Are there any universities offering online/distance learning Doctor of Pharmacy ? (for non pharmacy practitioners)
Doesn't look like it. In Canada we don't require a doctorate to do that job. Let me see - one and another one and another one
Most of the non-traditional programs are for the BS level pharmacists to obtain the Pharm.D. I do believe Creighton in Nebraska has the entire Pharm.D. program on line that can be done by anyone who has met the pre-requisites for entry into the program. You might look at their web-site.
Dotror of Pharmacy I was wondering if I could get a take on the Doctor fo Pharmacy degree change from some people. It has been a hotly (and sometimes heated) topic for some time in pharmacy. I have now been a director of pharmacy/hospital consultant for about 11 years. I have seen the programs develop. I would like to offer the following questions. 1. Do people see value in a pharmacist having the Doctor of Pharmacy degree? Would you be more or less likely to get advice or have a prescription filled based on the degree? 2. Does it surprise anyone to learn the degree use to be a 2 year post-graduate degree after a required 5 year, 160 hour BS degree in pharmacy? It is now a 6 year required entry level degree. Most complete it in 7-8 years fulltime. My brother went the post-grad route. 3. A lot of states boards of pharmacies have gotten permission from the state legislatures to "grandfather" pharmacists to a doctor of pharmacy license. The argument put forth is that after the degree change, the licensure exam has not. 4. For the pharmacists out there, now that everyone essentially will be a doctor of pharmacy whether PhaqrmD, PD, DPh etc. Will the Board of Pharmacy Specialties now take new meaning, or any meaning at all?
Re: Dotror of Pharmacy I have a friend whose brother had the DPharm. He told her that it is not really a doctorate. In other words he acknowledged that it is simply a title upgrade like the lawyers (JD). Indeed the Dept of Ed/NSF site does not list the DPharm or JD for that matter as degrees equivalent to the PhD (unlike DBA, DMin, EdD and a host of others that are). Both the DPharm & JD are considered first professional degrees (that have *Doctor* in the title). As someone else posted, in Canada Pharmacy is still a professional degree (bachelors) as is the law degree). Is someone more likely to respect a pharmacist because they upgraded their title. Probably not. To be frank you don't even notice their degree/certificate. You just go to Walgreens and ask to speak to the pharmacists. North
"You just go to Walgreens and ask to speak to the pharmacists." Not only that, but the person actually filling that prescription may very well be a parmacy tech with no formal education beyond high school.
There is currently no DPharm degree. Non-PharmD pharmacists - for whatever reason, use that one in Tennessee. I believe their state board of pharmacy approved the designation. The PharmD can be either an entry-level doctorate or a graduate doctoral degree. The graduate doctoral degree is more akin to a doctorate with a research component, and the individual is, or should be capable, f original research. Most will also have completed a fellowship, e.g. in some treatment area like infectious disease, or pharmacokinetics, etc. The entry-level degree is not a condensed version, it is simply designed differently; these individuals are more likely to desire work in patient care. Similarly, more and more are completing fellowships of one sort or another. Both can seek board certification in a number of areas. There are no grandfathered PharmD degrees. No PharmD can be completed only on-line; there is a significant clinical component that must be done in approved training sites, e.g. a hospital, and the candidate will rotate through a number of types of services. Retailer, as one might imagine, will be the last practice site to employ PharmDs in order to improve patient care - and overall health. It is a matter of economics, not science. There are many studies to show that a collaborative patient care paradigm, involving medicine, nursing and pharmacy, presents the best of all worlds in patient care. Pharmacist involvement has been shown to reduce overall costs and, best of all, improve patient care outcome.
They require 10 four week unpaid rotations which adds up to 1 1/2 years of school. Some of them can be taken at locations other than the school.
