To evaluate the impact of an innovative team-taught elective course on second-year (P2) students' knowledge and skills relating to the relationship between aromatherapy and pharmacy. An Aromatherapy Science elective course was offered to P2 students in an accelerated doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) degree program and was designed to provide an elective course experience while focusing on active-learning skills such as group work, student-led presentations, and in-class activities. Lectures were designed to reinforce core curricular threads from the basic sciences within the pharmaceutical sciences department while highlighting key aromatherapy principles. Course evaluations, grades, and student self-assessments were used to evaluate student fulfillment and knowledge gained. Students agreed this hands-on course integrated pharmaceutical science experiences, enriched their pharmacy education, and provided knowledge to enhance their confidence in describing essential oil uses, drug interactions, and key aromatherapy clinical implications. Students agreed this course prepared them to identify essential oil therapeutic uses and potential essential oil-drug interactions, and interpret literature. The introduction of aromatherapy principles to pharmacy students will prepare a new generation of healthcare professionals on the role of alternative medicines.

Objective. To compare Pharmacy Curriculum Outcomes Assessment (PCOA) scaled scores and North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination (NAPLEX) pass rates in students who completed a two-week intersession remediation or repeated a course with the scaled scores and pass rates of students who did not require any form of didactic remediation and did not have to repeat a course. Methods. Data examined for this study included NAPLEX/PCOA scores, NAPLEX pass/fail status, and remediation history for students at one college of pharmacy. Students from the graduating classes of 2016, 2017, and 2018 were organized into four groups: non-remediation, one course remediation and no repeats, more than one course remediation and no repeats, and one or more course repeats. Differences were analyzed using linear regression, logistic regression, and Pearson correlations. Results. The PCOA scores for students in the remediation groups were significantly lower than scores for students in the non-remediation groups, with a reduction of 37.8 to 50.9 points from the expected non-remediators’ score. The NAPLEX scores for students who remediated more than one course or repeated one or more courses were 16-20 points lower compared to students who did not remediate. The likelihood of a student failing the NAPLEX was also not significantly lower for students who remediated one course but was significantly lower for other remediation groups. Conclusion. Although single course remediation in this curricular model appears to have minimal impact on NAPLEX outcomes and may be an acceptable intervention for many students, additional support and interventions may be warranted for students who qualify for remediation in multiple courses and/or for repeating a course.

Objective. To describe an intersession remediation process in an accelerated three-year Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) program and to determine if the remediation process reduced attrition rates, including program withdrawals, progression to advanced pharmacy practice experiences (APPEs), and on-time graduation rates. Methods. Attrition was defined as dismissal, withdrawal, leave of absence, and/or change in graduation date. Progression data from students who matriculated between 2008 to 2016, with data available through spring 2017, were analyzed for number of course failures and successful intersession remediation. Other factors such as pharmacy year (first or second year), course subject, and course repeats were evaluated to characterize successful remediation attempts and identify elements that foster student success. Results. Of the 812 matriculated students across the time period analyzed, 18% (n=146) failed at least one didactic course (defined as course average <69.5%). Overall, 74.7% (n=109) of the students who failed a course remediated, with 75.2% (n=82) of those able to remediate being successful, remaining on-time for graduation. If students who remediated were instead required to repeat coursework, the college attrition rate would have averaged over 10 percentage points higher for the time period analyzed than the actual rate of 13.4%. Conclusion. Our study demonstrated that the majority of students who qualified for remediation were successful and graduated on time. Further studies in this area are needed to fully elucidate the effect of remediation processes on learning and retention of knowledge and skills.