The development of a career ladder program for staff pharmacists at a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center is recounted. Center policy required the establishment of clinical privileges for all pharmacists with direct patient contact and specified three VA privilege categories with increasing degrees of autonomy. The pharmacy department supported the need for all pharmacists to incorporate clinical activities into their daily practice but faced several problems, including inadequate instruction, insufficient incentives, fragmentation of clinical services, and subjectivity of measures of competence. In response, a pharmacy credentialing committee created a career ladder with three levels based on the established system of clinical privileges. Level A integrated basic clinical pharmacy knowledge with dispensing activities. Level B increased the number of clinical skills required and allowed the pharmacist to act as a therapeutic consultant. Level C incorporated the skills necessary for specialty practice. Instructors were designated for each clinical service area, readings and sample problems were assigned, and staff development presentations were improved. Objective tests of skills were designed. Combining the three levels on the career ladder with the three categories of clinical privileges formed a matrix of nine options for advancement. Pharmacists applying for advancement must master all requisite skills and submit relevant documentation. Each level carries a pay increase of 2%. A total of 53% of the staff pharmacists have participated in the program, which has had a favorable impact on staff retention. By combining nationally established categories of clinical privileges with an institution-specific career ladder, a pharmacy department helped ensure the consistency of services and promote the development of clinical practitioners.

 

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. M. Blair, J. Carmichael, E. Young, and K. Thrasher Pharmacist privileging in a health system: Report of the Qualified Provider Model Ad Hoc Committee Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm., November 15, 2007; 64(22): 2373 - 2381. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]