Bcps?

[BMBiology]

I guess this is the next "certification". Resident trained pharmacists especially those who have not received a job offer are trying to differentiate themselves by taking the BCPS.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Ackj]

Pretty much everyone I know who has completed a residency has their BCPS (or BCACP if they're am care). Not sure it really "differentiates" anyone since everyone does it.

 

[brianmcbride]

Pretty much everyone I know who has completed a residency has their BCPS (or BCACP if they're am care). Not sure it really "differentiates" anyone since everyone does it.

BCPS is little more than bunch of money grubbing poppycock for those who are looking for the easy way out of residency. You sit out and practice for three years, study, pay a boatload of money, and take a standardized test. It only makes money for ACCP who is the only organization that sells CE credits eligible for re-certification. The people that write the CE get very little money. It essentially funds a right-wing extremist organization that is just about as a annoying and in-bred as the Board of the Directors of your local condominium association.

Said another way: Would you use a drug that increased cost but did not improve outcomes? No. All pharmacy professors would have a heart attack if anyone did. Yet, they push and push and push and push the BCPS. Guess what? There is one single solitary piece of data that shows that a pharmacist with board certification (versus an certified pharmacist) improves any out come in any disease state. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Zero.

My advice, coming from a PharmD who did five years of fellowship training, spent time in academia, works in clinical practice and maintains an academic appointment, DON'T DO IT!

 

[awval999]

BCPS is little more than bunch of money grubbing poppycock for those who are looking for the easy way out of residency. You sit out and practice for three years, study, pay a boatload of money, and take a standardized test. It only makes money for ACCP who is the only organization that sells CE credits eligible for re-certification. The people that write the CE get very little money. It essentially funds a right-wing extremist organization that is just about as a annoying and in-bred as the Board of the Directors of your local condominium association.

Said another way: Would you use a drug that increased cost but did not improve outcomes? No. All pharmacy professors would have a heart attack if anyone did. Yet, they push and push and push and push the BCPS. Guess what? There is one single solitary piece of data that shows that a pharmacist with board certification (versus an certified pharmacist) improves any out come in any disease state. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Zero.

My advice, coming from a PharmD who did five years of fellowship training, spent time in academia, works in clinical practice and maintains an academic appointment, DON'T DO IT!

Not everyone has a cushy academia appointment.

Have you been in the hospital setting recently? Absolutely cutthroat. PGY-1's and PGY-2's applying for staff positions. This is why a measly ole' PharmD with 3 years experience is sitting for that test, because I damn sure am not going though one of those worthless residencies.

 

[joetrisman]

BCPS is little more than bunch of money grubbing poppycock for those who are looking for the easy way out of residency. You sit out and practice for three years, study, pay a boatload of money, and take a standardized test. It only makes money for ACCP who is the only organization that sells CE credits eligible for re-certification. The people that write the CE get very little money. It essentially funds a right-wing extremist organization that is just about as a annoying and in-bred as the Board of the Directors of your local condominium association.

Said another way: Would you use a drug that increased cost but did not improve outcomes? No. All pharmacy professors would have a heart attack if anyone did. Yet, they push and push and push and push the BCPS. Guess what? There is one single solitary piece of data that shows that a pharmacist with board certification (versus an certified pharmacist) improves any out come in any disease state. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Zero.

My advice, coming from a PharmD who did five years of fellowship training, spent time in academia, works in clinical practice and maintains an academic appointment, DON'T DO IT!

Not everyone has a cushy academia appointment.

Have you been in the hospital setting recently? Absolutely cutthroat. PGY-1's and PGY-2's applying for staff positions. This is why a measly ole' PharmD with 3 years experience is sitting for that test, because I damn sure am not going though one of those worthless residencies.

I want to know how you two really feel

 

[Praziquantel86]

Not everyone has a cushy academia appointment.

Have you been in the hospital setting recently? Absolutely cutthroat. PGY-1's and PGY-2's applying for staff positions. This is why a measly ole' PharmD with 3 years experience is sitting for that test, because I damn sure am not going though one of those worthless residencies.

So a residency is worthless but the test isn't? As someone who has done both, I disagree - I think the residency is/was an incredibly valuable experience. I guess I must be mistaken in your view, though.

 

[metrarx]

So a residency is worthless but the test isn't? As someone who has done both, I disagree - I think the residency is/was an incredibly valuable experience. I guess I must be mistaken in your view, though.

I wouldn't go as far as calling a pharm residency worthless but let's be real here. "Valuable experience" is about the only thing you get from a pharm one. Med residencies in highly desired specialties carry a lot more weight. There's really no comparison. The pay difference alone speaks volumes. Pharmacy specialists are right on par with staff pharmacists and in some situations, make even less.

I actually think everyone going into hospital practice should be required to do a PGY1 to gain this valuable experience you speak of so as not to require months of training. Other than that, I wouldn't take a 2 year pay cut to work in an area I have an interest in because that's pretty much what you're doing. A specialist's schedule will probably be better so that's a plus but hospital staffers don't do as many weekends as their retail counterparts (generally).

