Appraisal of the entrustable professional activities interprofessional team member domain performed by North Dakota pharmacists

Main Article Content


Education, Pharmacy, Schools, Pharmacy, Curriculum, Accreditation, Patient Care Team, Communication, Interprofessional Relations, Pharmacies, Patient Care, Pharmaceutical Services, Pharmacists, United States


Objective: To quantify the use of the interprofessional team member (ITM) domain of entrustable professional activities (EPAs) by North Dakota pharmacists across practice sites, roles in practice, and by preceptor status.

Methods: Survey methods were used to characterize the self-reported frequency with which pharmacists undertake core EPAs and supporting tasks in the ITM domain. The survey was administered to registered pharmacists practicing in North Dakota (n=990) during the fall of 2018, of which 457 (46.1%) responded. After eliminating responses with incomplete or missing information, 119 responses were available for analysis.

Results: For the overall EPA ITM domain, “Collaborate as a member of an interprofessional team population” pharmacists reported performing these activities an average (mean) of 3.3 times per month (SD=2.3). Within this domain, the highest reported example activity was “Use setting appropriate communication skills when interacting with others” (mean=4.1, SD 1.8), followed by “Communicate a patient’s medication-related problem(s) to another health professional” (mean=3.3, SD 2.0), and “Contribute medication-related expertise to the team’s work” (mean=3.1, SD=2.2). ITM domain and supporting example activities were performed at a greater rate in hospitals, community health centers and long-term-care facilities. For most items, preceptors reported a greater use of activities, than did non-preceptors.

Conclusions: North Dakota pharmacists currently complete tasks outlined in the ITM domain of the EPAs, although their contributions are varied by task, role, and preceptor status.


Download data is not yet available.
Abstract 392 | pdf Downloads 179


1. Greiner AC, Knebel E, eds. Health Professions Education: A Bridge to Quality. Washington: National Academies Press; 2003.
2. Hopkins D, ed. Framework for Action on Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice. Geneva: WHO; 2010.
3. Interprofessional Education Collaborative. Core competencies for interprofessional collaborative practice: Report of an expert panel. Washington: Interprofessional Education Collaborative; 2016.
4. Haines ST, Gleason BL, Kantorovich A, et al. Report of the 2015-2016 Academic Affairs Standing Committee. Am J Pharm Educ. 2016;80(9):S20.
5. Haines ST, Pittenger A, Plaza C. Describing Entrustable Professional Activities Is Merely the First Step. Am J Pharm Educ. 2017;81(1):18.
6. Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE). Accreditation standards and key elements for the professional program in pharmacy leading to the Doctor of Pharmacy degree. (accessed Oct 8, 2020).
7. Medina MS, Plaza CM, Stowe CD, et al. Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education 2013 educational outcomes. Am J Pharm Educ. 2013;77(8):162.
8. Kanmaz TJ, Culhane NS, Berenbrok LA, Jarrett J, Johanson EL, Ruehter VL, Trolli E, Welch LH and Heldenbrand SD. Curriculum crosswalk of the core entrustable professional activities for new pharmacy graduates. Am J Pharm Educ. 2020;84(1):8077.
9. Smith C, Stewart R, Smith G, Anderson HG, Baggarly S. Developing and implementing an entrustable professional activity assessment for pharmacy practice experiences. Am J Pharm Educ. 2020;84(9):ajpe7876.
10. Hauer KE, Kohlwes J, Cornett P, et al. Identifying entrustable professional activities in internal medicine training. J Grad Med Educ. 2013;5(1):54-59.
11. Pittenger AL, Copeland DA, Lacroix MM, et al. Report of the 2016-17 Academic Affairs Standing Committee: Entrustable professional activities implementation roadmap. Am J Pharm Educ. 2017;81(5):S4.
12. Greiner AC, Knebel E, eds. Health professions education: a bridge to quality. Washington: National Academies Press; 2003.
13. Scott DM, Montagne M, Hakanson N, Schwanke RW. The development and evaluation of an interdisciplinary health training program: a pharmacy perspective. Am J Pharm Educ. 1983;47(1):42-48.
14. Gustafsson L, Hutchinson L, Theodoros D, et al. Healthcare students' experiences of an interprofessional, student-led neuro-rehabilitation community-based clinic. J Interprof Care. 2016;30(2):259-261.
15. Rotz ME, Dueñas GG. "Collaborative-ready" students: Exploring factors that influence collaboration during a longitudinal interprofessional education practice experience. J Interprof Care. 2016;30(2):238-241.
16. Jones KM, Blumenthal DK, Burke JM, et al. Interprofessional education in introductory pharmacy practice experiences at US colleges and schools of pharmacy. Am J Pharm Educ. 2012;76(5):80.
17. Grice GR, Thomason AR, Meny LM, Pinelli NR, Martello JL, Zorek JA. Intentional Interprofessional Experiential Education. Am J Pharm Educ. 2018;82(3):6502.
18. Truong HA, Gorman MJ, East M, et al. The Eastern Shore Collaborative for Interprofessional Education's Implementation and Impact over Five Years. Am J Pharm Educ. 2018;82(4):6522.
19. Scott DM, Naughton CA, Petry N, Friesner DL. Assessment of Practice Management Entrustable Professional Activities by Pharmacists in North Dakota. Am J Pharm Educ. 2019;83(10):7486.
20. Scott DM, Kelsch MP, Hanel M, Friesner DL. Appraisal of the entrustable professional activities (EPAs) patient care provider domain by North Dakota pharmacists. Pharm Pract (Granada). 2019;17(4):1607.
21. Scott DM, Kelsch M, Zhang A, Friesner DL. Evaluation of the entrustable professional activities (EPAs) of the population health promoter domain by North Dakota pharmacists. Pharm Pract (Granada). 2020;18(3):1980.
22. Scott DM. Assessment of pharmacists' perception of patient care competence and need for training in rural and urban areas in North Dakota. J Rural Health. 2010;26(1):90-96.
23. Draugalis JR, Coons SJ, Plaza CM. Best practices for survey research reports: a synopsis for authors and reviewers. Am J Pharm Educ. 2008;72(1):11.
24. Scott DM, Strand M, Undem T, Anderson G, Clarens A, Liu X. Assessment of pharmacists' delivery of public health services in rural and urban areas in Iowa and North Dakota. Pharm Pract (Granada). 2016;14(4):836.
25. Dillman D, Smyth J, Christian L. Internet, mail, and mixed mode surveys: the tailored design method, 3rd ed. Hoboken: John Wiley; 2009.
26. Nulty D. Adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: What can be done? Assess Eval High Educ. 2008;33(3):301-314.
27. Slack MK, Baidoo B. Chapter 10: Bivariate analysis and comparing groups. In: Aparasu R, Bentley J, eds. Principles of research design and drug literature evaluation. Burlington: Jones and Bartlett; 2015.