Associations of gender and age groups on the knowledge and use of drug information resources by American pharmacists

  • Manuel J. Carvajal
  • Kevin A. Clauson
  • Jennifer Gershman
  • Hyla H. Polen
Keywords: Pharmacists, Drug Information Services, Sex Factors, Age Factors, United States

Abstract

Objectives: To explore knowledge and use of drug information resources by pharmacists and identify patterns influenced by gender and age-group classification.

Methods: A survey questionnaire was mailed nationwide to 1,000 practitioners working in community (n = 500) and hospital (n = 500) settings who answer drug information questions as part of their expected job responsibilities. Responses pertaining to drug information resource use and knowledge of different types of drug-related queries, resource media preferences, and perceived adequacy of resources maintained in the pharmacy were analyzed by gender and age group. The t statistic was used to test for significant differences of means and percentages between genders and between age groups. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize other findings.

Results: Gender and age group classification influenced patterns of knowledge and use of drug information resources by pharmacists. They also affected pharmacists’ perceptions of the most common types of questions prompting them to consult a drug information reference, as well as the resources consulted. Micromedex, exclusively available in electronic format, was the most commonly consulted resource overall by pharmacists. Lexi-Comp Online was the leading choice by women, preferred over Micromedex, but was not one of the top two resources selected by men.

Conclusion: This study successfully identified the influence of gender and age-group classification in assessing drug information resource knowledge and use of general and specific types of drug-related queries.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Carvajal MJ, Armayor GM, Hardigan PC. Nova Southeastern University College of Pharmacy Monograph Series. Socioeconomic profile of pharmacists in South Florida: who they are, what they do, how much they like it: volume 1. Fort Lauderdale, FL: Nova Southeastern University; 2010.

2. Costa PT, Terracciano A, McCrae RR. Gender differences in personality traits across cultures. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2001;81(2):322-331.

3. Nolen S, Larson J, Grayson C. Explaining the gender difference in depressive symptoms. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999;77(5):1061-1072.

4. Shauman KA, Noonan MC. Family migration and labor force outcomes: sex differences in occupational context. Soc Forces. 2007;85(4):1735-1764.

5. Bender KA, Donohue SM, Heywood JS. Job satisfaction and gender segregation. Oxf Econ Pap. 2005;57(3):479-496.

6. Kim S. Gender differences in the job satisfaction of public employees: a study of Seoul Metropolitan Government, Korea. Sex Roles. 2005;52(9/10):667-681.

7. Konrad AM, Corrigall E, Lieb P, Ritchie JE. Sex differences in job attribute preferences among managers and business students. Group & Organization Management. 2000; 25(2):108-131.

8. Bender KA, Heywood JS. Job satisfaction of the highly educated: the role of gender, academic tenure, and earnings. Scott J Polit Econ. 2006;53:253-279.

9. Carvajal MJ, Hardigan PC. Pharmacists’ inter-gender differences in behavior and opinions: is work input an important mediator? The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice (Internet). 2008;6(2). Accessed at http://ijahsp.nova.edu/articles/vol6num2/pdf/Hardigan.pdf, December 14th 2011.

10. Donohue SM, Heywood JS. Job satisfaction and gender. Int J Manpow. 2004;25(2):211-234.

11. Hersch J. Sex discrimination in the labor market. Foundations and Trends in Microeconomics. 2006;2(4):281-361.

12. Niederle M, Vesterlund L. So women shy away from competition? Do men compete too much? National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 11,474. Q J Econ (Internet). 2007;122(3):1067-1101. Accessed at http://www.nber.org/papers/w11474, December 14th 2011.

13. O’Halloran PL. Gender and racial differences: on-the-job training and payment schemes [dissertation]. [Milwaukee]: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee; 2003. 226 p.

14. Theodossiou I, Vasileiou E. Making the risk of job loss a way of life: does it affect job satisfaction? Research in Economics. 2007;61(2):71-83.

15. Jovic E, Wallace JE, Lemaire J. The generation and gender shifts in medicine: an exploratory survey of internal medicine physicians (Internet). BMC Health Serv Res. 2006; 6(55). Accessed at http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1472-6963-6-55.pdf, December 14th 2011.

16. Kennedy MM. Managing different generations requires new skills, insightful leadership. Physician Exec. 2003;29(6):20-23.

17. Shields MC, Shields MT. Working with generation X physicians. Physician Exec. 2003; 29(6):14-18.

18. Smola KW, Sutton CD. Generational differences: revisiting the generational work values for the new millennium. J Organ Behav. 2002;23(4):363-382.

19. Southard G, Lewis J. Building a workplace that recognizes generational diversity. Public Management. 2004;86(3):8-12.