Like other poster said, it's extremely cutthroat out there and the number of PGY2 applying for staffing positions is only going to increase. So not only did the person take a significant paycut for 2 years, said person can't even practice in the specialty they did their post grad training in. I know this isn't the norm...yet. But as these schools keep pumping out students who are increasingly interested in residencies, well, you get the picture. If I knew that pharm residencies would one day require 9-10+ years to possibly just get a staffing position, I'd do med school instead.

 

[Rattlergirl53]

I look at it like this. A residency doesn't guarantee you anything but there's a good chance it will open more doors for you.

I have a classmate that got a clinical pharmacist position out of school and one who did residency. Now one just got another job offer for a better clinical position and the resident is probably going to staff at her facility because they have no clinical positions at their facility.

I myself tried to get a hospital position out of school and could not land one. I then went to CVS and applied for residency. I start residency next month.

So it's all what is best for you. I realize me getting a residency isn't going to guarantee me a pharmacy dream job but I felt it was the best choice for me at the time and don't regret it.

 

[metrarx]

^^

I agree with this. Having a residency will definitely open more doors for you.

 

[confettiflyer]

I guess this is the next "certification". Resident trained pharmacists especially those who have not received a job offer are trying to differentiate themselves by taking the BCPS.

it's been around for a while, the "next" certifications are the ones in critical care and that other one i can't remember at the moment.

Plus the test is given in october and while the job market is tough initially as PGY1's finish up, most PGY1's are employed by the october date. BCPS will not confer me an employment advantage if I'm already employed.

BCPS is a feather in your cap but doesn't really *substantially* add to my CV. Directors will care more about your actual functionality as a clinician vs. be razzle dazzled by 4 extra letters.

 

[brianmcbride]

Academic jobs appear cushy from the outside but more (not all and excluding my friends) are siloed introverts who are not team players. Which is I left academia and took a nice job serving the underserved. I use more of my brain with dosing and drug therapy/pharmacology questions than I would in academia.

BCPS is a cash grab for ACCP and like the BS vs. PharmD debate, every training experience brings value. The rub comes when quantifying that value. PharmD brought value when it was a graduate degree. Now, residency training and a longer duration of it brings value. BCPS has never been shown to have value...it sucks that we have to "keep us with the Joneses" when the Jonses are buying bacon by the case and eating said case of bacon daily.

 

[awval999]

So a residency is worthless but the test isn't? As someone who has done both, I disagree - I think the residency is/was an incredibly valuable experience. I guess I must be mistaken in your view, though.

The test is worthless. However, since nearly all residents take it--- it shows a minimum level of competancy, especilly since every hospital with a pulse is starting a residency program now. I am taking it to show I have-- at least-- the competancy of the residents.

I would say that a residency is necessary now--- so no, it's not worthless, it's just that it's unneeded, it is practically another year of rotations, it wasn't as necessary when I graduated in 2010.

I guess what I'm trying to say is--- do we need a 4 year BS, 4 year PharmD, PGY-1, PGY-2 and a BCPS to properly staff the hospital pharmacy. Because that is what we are going to have. As candidates and practicioners continue to try to diferentiate themselves with certifications and tests--- it will lead to a war of overeducated, overqualified applications, such as PGY-2 PharmDs to all available openings in the hospitals.

 

[farmadiazepine]

it was nice when these tests differentiated people from each other, but now it doesn't. it's pretty much standard that whoever does pgy1 pgy2 take the bcps test.

and they wind up getting a staff hospital job, doing order entry, filling carts, and making iv's.

was it really worth it?

 

[awval999]

it was nice when these tests differentiated people from each other, but now it doesn't. it's pretty much standard that whoever does pgy1 pgy2 take the bcps test.

and they wind up getting a staff hospital job, doing order entry, filling carts, and making iv's.

was it really worth it?

either that or walgreens.

 

[Praziquantel86]

I wouldn't go as far as calling a pharm residency worthless but let's be real here. "Valuable experience" is about the only thing you get from a pharm one. Med residencies in highly desired specialties carry a lot more weight. There's really no comparison. The pay difference alone speaks volumes. Pharmacy specialists are right on par with staff pharmacists and in some situations, make even less.

I actually think everyone going into hospital practice should be required to do a PGY1 to gain this valuable experience you speak of so as not to require months of training. Other than that, I wouldn't take a 2 year pay cut to work in an area I have an interest in because that's pretty much what you're doing. A specialist's schedule will probably be better so that's a plus but hospital staffers don't do as many weekends as their retail counterparts (generally).

Like other poster said, it's extremely cutthroat out there and the number of PGY2 applying for staffing positions is only going to increase. So not only did the person take a significant paycut for 2 years, said person can't even practice in the specialty they did their post grad training in. I know this isn't the norm...yet. But as these schools keep pumping out students who are increasingly interested in residencies, well, you get the picture. If I knew that pharm residencies would one day require 9-10+ years to possibly just get a staffing position, I'd do med school instead.

I'll agree with you on this that a pharmacy residency doesn't carry the same weight as a medical residency, nor should it. I do think that the value of a residency is in extra training so you have the necessary competency to practice at an advanced level...it adds some degree of homogeneity to a very heterogeneous education system.

Also keep in mind that the traditional staffing model is dying. Some places more slowly than others, but as technology gets better and care becomes more complex, less pharmacist time will be devoted to distributive functions and more to cognitive services. This may be many years down the road for smaller/community shops, but the winds of change are blowing.

