The Perception of Patient Satisfaction among Public Health and Pharmacy graduate students: A Retrospective Analysis

Class of 2016 AbstractObjectives: To explore the difference in patient satisfaction with pharmacy services between Public Health and Pharmacy students. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the results of a 20-item questionnaire regarding patient satisfaction with community pharmacy services that was administered to pharmacy and public health graduate students at the University of Arizona. Pharmacy students (n = 95) and Public Health students (n = 67) completed the questionnaire and a Chi Square test was utilized to compare the results. Scores of 4 and 5 (Very Good and Excellent, respectively) were compared against 1, 2, and 3 (Poor, Fair, and Good, respectively). Questions were stratified into domains of “Friendly Explanation” and “Managing Therapy.” Results: Sixty-two percent of pharmacy students answered “Excellent” and “Very Good” on all 20 questions compared to 37% of public health students (p<0.001). In the “Friendly Explanation” domain, 73% of pharmacy students answered “Excellent” and “Very Good” compared to 57% of public health students (p<0.001). The “Managing Therapy” domain also yielded a higher percentage of satisfied pharmacy students compared to public health students (48% vs 36%, p<0.001). Areas with the highest degree of difference involved availability of the pharmacist, professionalism of pharmacy staff, and promptness of pharmacy services. Conclusions: Pharmacy students were more satisfied with pharmacy services than public health students. Increasing the availability of the pharmacist to answer patient questions, improving professionalism of staff, and providing prompt services may improve patient satisfaction with community pharmacy services among the general public.This item is part of the Pharmacy Student Research Projects collection, made available by the College of Pharmacy and the University Libraries at the University of Arizona. For more information about items in this collection, please contact Jennifer Martin, Librarian and Clinical Instructor, Pharmacy Practice and Science, [email protected]

IMPACT - Integrative Medicine PrimAry Care Trial: protocol for a comparative effectiveness study of the clinical and cost outcomes of an integrative primary care clinic model

BACKGROUND:Integrative medicine (IM) is a patient-centered, healing-oriented clinical paradigm that explicitly includes all appropriate therapeutic approaches whether they originate in conventional or complementary medicine (CM). While there is some evidence for the clinical and cost-effectiveness of IM practice models, the existing evidence base for IM depends largely on studies of individual CM therapies. This may in part be due to the methodological challenges inherent in evaluating a complex intervention (i.e., many interacting components applied flexibly and with tailoring) such as IM.METHODS/DESIGN:This study will use a combination of observational quantitative and qualitative methods to rigorously measure the health and healthcare utilization outcomes of the University of Arizona Integrative Health Center (UAIHC), an IM adult primary care clinic in Phoenix, Arizona. There are four groups of study participants. The primary group consists of clinic patients for whom clinical and cost outcomes will be tracked indicating the impact of the UAIHC clinic (n=500). In addition to comparing outcomes pre/post clinic enrollment, where possible, these outcomes will be compared to those of two matched control groups, and for some self-report measures, to regional and national data. The second and third study groups consist of clinic patients (n=180) and clinic personnel (n=15-20) from whom fidelity data (i.e., data indicating the extent to which the IM practice model was implemented as planned) will be collected. These data will be analyzed to determine the exact nature of the intervention as implemented and to provide covariates to the outcomes analyses as the clinic evolves. The fourth group is made up of patients (n=8) whose path through the clinic will be studied in detail using qualitative (periodic semi-structured interviews) methods. These data will be used to develop hypotheses regarding how the clinic works.DISCUSSION:The US health care system needs new models of care that are more patient-centered and empower patients to make positive lifestyle changes. These models have the potential to reduce the burden of chronic disease, lower the cost of healthcare, and offer a sustainable financial paradigm for our nation. This protocol has been designed to test whether the UAIHC can achieve this potential.TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinical Trials.gov NCT01785485.This item is part of the UA Faculty Publications collection. For more information this item or other items in the UA Campus Repository, contact the University of Arizona Libraries at [email protected]

When a Whole Practice Model Is the Intervention: Developing Fidelity Evaluation Components Using Program Theory-Driven Science for an Integrative Medicine Primary Care Clinic