20. Wah L. Managing Gen Xers strategically. Manage Rev. 2000;89(3):6.

21. Washburn ER. Are you ready for Generation X? Physician Exec. 2000;26(1):51-57.

22. Irvine JE. Measurement and expression of risk: optimizing decision strategies. Am J Med. 2004;117(5A):2S-7S.

23. Clauson KA, Fass JA, Seamon MJ. Legal requirements for drug information resources maintained by pharmacies. Drug Inf J. 2008;42(6):569-582.

24. Frenzel JE. Using electronic medical records to teach patient-centered care. Am J Pharm Educ. 2010;74(4):1-6.

25. Gettig JP. Drug information availability and preferences of health care professionals in Illinois: a pilot survey study. Drug Inf J. 2008;42(3):263-272.

26. Rheney CC, Byerly WG, Connelly JF. North Carolina physician access to drug information resources. Drug Inf J. 2000;34(1):69-73.

27. Smart S. Evidence-based information online. Practice Nurse. 2008;35(12):31-34.

28. Belgado BS, Hatton RC, Doering PL. Evaluation of electronic drug information resources for answering questions received by decentralized pharmacists. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1997;54(22):2592-2596.

29. Alkhateeb FM, Doucette WR, Ganther-Urmie JM. Influences on consumer spending for herbal products. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2006;2(2):254-265.

30. Pharmacy Manpower Project. (2010). Final Report of the 2009 National Sample Survey of the Pharmacist Workforce to Determine Contemporary Demographic and Practice Characteristics (Prepared by Midwest Pharmacy Workforce Research Consortium). Minneapolis, MN. Accessed at http://www.aacp.org/resources/research/pharmacymanpower/Documents/2009%20National%20Pharmacist%20Workforce%20Survey%20-%20FINAL%20REPORT.pdf, December 15th 2011.

31. Prochazka AV, Lundahl K, Pearson W, Oboler SK, Anderson RJ. Support of evidence-based guidelines for the annual physical examination: a survey of primary care providers. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165(12):1347-1352.

32. Brown LM, Schommer JC, Mott DA, Gaither CA, Doucette WR, Zgarrick DP, Droege M. Examining gender salary disparities: an analysis of the 2003 multistate salary survey. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2006;2(3):370-387.

33. Gardner SF, Stowe CD. The impact of a gender shift on a profession: women in pharmacy. Forum on Public Policy (Internet). 2006. Accessed at http://forumonpublicpolicy.com/archive07/gardner.pharmacy.pdf, December 15th 2011.

34. Johnson TJ. Pharmacist workforce in 2020: implications of requiring residency training for practice. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008;65(2):166-170.

35. Kenreigh CA, Wagner LT. The pharmacist shortage: where do we stand? Medscape Pharmacists. 2006;7(1). Accessed at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/521115, December 15th 2011.

36. Cunningham M. Influences of gender ideology and housework allocation on women’s employment over the life course. Soc Sci Res. 2008;37(1):254-267.

37. Fogli A, Veldkamp L. Nature or nurture? Learning and female labor force dynamics. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Research Department Staff Report 386. Accessed at http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/sr/sr386.pdf, December 15th 2011.

38. Poeschl G, Pinto I, Murias C, Silva A, Ribeiro R. Representations of family practices, belief in sex differences, and sexism. Sex Roles. 2006;55(1-2):111-121.

39. Quesenberry JL, Trauth EM, Morgan AJ. Understanding the “mommy tracks”: a framework for analyzing work-family balance in the IT workforce. Inf Res Manage J. 2006;19(2):37-53.

40. Poston RS, Suda KJ, Onita C. Information sources consulted and found useful in answering drug-related questions. E-Service Journal. 2009;6(3):3-39.

41. Czaja SJ, Sharit J. Age differences in attitudes toward computers. J Gerontol. 1998; 53(5):329-340.

42. Schrimsher RH, Freeman MK, Kendrach M. A survey of drug information resources in Alabama pharmacy facilities. Drug Inf J. 2006;40(1):51-60.

43. Kwan D, Hirschkorn K, Boon H. US and Canadian pharmacists’ attitudes, knowledge, and professional practice toward dietary supplements: a systematic review. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2006;6(31):1-10.

44. Lin HW, Pickard S, Mahady GB, Popovich NG. Conceptual development of a measure to assess pharmacists’ knowledge of herbal and dietary supplements. Am J Pharm Educ. 2008; 72(3):1-8.
How to Cite
1.
Carvajal MJ, Clauson KA, Gershman J, Polen HH. Associations of gender and age groups on the knowledge and use of drug information resources by American pharmacists. Pharm Pract (Granada) [Internet]. 1 [cited 2019Sep.18];11(2):71-0. Available from: https://pharmacypractice.org/journal/index.php/pp/article/view/338
Section
Original Research