The test is worthless. However, since nearly all residents take it--- it shows a minimum level of competancy, especilly since every hospital with a pulse is starting a residency program now. I am taking it to show I have-- at least-- the competancy of the residents.

I would say that a residency is necessary now--- so no, it's not worthless, it's just that it's unneeded, it is practically another year of rotations, it wasn't as necessary when I graduated in 2010.

I guess what I'm trying to say is--- do we need a 4 year BS, 4 year PharmD, PGY-1, PGY-2 and a BCPS to properly staff the hospital pharmacy. Because that is what we are going to have. As candidates and practicioners continue to try to diferentiate themselves with certifications and tests--- it will lead to a war of overeducated, overqualified applications, such as PGY-2 PharmDs to all available openings in the hospitals.

I entirely disagree with you that a residency is equivalent to an extra year of school rotations. Anyone who says or agrees with that has clearly not done one. It's honestly a little insulting to hear that, but to each their own.

And no, we do not need PGY-2s to staff a pharmacy. That's a problem with overtraining - there are way too many residents for the jobs available. This isn't a problem with residency, but it is a problem with the pharmacy job market. Until practice changes and we see clinically-focused jobs becoming the norm, it will continue to be a problem. And until such a time, it sucks for the people who have spent time and money to better themselves as clinicians only to see that the jobs they were hoping for simply don't exist in the quantity they should.

 

[Pharm 917717]

I work in a hybrid staff/clinical position in a large teaching hospital. We have so many applicants now that when we do have an open position it is likely going to someone who completed a residency. We don't require a residency but it is far less likely we will hire someone if they don't have one at this point. It's market saturation at work I'm afraid.

We also do not require BCPS but about 25% of staff (including me) have it and the remaining pharmacists feel they are under a lot of pressure to take the test if they want to continue performing clinical functions.

 

[metrarx]

I'll agree with you on this that a pharmacy residency doesn't carry the same weight as a medical residency, nor should it. I do think that the value of a residency is in extra training so you have the necessary competency to practice at an advanced level...it adds some degree of homogeneity to a very heterogeneous education system.

Also keep in mind that the traditional staffing model is dying. Some places more slowly than others, but as technology gets better and care becomes more complex, less pharmacist time will be devoted to distributive functions and more to cognitive services. This may be many years down the road for smaller/community shops, but the winds of change are blowing.



I entirely disagree with you that a residency is equivalent to an extra year of school rotations. Anyone who says or agrees with that has clearly not done one. It's honestly a little insulting to hear that, but to each their own.

And no, we do not need PGY-2s to staff a pharmacy. That's a problem with overtraining - there are way too many residents for the jobs available. This isn't a problem with residency, but it is a problem with the pharmacy job market. Until practice changes and we see clinically-focused jobs becoming the norm, it will continue to be a problem. And until such a time, it sucks for the people who have spent time and money to better themselves as clinicians only to see that the jobs they were hoping for simply don't exist in the quantity they should.

I agree that extra training is needed in specialized areas (onc, ID, transplant, etc.). I have learned so much from our ID pharmacist that my practice has changed for the better in the last few years. When I work at other hospitals (smaller, one man operation), I can make very good recommendations.

This is my problem with residency. As the other poster mentioned, many hospitals are trying to "cash in" on residencies because they have someone who will do a major project for them that is hopefully practice-changing and they will also staff on weekends. It's a definitely a win-win situation for both parties but like you said, there is some major overtraining going on. You have people doing PGY2s who may not have an interest in that field but they're doing it to differentiate themselves as much as possible. This dilutes the market. I would expect a PGY2 to make at least 20-30% more than me but that isn't the norm and that's one of the reasons why I didn't do one.

At this point I'm all for required PGY1 residencies for hospital jobs and very limited residencies for PGY2s so the market doesn't get diluted. I seriously can't believe the number of critical-care residencies that are out there now. It's kind of ridiculous.

 

[BenJammin]

I still don't understand why a PGY-1 is more qualified than me. We have the same amount of experience and we do the same things day-to-day. Is it really all about the letters? That's such a shame. You can keep your fancy letters, I'll keep being a clinical pharmacist.

 

[BenJammin]

it was nice when these tests differentiated people from each other, but now it doesn't. it's pretty much standard that whoever does pgy1 pgy2 take the bcps test.

and they wind up getting a staff hospital job, doing order entry, filling carts, and making iv's.

was it really worth it?

Take a pharmacist like me and take a resident pharmacist, drag them through the same stuff, and you'll get the same kind of pharmacist. Except I'm at a better hospital. I know I'm a better clinical pharmacist than any PGY-1 from a mediocre hospital.

If you have a PGY-1 and you're working at Walgreens, you're not a residency trained pharmacist...you're a victim.

 

[brianmcbride]

The overarching problem is that pharmacy does NOT have clinical laddering like medicine. Established practitioners should be grandfathered because nothing beats experience but experience. Going forward, a PGY1 residency should be required of all graduates prior to licensure. BCPS should not be allowed without a PGY2 in pharmacotherapy and/or 5 years of experience.

As someone who did extensive post-doctoral training, I can tell you that a BCPS will never make one practitioner equal to someone who invested the year of training and the pay cut.

