Efficacy of personal pharmacogenomic testing as an educational tool in the pharmacy curriculum: A nonblinded, randomized controlled trial
Author
Grace, C.Larriva, M.M.
Steiner, H.E.
Marupuru, S.
Campbell, P.J.
Patterson, H.
Cropp, C.D.
Quinn, D.
Klimecki, W.
Nix, D.E.
Warholak, T.
Karnes, J.H.
Affiliation
Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, University of Arizona College of PharmacyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Arizona College of Medicine-Tucson
College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Arizona
Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Arizona College of Pharmacy
Issue Date
2021
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
John Wiley and Sons IncCitation
Grace, C., Larriva, M. M., Steiner, H. E., Marupuru, S., Campbell, P. J., Patterson, H., Cropp, C. D., Quinn, D., Klimecki, W., Nix, D. E., Warholak, T., & Karnes, J. H. (2021). Efficacy of personal pharmacogenomic testing as an educational tool in the pharmacy curriculum: A nonblinded, randomized controlled trial. Clinical and Translational Science.Rights
Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Personal genomic educational testing (PGET) has been suggested as a strategy to improve student learning for pharmacogenomics (PGx), but no randomized studies have evaluated PGET’s educational benefit. We investigated the effect of PGET on student knowledge, comfort, and attitudes related to PGx in a nonblinded, randomized controlled trial. Consenting participants were randomized to receive PGET or no PGET (NPGET) during 4 subsequent years of a PGx course. All participants completed a pre-survey and post-survey designed to assess (1) PGx knowledge, (2) comfort with PGx patient education and clinical skills, and (3) attitudes toward PGx. Instructors were blinded to PGET assignment. The Wilcoxon Rank Sum test was used to compare pre-survey and post-survey PGx knowledge, comfort, and attitudes. No differences in baseline characteristics were observed between PGET (n = 117) and NPGET (n = 116) participants. Among all participants, significant improvement was observed in PGx knowledge (mean 57% vs. 39% correct responses; p < 0.001) with similar results for student comfort and attitudes. Change in pre/post-PGx knowledge, comfort, and attitudes were not significantly different between PGET and NPGET groups (mean 19.5% vs. 16.7% knowledge improvement, respectively; p = 0.41). Similar results were observed for PGET participants carrying a highly actionable PGx variant versus PGET participants without an actionable variant. Significant improvement in Likert scale responses were observed in PGET versus NPGET for questions that assessed student engagement (p = 0.020) and reinforcement of course concepts (p = 0.006). Although some evidence of improved engagement and participation was observed, the results of this study suggest that PGET does not directly improve student PGx knowledge, comfort, and attitudes. © 2021 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.Note
Open access journalISSN
1752-8054Version
Final published versionae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1111/cts.13121
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License.