An Online, Multi-institutional Debate on Diabetes Medications by Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experience Students

• Published in: American journal of pharmaceutical education Vol. 87; no. 1; pp. ajpe8815 - 44
• Main Authors: Hess, Rick, Whitley, Heather P., Majerczyk, Daniel, Stamm, Pamela
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01-01-2023; American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy; Elsevier Limited; American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
• Subjects: Ambulatory care; Behavioral Objectives; Brief; Clinical decision making; Collaboration; Communication; Cooperative learning; Critical thinking; Curricula; Curriculum; debate; Debates; Debates and debating; Diabetes; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 - drug therapy; Diabetes therapy; Drug stores; Education; Education, Pharmacy - methods; Educational aspects; Educational Environment; Educational Measurement - methods; Educational objectives; Educational Strategies; Electronic discussion groups; Forensics (Public speaking); Glucagon; Humans; journal club; Knowledge; Medical education; multi-institutional; online; Patients; Peptides; Pharmaceutical Education; Pharmacists; Pharmacology; Pharmacy; Problem solving; Response rates; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors; Student attitudes; Students, Pharmacy; Study and teaching; Teaching Methods; Thinking Skills; United States; debate; online; critical thinking; journal club; multi-institutional
• ISSN: 0002-9459; 1553-6467
• DOI: 10.5688/ajpe8815

Objective. The purpose of this study was to evaluate changes in advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) students’ knowledge and to measure student perceptions of an online, multi-institutional debate curriculum as an alternative to a journal club to improve critical thinking skills related to diabetes medications.
Methods. All APPE students assigned to four faculty (n=37) at three different colleges during the 2020-2021 academic year received instruction on diabetes medication classes and their cardiovascular outcome trials. Students debated via the Lincoln-Douglas format whether the preferred second-line therapies for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus are either glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Matched pre- and post-APPE knowledge scores were measured using a seven-item assessment tool. A 22-item post-debate survey measured student perceptions of the activity.
Results. Pre- and post-APPE knowledge scores were compared in 32 students, yielding an 86% response rate. Knowledge scores improved 32% (59% pre vs 87% post). Thirty-three students completed the perceptions survey, yielding an 89% response rate. Students reported that the debate activity was beneficial (100%) and rated it more effective than a journal club at improving critical thinking skills and knowledge retention.
Conclusion. Preliminary results suggest that incorporating an online, multi-institutional debate as an alternative to journal clubs during APPE rotations was well received. Further research is warranted on the impact of the multi-institutional debate and how to best deliver it during the APPEs of a pharmacy curriculum.