Factors affecting a face to face learning event

In publicising events, the topic, including the driver for the topic and the skills that will be obtained, the speaker and their experience plus how learning can be applied after the event should be included

Current reality and preferences for continuing professional development (CPD) of pharmacists in England : supporting pharmacists to achieve their CPD requirments

Background: Continuing professional development (CPD) is essential for pharmacists and is a regulator requirement in Great Britain (GB). Objectives: The aim of this study was to establish current participation in CPD activity in GB, in terms of format and providers, plus preferences of pharmacists, including motivators and barriers, and support needed for application of learning. Methods: This study utilised a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews of pharmacists in South London, England. Results: The majority of responders (n=293/338, 86.6%) had taken part in CPD activity in the past 12 months. Although face-to-face workshops were the most preferred activity, digital completion was the most used activity. There was increasing non-participation with reduced working hours (p=0.003). The employer was the most commonly used provider. From 19 interviews, three main themes emerged: Engagement, Intervention and Application. Conclusions: It is clear that no single format is preferred by all. There needs to be a strategy to ensure good utilisation of providers, and CPD-based events having an impact on practice

A systematic review of models used and preferences for continuing education and continuing professional development of pharmacists

Continuing Education (CE) or Continuing Professional Development (CPD) are used by pharmacists globally to maintain up-to-date knowledge and skills throughout their careers. The primary aim of this study was to identify the formats or models used by pharmacists for CE and CPD globally. The secondary aim was to identify preferences of pharmacists, in relation to the variety of formats or models used to fulfil mandatory requirements, in order to support future planning of lifelong learning events. A systematic review was performed using PubMed, Science Direct, and Web of Science covering a time period from 1995 until March 2018. Searches were conducted in English, with studies on undergraduate studies being excluded. Eighteen papers from an initial search of 4561 were included from 2004 to 2014. All studies focused on pharmacists. Three studies identified face-to-face learning as a preference, with six studies identifying a positive impact of interactive learning. All four identified studies focusing on online provision were linked to CE. One study highlighted the benefits of blended learning. Two studies identified concluded that no one size fits all. A clear structure of event was highlighted in three studies. Three studies highlighted the relevance of topics to practice, and two studies showed the need for opportunities to apply knowledge. Due to the variety of formats and no consistent model, no perfect model or activity has been identified. However, CPD showed increased practice outcomes versus CE. Although an increasing amount of technology is being utilized, face-to-face learning is still preferred. Interactive, multiple-format learning should be used where possible, to reflect preferences of different learners. There is a need for a structured approach to the planning and learning event itself to support CE and CPD

Interviews with global pharmacists and healthcare professionals in Great Britain to establish personal experiences around professional development activity

Professional development activity is needed to ensure practitioners are up to date and providing optimal patient care. This includes, but is not restricted to, mandatory continuing professional development (CPD) or continuing education (CE) requirements, which differ by professions globally and within countries. This study aimed to investigate perceptions, participation, and individual practice for healthcare professionals in Great Britain (GB) and pharmacists globally to identify similarities and differences after the introduction of revalidation for pharmacists in GB. Qualitative data was received through interviews, which was analysed using content analysis. In total, 24 interviews were completed with pharmacists registered globally, and healthcare professionals registered in GB. A culture of CPD was seen for healthcare professionals in GB and globally for pharmacists; there was no consistent model. Face-to-face activity was common, with an increase in online provision, especially where large geographies were seen. Most learning was completed in the professional’s own time. Multiple providers were seen, with the evaluation of events using questionnaires being commonplace. Different formats of learning were useful for different topics, with skills learning being better when face-to-face. Although varied requirements were in place, regulation should support patient-based practice outcomes. This study showed that commitment to learning was similar in different professions in GB and by pharmacists globally, with similar benefits and challenges