 

[awval999]

The overarching problem is that pharmacy does NOT have clinical laddering like medicine. Established practitioners should be grandfathered because nothing beats experience but experience. Going forward, a PGY1 residency should be required of all graduates prior to licensure. BCPS should not be allowed without a PGY2 in pharmacotherapy and/or 5 years of experience.

As someone who did extensive post-doctoral training, I can tell you that a BCPS will never make one practitioner equal to someone who invested the year of training and the pay cut.

how does a voluntary pay cut have anything to do with clinical knowledge?

 

[brianmcbride]

how does a voluntary pay cut have anything to do with clinical knowledge?

Nothing.

The year of training gives on clinical knowledge that not even three years in practice can provide.

The pay cut shows a commitment to not only the profession but to the patients this individual pharmacist took an oath to heal and protect. That level of commitment gets someone an interview. If they turn out to be clinically deficient I wouldnt give them the position of a clinical coordinator. Inseatd, I'd be more likely to promote a BS trained pharmacist and mentor the residency trained person for a year or two.

Now, if someone came to me witha BCPS and no residency, I would ask them why. If they had a good reason (taking care of a parent), then that is a valid reason. The person may say that they dont want to answer that question and they dont have to because they may have opted to not choose a residency for legally protected reasons that cant be asked during an interview (divorce, FMLA, etc.) If they give an off-the cuff reason like those stated above (i.e. its another year of rotation), then I am not interested in the candidate. "How would you know if its only another year of rotation if you had not done a residency?" would be my next question. The interview goes down hill from there.

This is why I left academia. Everything was labels and judgment, not professional excellence. Excellence does not require a BCPS or even a PharmD. It requires someone who is committed and committed to excellence. A BCPS does not always equate to excellence. It's a label without evidence of its efficacy.

I'd rather work at a small hospital that does not require a BCPS than one that does. I can show up for work every day and take care of patients extremely well. The hospital that requires BCPS, well that is their loss because they see one paradigm and one paradigm only. We don't treat every patient the same, so why should every pharmacist be vanilla? Diversity is what makes the profession great.

 

[mustang sally]

We also do not require BCPS but about 25% of staff (including me) have it and the remaining pharmacists feel they are under a lot of pressure to take the test if they want to continue performing clinical functions.

This is how I feel. Do I want to do BCPS? Maybe, but I more feel like it's something I "have to" do in order to show some level of competency (no residency), even though I don't think its ultimately going to give me any sort of competitive edge at all. How can it, when you can have someone who has both BCPS and 1-2 years of residency under their belt?

 

[brianmcbride]

I work in a hybrid staff/clinical position in a large teaching hospital. We have so many applicants now that when we do have an open position it is likely going to someone who completed a residency. We don't require a residency but it is far less likely we will hire someone if they don't have one at this point. It's market saturation at work I'm afraid.

We also do not require BCPS but about 25% of staff (including me) have it and the remaining pharmacists feel they are under a lot of pressure to take the test if they want to continue performing clinical functions.

From a funding perspective, if an employer requires BCPS, most pay for it. If you have a large enough staff, that expense can almost fund an FTE. More pharmacists improves clinical outcomes. There is moutains of data on that...BCPS improving outcomes? Not so much.. However, BCPS is a VEY laudable achievement for anyone who gets it because they are committed to the professional fostering knowledge. The problem I have is where people think it replaces a residency. It doesn't in my book.

...and everyone should staff...it is important to maintain relative competence.

 

[PharmDstudent]

Nothing.

The year of training gives on clinical knowledge that not even three years in practice can provide.

The pay cut shows a commitment to not only the profession but to the patients this individual pharmacist took an oath to heal and protect. That level of commitment gets someone an interview. If they turn out to be clinically deficient I wouldnt give them the position of a clinical coordinator. Inseatd, I'd be more likely to promote a BS trained pharmacist and mentor the residency trained person for a year or two.

Now, if someone came to me witha BCPS and no residency, I would ask them why. If they had a good reason (taking care of a parent), then that is a valid reason. The person may say that they dont want to answer that question and they dont have to because they may have opted to not choose a residency for legally protected reasons that cant be asked during an interview (divorce, FMLA, etc.) If they give an off-the cuff reason like those stated above (i.e. its another year of rotation), then I am not interested in the candidate. "How would you know if its only another year of rotation if you had not done a residency?" would be my next question. The interview goes down hill from there.

This is why I left academia. Everything was labels and judgment, not professional excellence. Excellence does not require a BCPS or even a PharmD. It requires someone who is committed and committed to excellence. A BCPS does not always equate to excellence. It's a label without evidence of its efficacy.

I'd rather work at a small hospital that does not require a BCPS than one that does. I can show up for work every day and take care of patients extremely well. The hospital that requires BCPS, well that is their loss because they see one paradigm and one paradigm only. We don't treat every patient the same, so why should every pharmacist be vanilla? Diversity is what makes the profession great.

A pay cut has nothing to do with commitment. Stop trying to justify crappy pay!

Why not just make a residency a volunteer position to really show how committed someone is? 🙄

 

[MatCauthon]

A pay cut has nothing to do with commitment. Stop trying to justify crappy pay!

Why not just make a residency a volunteer position to really show how committed someone is? 🙄

Exactly. A residency doesn't show how committed a pharmacist is. It probably did 5-10 years ago when there was a shortage, but a lot of pharmacists are doing it because they think it is the only job they will get anyway.

A pharmacists merits, ability, and dedication has nothing to do with whether they did a residency or not. Everyone here has extremely bright people here in their class who opted out of residency but easily could have matched at the top residencies in the county. Likewise, we all know people who barely passed pharmacy school that matched.

There is no one-size fits all label for pharmacists.

 

[confettiflyer]

I still don't understand why a PGY-1 is more qualified than me. We have the same amount of experience and we do the same things day-to-day. Is it really all about the letters? That's such a shame. You can keep your fancy letters, I'll keep being a clinical pharmacist.

They aren't...it's about the first stepping stone. I'm pragmatic, PGY-1 to me is a job first and foremost (albeit with a lot of variety). It's not about a fresh PGY-1 vs. an experienced pharmacist, it's really about picking the licensed and 1 year experienced PGY-1 over the new grad that has licensure in process.

 

[awval999]

They aren't...it's about the first stepping stone. I'm pragmatic, PGY-1 to me is a job first and foremost (albeit with a lot of variety). It's not about a fresh PGY-1 vs. an experienced pharmacist, it's really about picking the licensed and 1 year experienced PGY-1 over the new grad that has licensure in process.

When confetti talks--- you shut up and listen.

 

[BMBiology]

And say sir, yes sir!

 

[awval999]

Looks like this thread has turned into a pissing match.

Residency-trained vs. Non-residency trained
BCPS vs. no-BCPS

I think we all agree on the details. Any of the above show a dedication to improving oneself.

To answer your "interview" question Dr. McBride---

McBride: I see you are BCPS certified but no residency.... why is that?

Me: Sure... that's a good question. I was offered an overnight staffing position as a new graduate. Residencies were a lot less common when I graduated and I had a lot of loans to pay off. I wanted to start my life right then and there. It was a good decision for me.
During my time at XXXXXX we incorporated additional clinical tasks into my position and I was the defacto clinical night RPh. When 3 years came I knew I wanted to become board certified to challenge myself and prove to others about my qualifications. And here we are today.

 

[confettiflyer]

Looks like this thread has turned into a pissing match.

Residency-trained vs. Non-residency trained
BCPS vs. no-BCPS

I know I saw this coming, and you probably did too, but when such a small subset of graduating students (~25%) enter residency, you end up an easily marginalized group of practitioners.

It's multifactorial, some of it is fear, some of it is generational. If you're a non-residency trained (NRT) RPh doing clinical work, you either express your worldview that PGY1 is useless because (a) "hey look at me, i did fine" or (b) out of generational fear that a young, unjaded, up and coming practitioner with credential inflation may come along and do your job for cheaper (not unique to pharmacy).

We're hungry and in debt, almost literally nothing to lose. Watch out.

Some of it is geographic, opportunities for clinical work are different between Cody, WY and Palo Alto, CA. PGY1's scoring clinical coord positions right out of school scratch their heads why their fellow PGY1's are scraping by with PT & per-diem work staffing.

Put it all together and you get this weird perception of additional credentials.

So why am I doing BCPS? My n=1 answer is I'm doing it to validate my PGY1 year the same way a nurse with extensive diabetes education experience would pursue CDE certification. Secondly, my experience speaks for itself, a well-read director would recognize it and call my references appropriately, but not every manager is created equal. As a matter of convenience, it's easier to describe me as "Confettiflyer, a board-certified, PGY-1 trained clinical pharmacist with interest in acute care practice" in a 15 second elevator speech.

Part of is credential inflation...but I've earned the right having completed an accredited program, so since it's my right/privilege to do it now, I'm gonna do it. Doesn't help me for employment at all.

So to address the employment boost question, if you're an unemployed PGY1 trained pharmacist and it's been 4-5 months since you finished, you have a lot more questions to answer than a BCPS designation can hide.

 

[bacillus1]

I think that I've decided that I'm gonna do BCPS. Yes, it's completely for credential inflation, not gonna lie about that. I will be employed come July, but only until the end of November. I'm hoping that BCPS will increase my employability for when my temporary position is done. Meanwhile, when I'm interviewing for positions a few months the end of the job, I could tell them that I'm preparing for BCPS, so I hope that'll look good as well.

 

[Pharm 917717]

From a funding perspective, if an employer requires BCPS, most pay for it. If you have a large enough staff, that expense can almost fund an FTE. More pharmacists improves clinical outcomes. There is moutains of data on that...BCPS improving outcomes? Not so much.. However, BCPS is a VEY laudable achievement for anyone who gets it because they are committed to the professional fostering knowledge. The problem I have is where people think it replaces a residency. It doesn't in my book.

...and everyone should staff...it is important to maintain relative competence.

My employer paid for the ACCP Updates in Therapeutics material and also paid for the exam.

They do not pay the yearly $100 "maintenance fee" or cover the cost of PSAP modules. If you want to keep it up you are entirely on your own.

I thought it was awesome that they paid for any part of it at all since I did it for myself anyway. Also if they ever do decide to make in mandatory I've already done it.

 

[SimbaPharmD]

I think that I've decided that I'm gonna do BCPS. Yes, it's completely for credential inflation, not gonna lie about that. I will be employed come July, but only until the end of November. I'm hoping that BCPS will increase my employability for when my temporary position is done. Meanwhile, when I'm interviewing for positions a few months the end of the job, I could tell them that I'm preparing for BCPS, so I hope that'll look good as well.

It depends on VAs but you get step increase as well!

 

[Praziquantel86]

Looks like this thread has turned into a pissing match.

Residency-trained vs. Non-residency trained
BCPS vs. no-BCPS

I think we all agree on the details. Any of the above show a dedication to improving oneself.

To answer your "interview" question Dr. McBride---

McBride: I see you are BCPS certified but no residency.... why is that?

Me: Sure... that's a good question. I was offered an overnight staffing position as a new graduate. Residencies were a lot less common when I graduated and I had a lot of loans to pay off. I wanted to start my life right then and there. It was a good decision for me.
During my time at XXXXXX we incorporated additional clinical tasks into my position and I was the defacto clinical night RPh. When 3 years came I knew I wanted to become board certified to challenge myself and prove to others about my qualifications. And here we are today.

I don't think being the "defacto clinical night RPh" for three years is in any way equivalent to a year of residency training. The benefit of a residency is that it occurs in a structured manner, providing continuous feedback and intensive exposure to a variety of different clinical fields. During this time you acquire the ability to independently think about a clinical situation and actually acquire a true experience- and knowledge-based opinion on multiple topics. You also participate in the medical decision-making process, providing a depth of knowledge (e.g., understanding the nuances of why a particular treatment course was chosen in lieu of another), which is not possible in the context of post-hoc chart review and order verification/entry. Most important in this process is the closed feedback loop from preceptors/physicians telling you what mistakes and errors in judgment you've made along the way allowing for continuous improvement.

Outside of the context of a residency, all this is lost. Things like aminoglycoside/vanc monitoring, warfarin dosing, IV->PO switches, etc. are great, but are just a tiny piece of the skills acquired during a residency and are absolutely not equivalent to one. You might be good at following protocols, but a residency teaches you to go beyond what protocols can offer. I bring up the example of the vancomycin-MRSA thread - a residency would have exposed you to that debate and allowed an opinion to be formed.

I'm not casting aspersions on wanting to pay off your loans and get on with your life, there's nothing wrong with that. But in some cases, you just can't have your cake and eat it too.

 

[MatCauthon]

I don't think being the "defacto clinical night RPh" for three years is in any way equivalent to a year of residency training. The benefit of a residency is that it occurs in a structured manner, providing continuous feedback and intensive exposure to a variety of different clinical fields. During this time you acquire the ability to independently think about a clinical situation and actually acquire a true experience- and knowledge-based opinion on multiple topics. You also participate in the medical decision-making process, providing a depth of knowledge (e.g., understanding the nuances of why a particular treatment course was chosen in lieu of another), which is not possible in the context of post-hoc chart review and order verification/entry. Most important in this process is the closed feedback loop from preceptors/physicians telling you what mistakes and errors in judgment you've made along the way allowing for continuous improvement.

Outside of the context of a residency, all this is lost. Things like aminoglycoside/vanc monitoring, warfarin dosing, IV->PO switches, etc. are great, but are just a tiny piece of the skills acquired during a residency and are absolutely not equivalent to one. You might be good at following protocols, but a residency teaches you to go beyond what protocols can offer. I bring up the example of the vancomycin-MRSA thread - a residency would have exposed you to that debate and allowed an opinion to be formed.

I'm not casting aspersions on wanting to pay off your loans and get on with your life, there's nothing wrong with that. But in some cases, you just can't have your cake and eat it too.

Only someone who completed a residency is qualified enough to read journal articles, attend journal club, and form a developed opinion on hospital pharmacy issues.

 

[Praziquantel86]

Only someone who completed a residency is qualified enough to read journal articles, attend journal club, and form a developed opinion on hospital pharmacy issues.

I didn't say that, did I? In fact, a student had the best replies in that thread. It was simply an example that went in as part of the overall reply, and was perhaps not the best example. Anyone has the ability to do those things for sure, it's the residency training that provides the environment described above that provides appropriate clinical context for application. As with everything else, there are exceptions. Some people are able to do this without having done a residency, and good for them if they can.

 

[metrarx]

I don't think being the "defacto clinical night RPh" for three years is in any way equivalent to a year of residency training. The benefit of a residency is that it occurs in a structured manner, providing continuous feedback and intensive exposure to a variety of different clinical fields. During this time you acquire the ability to independently think about a clinical situation and actually acquire a true experience- and knowledge-based opinion on multiple topics. You also participate in the medical decision-making process, providing a depth of knowledge (e.g., understanding the nuances of why a particular treatment course was chosen in lieu of another), which is not possible in the context of post-hoc chart review and order verification/entry. Most important in this process is the closed feedback loop from preceptors/physicians telling you what mistakes and errors in judgment you've made along the way allowing for continuous improvement.

Outside of the context of a residency, all this is lost. Things like aminoglycoside/vanc monitoring, warfarin dosing, IV->PO switches, etc. are great, but are just a tiny piece of the skills acquired during a residency and are absolutely not equivalent to one. You might be good at following protocols, but a residency teaches you to go beyond what protocols can offer. I bring up the example of the vancomycin-MRSA thread - a residency would have exposed you to that debate and allowed an opinion to be formed.

I'm not casting aspersions on wanting to pay off your loans and get on with your life, there's nothing wrong with that. But in some cases, you just can't have your cake and eat it too.

Seriously? That's quite a biased generalization isn't it? You're telling me that no matter how many years you practice, you'll never quite attain the knowledge-base of a PGY1? We both know that's not true. There are pharmacists who are great and not so great regardless of whether they did a residency or not. I can generalize too. I currently work with pharmacists who work in specialized areas who exceed our PGY2s. Providers seek them out more for questions. So I guess a non-residency trained CC pharm > PGY2 who did a CC residency? I hope you see my point.

 

[Praziquantel86]

Seriously? That's quite a biased generalization isn't it? You're telling me that no matter how many years you practice, you'll never quite attain the knowledge-base of a PGY1? We both know that's not true. There are pharmacists who are great and not so great regardless of whether they did a residency or not. I can generalize too. I currently work with pharmacists who work in specialized areas who exceed our PGY2s. Providers seek them out more for questions. So I guess a non-residency trained CC pharm > PGY2 who did a CC residency? I hope you see my point.

I didn't say that either, did I? I specifically replied to the 3 year comment. I've worked with some incredible pharmacists who are not residency trained, in fact, they've been some of my best preceptors. Several didn't have PharmDs.

I do believe, however, that those folks are going to be fewer and farther between. As the number of residency trained pharmacists grows, I believe that the ability to find jobs where a person might grow clinically without one will become increasingly limited. Without the proper work environment, I don't think it's possible to get to that level in any number of years of practice. Unfortunately, that era seems to be passing by, making residency training more important than it ever has been.

 

[ucrx]

I didn't say that either, did I? I specifically replied to the 3 year comment. I've worked with some incredible pharmacists who are not residency trained, in fact, they've been some of my best preceptors. Several didn't have PharmDs.

I do believe, however, that those folks are going to be fewer and farther between. As the number of residency trained pharmacists grows, I believe that the ability to find jobs where a person might grow clinically without one will become increasingly limited. Without the proper work environment, I don't think it's possible to get to that level in any number of years of practice. Unfortunately, that era seems to be passing by, making residency training more important than it ever has been.

Some hospital pharmacy departments are much better at providing that environment than others. I've worked in hospitals where they provide the support for non-residency trained pharmacists to develop stronger clinical skills (and residency trained pharmacists to keep improving) and I've worked places where it was lacking. Residency helps with that, but it isn't the only way to get there. It takes the right pharmacist in the right environment to develop the skills. Residencies in general provide that environment. To me, one of the biggest factors is mentoring from those who have been there before.

In response to the post above, I don't know if I agree about the future environment. I think the environment may still be there, but the opportunities for new graduate pharmacists to get a position in these places will almost entirely disappear with the amount of residency graduates competing for jobs.

As far as BCPS (and others)... I'm undecided on the benefit. My institution has a career ladder that rewards board certification, so I'm going to take it.

 

[confettiflyer]

Only someone who completed a residency is qualified enough to read journal articles, attend journal club, and form a developed opinion on hospital pharmacy issues.

what the hell random ass comment is this?

 

[confettiflyer]

I think the environment may still be there, but the opportunities for new graduate pharmacists to get a position in these places will almost entirely disappear with the amount of residency graduates competing for jobs.

It is the numbers, my back of envelope calculations say if there are 10,000 graduates and 50% of them go to retail, 25% go into residency, the sheer volume of licensed, 1 year experienced, PGY1 trained (note the order I put that in) pharmacists mean that directors get their pick of whoever. Exceptions will abound, of course.

You shoulda seen the environment at Western States this year...best and the brightest, and all the employers there not only got their pick of the best of the best, they got a "free trial" during the presentations. Hell we were toasting my friends picking up part-time hospital gigs.

If it's that competitive there, I don't think any new grad has a chance in hell in the impacted markets at getting their foot in the door. Add that to the list of 5-figure RPh signing bonuses, 8-track tapes, and travel agencies on every corner.

 

[bacillus1]

It is the numbers, my back of envelope calculations say if there are 10,000 graduates and 50% of them go to retail, 25% go into residency, the sheer volume of licensed, 1 year experienced, PGY1 trained (note the order I put that in) pharmacists mean that directors get their pick of whoever. Exceptions will abound, of course.

You shoulda seen the environment at Western States this year...best and the brightest, and all the employers there not only got their pick of the best of the best, they got a "free trial" during the presentations. Hell we were toasting my friends picking up part-time hospital gigs.

If it's that competitive there, I don't think any new grad has a chance in hell in the impacted markets at getting their foot in the door. Add that to the list of 5-figure RPh signing bonuses, 8-track tapes, and travel agencies on every corner.

At least you had an actual career fair at Western States. At Eastern States, there were 2 tables. One of them was the VA. They just said "here's a flyer on how to apply for jobs through our website". When my co-resident and I introduced ourselves at the table, the guy pretty much just encouraged us to keep looking and told us that maybe it's good that we have temporary employment now, since we'll have less people to compete with in November/December.

