(Management Case Study) Development and Implementation of a Clinical Research Microcredential Program for Pharmacy Residents

Purpose: Previous literature has emphasized the need to improve efforts to increase the number of highly trained and competent pharmacist researchers. Our institution developed a residency research certificate program in 2018, which evolved into a clinical research microcredential program in 2020. The purpose of this program is to present how our institution developed, implemented, and evaluated this program. These data are important to share with the ASHP MCM audience if other residency programs are interested in adopting such a program. Our experience and early outcome data was published in AJHP (Darko W, et al. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2021;78(5):436-446).

Methods: To our knowledge, this clinical research microcredential program is the first of its kind at ASHP-accredited PGY1 Pharmacy Residency program and we want to share our experience with other residency programs to help them develop and implement a similar program based on their own available resources. Our institution currently has 5 ASHP-accredited pharmacy residency programs: PGY1 pharmacy, PGY2 ambulatory care, PGY2 geriatrics, PGY2 infectious diseases, and PGY2 pediatrics. The PGY1 pharmacy residency program has 6 residents, and all other programs have a single resident. The research seminar curriculum was separated into 5 distinct modules that consisted of 23 contact hours and aligned with the academic year: (1) research primer, (2) regulatory and ethical issues in research, (3) understanding statistical tests and software, (4) research project presentation, and (5) application of research knowledge and skills. The program is delivered by both academic and clinical faculty, which brings diverse backgrounds and perspectives for the pharmacy residents to learn from. A pre- and post-program survey was distributed to residents to assess their perceptions and prior experiences with research and aligned with the program's content, objectives, and goals. Residents were also given a 25-item, individualized, closed-book research knowledge assessment to evaluate their baseline education and skills in research and statistics before and after the program. Feedback on the research seminars was also collected and used for continuous process improvement.

Results: Our early data demonstrated that there was a statistically significant increase in the residents' mean scores on the research knowledge assessment following the program (84.7% versus 61.3%, p=0.002). Thus, they demonstrated significant improvements in their knowledge of research principles and statistics. Residents' perceptions of the program were also positive overall and they strongly agreed that they would recommend the program to other residents. Furthermore, residents' confidence in several research areas improved significantly after completion of the program. Several research preceptors and mentors have come out of this program as prior graduates.

Conclusion: Our clinical research microcredential program has demonstrated several benefits, including improvement in research knowledge and skills to help prepare residents for future research endeavors and research production during their careers. Overall, the program was perceived very positive as well. This program may also serve as a potential recruitment tool for hosting institutions. We hope our program will serve as a potential model for other institutions to create their own program based on their individual interests and available resources to further advance research education and training for residents.