“
“The objective of this study was to evaluate the use of an audience response

system (i.e. clickers) as an engaging tool for learning and examine its potential for enhancing continuing education (CE) activities. Attendees at a symposium were invited to utilise and evaluate the use of clickers. Electronic data relating to participant demographics and feedback were collected using clickers during the symposium. The 60 attendees who used the clickers were mostly pharmacists (76%) who worked in hospital pharmacy practice (86%). Attendees strongly agreed or agreed that clickers were easy to use (94%), enhanced interaction (98%), allowed comparison of knowledge with PF-562271 clinical trial that of their peers (78%), brought to attention their knowledge deficits (64%) and should be used again (94%). The innovative use of clickers at the symposium was

very well received by all attendees and offered a number of benefits, including the ability to provide a more engaging and interactive CE activity. “
“To establish a consensual and coherent ranking of healthcare programmes that involve the presence of ward-based and clinic-based clinical pharmacists, based on health outcome, health costs and safe delivery of care. This descriptive study was derived from a structured dialogue (Delphi technique) among directors of pharmacy department. We established a quantitative profile of healthcare programmes Masitinib (AB1010) at five sites that involved the provision of ward-based and clinic-based pharmaceutical care. A summary table of evidence established a unique

Daporinad quality rating per inpatient (clinic-based) or outpatient (ward-based) healthcare programme. Each director rated the perceived impact of pharmaceutical care per inpatient or outpatient healthcare programme on three fields: health outcome, health costs and safe delivery of care. They agreed by consensus on the final ranking of healthcare programmes. A ranking was assigned for each of the 18 healthcare programmes for outpatient care and the 17 healthcare programmes for inpatient care involving the presence of pharmacists, based on health outcome, health costs and safe delivery of care. There was a good correlation between ranking based on data from a 2007–2008 Canadian report on hospital pharmacy practice and the ranking proposed by directors of pharmacy department. Given the often limited human and financial resources, managers should consider the best evidence available on a profession’s impact to plan healthcare services within an organization. Data are few on ranking healthcare programmes in order to prioritize which healthcare programme would mostly benefit from the delivery of pharmaceutical care by ward-based and clinic-based pharmacists.