The two major research universities in Washington state, the University of Washington and Washington State University, joined efforts to create a unique external PharmD program that is completed almost entirely by distance learning, with the exception of some weekend workshops and the required clinical clerkships, which are usually done at a facility near your home. http://depts.washington.edu/expharmd/ExPharmD_FAQs.html is the URL explaining the program. Unfortunately, the program is ending soon, a casualty of low census, the declining economy in Washington state, and new security concerns after 9/11. The program was designed for working pharmacists with a BSc in Pharmacy to upgrade their degree to a PharmD. Many of the students in the program were in Canada, and the new difficulty in students from Canada commuting to classes in the USA after 9/11 severely cut enrollment. Also, speaking as a malpractice expert, I heartily endorse the concept of pharmacists going on rounds and being available for consultation in the inpatient setting. There is indeed literature supporting this from the standpoint of improved outcomes and reduced medication errors. I am not sure that studies have been done which show a positive correlation between pharmacists with a BSc vs. a PharmD and greater clinical competence in many settings, most notably retail. A specialized PharmD or PhD in pharmacology is probably best used in the research or inpatient settings. Regards, Michael Lloyd Mill Creek, Washington USA
First, Dr. Justice is correct there is always going to be a substancial component of clinical rotations. Nature of the beast. Same with the MD from one of the out of country places. What I meant to say is that Creighton has the didactic protion on-line. Closest you will ever get. Unpaid rotations are a part of the program. Second, Their is no grandfathering to a degree, but several states have given the title "doctor of pharmacy" and changed from RPh, to PD or DPh. I was wondering about the perception overall of the PharmD. In Oklahoma we went from a 160hour, 5 year BS degree, with one year of internship outside of school required for licensure. To a 6 year program with no internship required as the experiential rotations are in the school. I have to wonder what was gained. There are even new schools offering a 5 year PharmD if you go in the summers. It used to be we had to go in the summers to get done on time anyway. I truly believe (Dr. Justice I would love your opinion give your credentials) that we need to first define what is A Pharm D. Is it two-year post grad, 6 year track through, 5 year track through with summers. Was internship prior to licensure beneficial, or is it too much now? I agree collaborative arrangements are the most beneficial. As a Director of Pharmacy I have done glycoside dosing, pain management, etc. and had pharmacists on rounds with physicians. Although as a realist the vast majority of jobs are retail, and the vast majority of hospital jobs involve an IV room.
Educational overkill has hit many professions. Into the early 1970s, in Canada anyway, accounting was usually an alternative to university. Work five years, take a few courses each year and write an exam. Now those who write the CA exams all have degrees but apperently to control the supply, 55 % of the candidates have been failed some years. Now the US has mostly gone to a 5 year university program for accounting. Add another year and they will want to be doctors too. My, probably erroneous, impression is that the majority of pharmacists utilize an insignificant amount of their training in their daily activities. I see a lot of pharmacists counting pills and printing labels. For pharmacists who want to play pharmacologist or pseudo MD, have them take postgraduate training. How have lawyers managed to maintain a three year program, given the proliferation of laws and jurisprudence? Mind you, they did all become doctors too. I imagine they ration what is taught.
The unfortunate assumption was that a degree change could change a profession. Economics drive a professions. There are extremely few specialty positions and a great number and need of retail, inpatient pharmacists. The largest number of positions are still retail. Some opportunites have arisen especially in industry. But the future looks about the same. The logic was to try and separate the pharmacist from dispensing. This is almost impossible to do. The vast majority of jobs will be dispensing and compounding for the patient. There was hope of charging for cognitive services. This has been achieved partially but will not be a wholesale service. Most people who pay $100 for a prescription expect the courtesy of being told what it's for and how to take it. The National Association of Chain Drug Stores fought the all PharmD for obvious reasons. I have not heard anyone advocating a return to BS level. I have seen some schools offering a 5 year accelerated program. ACPE has committed to only accrediting PharmD programs in the future. If 5 year programs are indeed allowed, what do you tell the BS pharmacist who had a year of internship before sitting for licensure?
Entry-level qualifications aside, isn't the retail pharmacist sitting pretty these days from an economic standpoint? I have read stories in major media outlets telling of pharmacists right out of school being offered $ 80 to 90K per year to work at Walgreen's, Rite-Aid and other chain stores. Or are these job offers unique to only a few areas of the country? Even with the terrible job market in Washington state, the Sunday want ads always seem to have positions for retail pharmacists. So if this is generally true across the country, the leaders of the pharmacy industry have clearly grasped the economic concept of supply and demand to the benefit of their profession. Regards, Michael Lloyd Mill Creek, Washington USA
The requirements for what constitutes a Pharm.D. curriculum is designated by a national accrediting body. If a school wishes to innovate the curriculum, to speed up completion, or extend the curriculum the changes must still meet the requirements. I cannot think of a pharmacy school that can accept more than about 20% of applicants and no pharmacy school that have insufficient numbers of degree candidates. PharmDs are not, as someone suggested playing pharmacologist or acting as pseudo-MDs. PharmDs have effectively replaced pharmacologists in the institutional setting, perhaps because pharmacologists lacked clinical training. The same thing is occurring in certain areas of pharmaceutical manufacturing where clinical experience is vital, e.g. assessing patient outcome for clinical trials or interpreting clinical impact of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug action. The pharmacist’s clinical practice is significantly different from that of a physician. Except in aberrant circumstance, the relationship is not competitive. I have never met a PharmD who wished he or she was a physician - except perhaps from an economic perspective, and that is becoming less so. It is now becoming increasingly unusual to find a physician who has a problem when a pharmacist makes suggestions for patient care. After all, patient care is the concern of both.