Integrative medicine (IM) is a clinical paradigm of whole person healthcare that combines appropriate conventional and complementary medicine (CM) treatments. Studies of integrative healthcare systems and theory-driven evaluations of IM practice models need to be undertaken. Two health services research methods can strengthen the validity of IM healthcare studies, practice theory, and fidelity evaluation. The University of Arizona Integrative Health Center (UAIHC) is a membership-supported integrative primary care clinic in Phoenix, AZ. A comparative effectiveness evaluation is being conducted to assess its clinical and cost outcomes. A process evaluation of the clinic’s practice theory components assesses model fidelity for four purposes: (1) as a measure of intervention integrity to determine whether the practice model was delivered as intended; (2) to describe an integrative primary care clinic model as it is being developed and refined; (3) as potential covariates in the outcomes analyses, to assist in interpretation of findings, and for external validity and replication; and (4) to provide feedback for needed corrections and improvements of clinic operations over time. This paper provides a rationale for the use of practice theory and fidelity evaluation in studies of integrative practices and describes the approach and protocol used in fidelity evaluation of the UAIHC

Effects of an Organizational Linkage Intervention on Inter-Organizational Service Coordination Between Probation/Parole Agencies and Community Treatment Providers.

Weak coordination between community correctional agencies and community-based treatment providers is a major barrier to diffusion of medication-assisted treatment (MAT)-the inclusion of medications (e.g., methadone and buprenorphine) in combination with traditional counseling and behavioral therapies to treat substance use disorders. In a multisite cluster randomized trial, experimental sites (j = 10) received a 3-h MAT training plus a 12-month linkage intervention; control sites (j = 10) received the 3-h training alone. Hierarchical linear models showed that the intervention resulted in significant improvements in perceptions of interagency coordination among treatment providers, but not probation/parole agents. Implications for policy and practice are discussed

A cluster randomized trial of an organizational linkage intervention for offenders with substance use disorders: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders are highly prevalent in community correctional populations, yet these settings frequently are ill-equipped to identify and refer offenders to community-based treatment services. In particular, community corrections staff are often opposed to the use of medication in addiction treatment because of inadequate knowledge, resources, and organizational structures to facilitate client linkages to evidence-based services. METHODS/DESIGN: Each of the NIDA-funded Research Centers recruited 2 criminal justice agencies to participate in the study. Eligibility rules required study sites that were focused on community corrections (i.e., probation or parole), had few or no formal relationships with treatment providers for referring clients to medication-assisted treatment, and had no state or local policies prohibiting such relationships. Sites under the oversight of the same parent agency were eligible only if they were in geographically distinct catchment areas, and could be assigned to different study arms without cross-contamination at any level. The 18 clusters consisted of community corrections officers and their offender caseloads nested within agencies, each of which was partnered with at least one community-based substance abuse treatment program. Randomization was blocked by Research Center, within which one cluster was randomly assigned to a training-only condition (comparison) and the other to training followed by a strategic organizational linkage process (intervention). Line staff received a scientifically-grounded, systematically-delivered training session that addresses gaps in existing knowledge, perceptions, and information about medication-assisted treatment (MAT) and local availability of MAT services. Key decision-makers subsequently were asked to collaborate in a strategic planning process to enhance formal and informal linkages between criminal justice agencies and local MAT providers. It was hypothesized that the two implementation intervention components together would be more likely than staff training alone to improve the process of referring opioid- and alcohol-dependent adults under community supervision to appropriate addiction pharmacotherapy. Outcomes were measured at the client (referrals), line staff (attitudes), and organizational (linkage) levels. DISCUSSION: Through closer collaboration among criminal justice agencies and treatment providers, improved linkages to effective substance abuse treatment should yield significant clinical, public health and public safety benefits

Effect of an organizational linkage intervention on staff perceptions of medication-assisted treatment and referral intentions in community corrections.

INTRODUCTION: Medication-assisted treatment (MAT) is effective for alcohol and opioid use disorders but it is stigmatized and underutilized in criminal justice settings. METHODS: This study cluster-randomized 20 community corrections sites to determine whether an experimental implementation strategy of training and an organizational linkage intervention improved staff perceptions of MAT and referral intentions more than training alone. The 3-hour training was designed to address deficits in knowledge, perceptions and referral information, and the organizational linkage intervention brought together community corrections and addiction treatment agencies in an interagency strategic planning and implementation process over 12 months. RESULTS: Although training alone was associated with increases in familiarity with pharmacotherapy and knowledge of where to refer clients, the experimental intervention produced significantly greater improvements in functional attitudes (e.g. that MAT is helpful to clients) and referral intentions. Corrections staff demonstrated greater improvements in functional perceptions and intent to refer opioid dependent clients for MAT than did treatment staff. CONCLUSION: Knowledge, perceptions and information training plus interorganizational strategic planning intervention is an effective means to change attitudes and intent to refer clients for medication assisted treatment in community corrections settings, especially among corrections staff