Cross-sectional survey observes low continuous professional development familiarity among pharmacists, indicating a need for structured educational policies.
Background: In the evolving landscape of pharmacy, the shift towards patient-centred care necessitates continuous professional development (CPD) for pharmacists. This study aims to assess the awareness, perception, motivators, and barriers to CPD implementation among pharmacists. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted, utilising a structured questionnaire. Convenience sampling was employed, inviting 250 pharmacists from diverse practice settings to participate. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. Results: Out of the 210 pharmacists who participated in the study, more than half (51.7%) were unfamiliar with CPD, while only a small percentage (3.8%) were very familiar with it. Engagement in learning activities was common, reported by 80% of participants, with varying frequencies: weekly (19%), monthly (30.5%), yearly (27.6%), and rarely (22.9%). However, the implementation of CPD cycle elements was minimal, with only 8.6% reflecting, 5.7% planning, 10.5% taking action, and 7.2% evaluating their learning activities more than 75% of the time. Most pharmacists supported mandatory CPD (80.6%) and integration into a legal framework (81.3%). Anticipated benefits, such as keeping knowledge updated (92.9%) and improving patient care (91%), were highly endorsed. Motivators for CPD included proximity to the workplace (82.3%) and flexible schedules (84.7%), while barriers included time constraints (73.7%) and lack of information (74.2%). Conclusion: Pharmacists demonstrate low awareness and implementation of CPD, underscoring the necessity for educational initiatives and legislative support. Motivators such as proximity and flexible schedules could enhance CPD uptake, while addressing barriers like time constraints and lack of information is crucial for successful CPD integration in pharmacy practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Qaisi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: