Fairleigh Dickinson University School of Pharmacy & Health Sciences, Florham Park, NJ, USA.
Department of Pharmacy Practice, Creighton University School of Pharmacy and Health Professions, Omaha, NE, USA.
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2022 Dec 5;79(24):2261-2270. doi: 10.1093/ajhp/zxac254.
To determine the relationship of advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) grading schemes and other pharmacy program variables (ie, program age and funding) with pharmacy residency match rates.
A 12-question survey was disseminated to experiential administrators of pharmacy programs in October 2018. Respondents identified their program's APPE grading scheme (pass/fail, letter grades, or other) and associated pros and cons. Responding programs were categorized by age and funding status. Survey responses were correlated with the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists residency match rates for 2016 through 2018. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression models as well as by attributes via thematic analysis. Most pharmacy programs (62%) reported using letter grades for APPEs compared to pass/fail (30%) or other (8%) schemes. Pharmacy programs using pass/fail grading were more likely to have students match to postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) (P < 0.001) and postgraduate year 2 (PGY2) (P = 0.0074) residencies. Older pharmacy programs for each grading scheme were more likely to have higher match rates; however, for PGY1 match rates, older programs utilizing letter grades correlated to lower match rates than those utilizing pass/fail grading (P < 0.0001). Likewise, both public and private pharmacy programs using pass/fail grading had higher PGY1 match rates than those using letter grades (P = 0.0006 and P = 0.0014).
Pass/fail grading in APPEs does not hinder PGY1 or PGY2 residency placement compared to other grading schemes both overall and in combination with certain pharmacy program variables. Grading scheme strengths and weaknesses should be considered when deciding on optimal assessment strategies for APPEs and when evaluating candidates for residencies.
确定高级药学实践经验（APPE）评分方案与其他药学课程变量（即课程年限和资金）与药学住院医师匹配率的关系。
2018 年 10 月，向药学课程的实践管理人员分发了一份 12 个问题的调查问卷。受访者确定了其课程的 APPE 评分方案（通过/不通过、字母等级或其他）以及相关的优缺点。根据年龄和资金状况对参与的课程进行了分类。将调查结果与 2016 年至 2018 年美国卫生系统药剂师协会住院医师匹配率相关联。使用描述性统计和逻辑回归模型以及通过主题分析对属性进行数据分析。与通过/不通过（30%）或其他（8%）方案相比，大多数药学课程（62%）报告使用字母等级来进行 APPE。使用通过/不通过评分的药学课程更有可能使学生匹配到住院医师 1 年（PGY1）（P<0.001）和住院医师 2 年（PGY2）（P=0.0074）。对于每个评分方案，年限较长的药学课程更有可能具有较高的匹配率；然而，对于 PGY1 的匹配率，使用字母等级的较年长课程与使用通过/不通过等级的课程相比，其匹配率较低（P<0.0001）。同样，使用通过/不通过等级的公立和私立药学课程的 PGY1 匹配率均高于使用字母等级的课程（P=0.0006 和 P=0.0014）。
与其他评分方案相比，APPE 中的通过/不通过评分不会阻碍 PGY1 或 PGY2 的住院医师安置，无论总体情况如何，以及与某些药学课程变量相结合时都是如此。在决定 APPE 的最佳评估策略以及评估住院医师候选人时，应考虑评分方案的优缺点。