 

[PharmDstudent]

It is the numbers, my back of envelope calculations say if there are 10,000 graduates and 50% of them go to retail, 25% go into residency, the sheer volume of licensed, 1 year experienced, PGY1 trained (note the order I put that in) pharmacists mean that directors get their pick of whoever. Exceptions will abound, of course.

You shoulda seen the environment at Western States this year...best and the brightest, and all the employers there not only got their pick of the best of the best, they got a "free trial" during the presentations. Hell we were toasting my friends picking up part-time hospital gigs.

If it's that competitive there, I don't think any new grad has a chance in hell in the impacted markets at getting their foot in the door. Add that to the list of 5-figure RPh signing bonuses, 8-track tapes, and travel agencies on every corner.

You seem to be leaving out the whole "networking" part of landing a job... I mean, even Sparda got hired on as a full time inpatient staff pharmacist in flippin' NYC, and now he's starting another prn job, too!

 

[confettiflyer]

At least you had an actual career fair at Western States. At Eastern States, there were 2 tables. One of them was the VA. They just said "here's a flyer on how to apply for jobs through our website". When my co-resident and I introduced ourselves at the table, the guy pretty much just encouraged us to keep looking and told us that maybe it's good that we have temporary employment now, since we'll have less people to compete with in November/December.

I mean there were a handful of tables and interviews ongoing throughout the conference (by the small lagoon + near the docks where all the boats were were popular places).

But I think there were a lot of DOP's & CC's going stealth into presentations, I was told later by my DOP that 2 directors were at my presentation whose institutions I applied to previously (with no response yes/no up through the conference). Same with my co-residents, I stealthily looked at name tags at their presentations and recognized a handful. My best inference is that my own DOP said "hey buddy of mine, check out my residents, they're pretty good."

Back to the BCPS debate - further evidence that it doesn't help initial employment since none of us have it.

 

[VCU07]

Take a pharmacist like me and take a resident pharmacist, drag them through the same stuff, and you'll get the same kind of pharmacist. Except I'm at a better hospital. I know I'm a better clinical pharmacist than any PGY-1 from a mediocre hospital.

If you have a PGY-1 and you're working at Walgreens, you're not a residency trained pharmacist...you're a victim.

I'm with you on this BenJammin. I have 7 years of clinical experience and have been working critical care for the past 4 years. I work over an hr away from where I live b/c other employers won't even give me a chance. What has happened to our profession that experience is no longer considered valid? I spoke with two DOPs who flat out stated they won't even consider a pharmacist anymore without residency. We hired a residency trained pharmacist a couple yrs back. Guess what, that pharmacist was nowhere near my level of experience...eventually ended up leaving. Thinking getting my BCPS would help land me a closer job...yeah, my CV is still being thrown into the trash. The profession has taken advantage of the saturation to the highest extent imaginable. Lets make pharmacists do residency then pay them less! Pharmacy better get back on track quickly or this thing is going to derail.

 

[VCU07]

anyone going for the new critcal care bcps?

What's the point? I learned my lesson with BCPS.

 

[confettiflyer]

I'm with you on this BenJammin. I have 7 years of clinical experience and have been working critical care for the past 4 years. I work over an hr away from where I live b/c other employers won't even give me a chance. What has happened to our profession that experience is no longer considered valid? I spoke with two DOPs who flat out stated they won't even consider a pharmacist anymore without residency. We hired a residency trained pharmacist a couple yrs back. Guess what, that pharmacist was nowhere near my level of experience...eventually ended up leaving. Thinking getting my BCPS would help land me a closer job...yeah, my CV is still being thrown into the trash. The profession has taken advantage of the saturation to the highest extent imaginable. Lets make pharmacists do residency then pay them less! Pharmacy better get back on track quickly or this thing is going to derail.

Something doesn't sound right here... 4 years critical care experience out of 7 total clinical and no one's called?

I feel like there's a missing piece, the top academic centers in my region have hired crit care specialists with the same experience (possibly less) and no residency and this is fairly recent.

 

[VCU07]

Something doesn't sound right here... 4 years critical care experience out of 7 total clinical and no one's called?

I feel like there's a missing piece, the top academic centers in my region have hired crit care specialists with the same experience (possibly less) and no residency and this is fairly recent.

No ones called b/c these institutions require residency Hence, my CV gets trashed. Nothing unclear there.

 

[gwarm01]

We hired a residency trained pharmacist a couple yrs back. Guess what, that pharmacist was nowhere near my level of experience...eventually ended up leaving.

We had a similar experience. Hired a PGY2 with the expectation of them being a superstar, turned out to be a total dud. Barely functional. Similar situation with a PGY1 from our own institution that just could not handle the job duties. I don't doubt that the residency gave them an opportunity to learn a lot, but our error is in assuming they can just hit the ground running. I really think they should receive the same training we give new graduates, because that's what they are in a sense. Let them staff for a year. Learn what it means to practice in an environment where time is a valuable commodity, where you aren't researching for a presentation but rather providing critical services to a patient. I feel it is a mistake to throw them directly into positions that would otherwise require years of experience.

The real sad thing is that there is a real chance the PGY2 pharmacist will be granted a coveted critical care clinical spot when we have a much more capable PGY1 trained pharmacist who has been with us for several years and certainly proved themselves to be one of the best on staff.