Participating pharmacy faculty trainers were recruited at professional meetings, from professional organizations’ listservs, and through personal contacts, Web sites, and e-mail announcements to all faculty members and deans registered on the AACP listserv. At the time of recruitment in the spring of 2010, our target population for dissemination was all 120 colleges and schools of pharmacy in the United States. Faculty members were invited to participate if they were teaching or were planning to teach a pharmacogenomics course at their respective institutions in the upcoming academic year. Participants signed a Faculty Trainer Agreement form, which outlined the scope of the program, a list of shared curriculum topics, available training sessions, and administration of 4 survey instruments: faculty posttraining, student pretest, student posttest, and program implementation. The results of only the faculty posttraining survey instrument are presented here.
The faculty posttraining survey instrument was adapted from an instrument previously used to evaluate a tobacco-cessation train-the-trainer program (Rx for Change
) for pharmacy faculty.11
Prior to use, the survey instrument was beta-tested by 5 individuals and revised accordingly. Faculty trainers agreed to incorporate at least 1 module into their courses and complete and return all survey instruments. Electronic access to PharmGenEd (http://pharmacogenomics.ucsd.edu
) educational materials was granted to faculty participants who signed the agreement and completed training requirements. Faculty members did not receive monetary compensation for participating in the program. All evaluation procedures and survey instruments were approved by the UCSD Human Research Protections Program.
The PharmGenEd team identified and invited expert authors to develop educational materials for targeted content areas, including PowerPoint (Microsoft, Redmond, WA) presentations, detailed speaker notes, 10 self-assessment multiple-choice items, and a list of recommended readings. The PharmGenEd staff developed a coordinator’s guide to highlight implementation logistics, including: (1) the PharmGenEd program, (2) how to download instructional materials, (3) how to implement the pharmacogenomics curriculum, and (4) program evaluation materials that are requested by PharmGenEd staff. The shared curriculum modules were designed to be implemented during the latter years of the pharmacy curriculum; faculty members could use each module in its entirety or partially to integrate with their existing curricula. The modules, each of which was designed to be presented within 60 minutes, were developed using an iterative process among authors, peer reviewers, and the PharmGenEd staff. The content expert authors developed the modules using the PharmGenEd PowerPoint template. They also received guidelines for how the module should be structured. With the exception of the module on economic issues, each module was organized into the following sections: (1) objectives; (2) outline; (3) case study; (4) overview of drug/therapeutic class; (5) gene/allele of interest; (6) population prevalence; (7) clinical relevance in terms of efficacy, toxicity, and dosing; (8) available pharmacogenomic test; (9) testing recommendation from prescribing information or guidelines (if any); (10) summary; (11) case summary; and (12) references. At least 3 reviewers per module provided comments and suggestions using a reviewer form that evaluated scientific merit, clinical application, and editorial and/or stylistic issues.
Between August and October 2010, content expert authors and the PharmGenEd staff conducted 8 live webinars (1 for each module) and 1 prerecorded webinar for the Concepts and Clinical Applications module. The PharmGenEd staff posted all webinar links on the PharmGenEd Web site, which was accessible to participants throughout the academic year. During the first hour of each module, the content expert authors taught the course content. During the second hour, the content expert conducted a question-and-answer session, encouraging audience participants to ask questions verbally or by using the chat function. Each webinar was recorded and made accessible to faculty trainers for future viewing through the PharmGenEd Web site. Potential faculty trainers could view these webinar recordings before determining whether to use the PharmGenEd modules and integrate them into their curricula.
After all of the live webinar training sessions had been conducted, a 29-item posttraining survey instrument was mailed to faculty trainers who had participated in at least 1 webinar. Each survey instrument was assigned a unique code for each institution and mailed through Fed-Ex. Prepaid return labels were included with each mailing for faculty trainers to use in returning their survey instruments, and outgoing and incoming mailings were recorded and tracked. The survey instrument, which was designed to parallel prior survey instruments assessing the impact of train-the-trainer programs for pharmacy faculty, assessed key factors hypothesized to be associated with adoption of the PharmGenEd program.9,11
The posttraining survey instrument included sociodemographic data such as sex, age, race, ethnicity, academic rank, degrees, number of years in current position, and specialty or discipline. Faculty trainers reported the topic (specific modules) and format (live and/or recorded) of the train-the-trainer webinar session(s) they attended. They also reported whether they had (1) received any formal training in pharmacogenomics or teaching students about pharmacogenomics; (2) previous experience in teaching pharmacogenomics – including class lectures, laboratories or workshops, continuing education programs, or classes to patients; and (3) worked as a clinician in a setting that uses pharmacogenomic testing.
Faculty trainers rated their overall ability to teach pharmacogenomics to their students before and after participating in the PharmGenEd training. They estimated the percentage of program content that (1) was completely new, (2) was previously learned but needed review, and (3) was an unnecessary review (the sum of the percentages totaled 100%). For the PowerPoint lectures slides, instructor notes, coordinator’s guide, and PharmGenEd Web site, faculty trainers rated the overall quality (1=poor, 2=fair, 3=good, 4=very good, 5=excellent), overall usefulness (1=not at all useful, 2=a little useful, 3=moderately useful, 4=very useful, 5=extremely useful), and overall likelihood of use at their institution (1=not at all likely, 2=a little likely, 3=moderately likely, 4=very likely, 5=extremely likely). In a manner consistent with prior train-the-trainer studies9,11
that applied Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovations as a theoretical framework,9,11,14
we evaluated faculty trainers’ perceptions toward adoptability of the PharmGenEd program. Using a 5-point response scale (1=poor, 2=fair, 3=good, 4=very good, and 5=excellent), faculty trainers rated the PharmGenEd program with respect to: (1) compatibility for integration into existing curriculum structure; (2) relative advantage of other pharmacogenomics training programs that were available; (3) relative advantage over other pharmacogenomic training programs that were taught in the curriculum; (4) acceptability of the complexity of implementing PharmGenEd curriculum; (5) appropriateness of teaching methods used; and (6) clarity of the coordinator’s guide in its ability to facilitate program implementation. Additionally, we assessed confidence in skills for teaching PharmGenEd materials and likelihood of adoption of PharmGenEd materials during the upcoming academic year (2010–2011).
Faculty trainers’ perceptions were assessed regarding how important it is for each of the therapeutic modules to be covered in their college’s or school’s required pharmacogenomics coursework (1=not at all important, 2=a little important, 3=moderately important, 4=very important, 5=extremely important). Faculty trainers were asked to indicate whether they personally had the ability to determine whether PharmGenEd materials would be integrated into their school’s curricula (yes, no, not sure) and to estimate the total number of minutes of pharmacogenomics content they anticipated teaching at their institution during the upcoming academic year. For colleges and schools that had more than 1 survey respondent, the estimated total number of minutes was computed as an average of responses.
Finally, faculty trainers indicated whether they were interested in using the PharmGenEd materials to train licensed health professionals and whether they would recommend the PharmGenEd train-the-trainer program to other pharmacy faculty members or faculty members from other health professions schools (eg, medical, nursing, dental).
Summary statistics were computed to characterize survey responses. Group comparisons were made using chi-squared tests of independence or comparisons of group means, as appropriate. In all cases, comparisons of means were made using both parametric and nonparametric tests, and the conclusions were the same. As such, parametric test results were chosen for presentation to aid interpretability. Analyses were conducted using SPSS, version 19 (IBM, Armonk, NY).