Objectives: Lack of basic practice research literacy could be considered a barrier to conducting or participating in practice research. Therefore, we examined pharmacy practice research literacy in Japanese community ...Objectives: Lack of basic practice research literacy could be considered a barrier to conducting or participating in practice research. Therefore, we examined pharmacy practice research literacy in Japanese community pharmacists. Methods: Community pharmacists (n = 478) who delivered presentations at three major pharmacy-related conferences in 2012 and 2013 completed the survey. We selected 10 key terms related to practice research and asked participants whether they knew the meaning of. Questionnaires were sent to and returned by pharmacists via mail. Results: Of the 478 pharmacists who received questionnaires, 230 (47.9%) completed the survey. The response rates indicating that participants were familiar with the 10 key terms were approximately 50% or lower. The highest response rate was 67.0% for “bias”, and the lowest was 17.0% for “PICO/PECO: Patient-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome/Patient-Exposure-Comparison-Outcome”. Younger pharmacists tended to know several key terms, such as “p values”, “bias”, and “outcome”. Conclusion: Japanese community pharmacists were not knowledgeable with respect to conducting and participating in pharmacy practice research. Practice research knowledge was superior in younger pharmacists. Education in pharmacy schools and continuing professional development programs is important for community pharmacists’ practice research development.展开更多
文摘Objectives: Lack of basic practice research literacy could be considered a barrier to conducting or participating in practice research. Therefore, we examined pharmacy practice research literacy in Japanese community pharmacists. Methods: Community pharmacists (n = 478) who delivered presentations at three major pharmacy-related conferences in 2012 and 2013 completed the survey. We selected 10 key terms related to practice research and asked participants whether they knew the meaning of. Questionnaires were sent to and returned by pharmacists via mail. Results: Of the 478 pharmacists who received questionnaires, 230 (47.9%) completed the survey. The response rates indicating that participants were familiar with the 10 key terms were approximately 50% or lower. The highest response rate was 67.0% for “bias”, and the lowest was 17.0% for “PICO/PECO: Patient-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome/Patient-Exposure-Comparison-Outcome”. Younger pharmacists tended to know several key terms, such as “p values”, “bias”, and “outcome”. Conclusion: Japanese community pharmacists were not knowledgeable with respect to conducting and participating in pharmacy practice research. Practice research knowledge was superior in younger pharmacists. Education in pharmacy schools and continuing professional development programs is important for community pharmacists’ practice research development.
