Electronic Theses and Dissertations

Date of Award

1-1-2023

Document Type

Thesis

Degree Name

M.S. in Pharmaceutical Science

First Advisor

Meagen M. Rosenthal

Second Advisor

Marie Barnard

Third Advisor

Alicia Bouldin

School

University of Mississippi

Relational Format

dissertation/thesis

Abstract

Background/Objectives

The infodemic, layered with partisan politics and unsubstantiated medical claims, placed pharmacists in a position to not only have to actively stay up-to-date on developing COVID-19 information but also COVID-19 misinformation. While pharmacists are taught which sources to trust for guidance on public health concerns, it is unclear how new pharmacist practitioners (NPP) were prepared and able to handle patient-driven misinformation. The primary objective of this study is to describe NPP experiences of handling COVID-19-related misinformation presented by patients.

Methods

The study included semi-structured interviews over Zoom with a sample population of St. John’s University (SJU) and University of Mississippi (UM) PharmD 2020 and 2021 graduates recruited through purposive and snowball sampling until saturation was met. Participants received a $25 Amazon gift card for a 30-minute semi-structured interview. Interview questions were based on the constructs of the HURIER model and constructs of the WHO algorithm on how to respond to vocal vaccine deniers. Data was analyzed by deductive thematic content analysis with three coders and the HURIER model and the WHO algorithm were employed as a guiding framework.

Results

A total of 13 interviews were completed. Eight participants (61.5%) graduated from SJU (Queens, NY) and five (38.5%) graduated from UM (Oxford, MS). Participants worked in independent (30.8%), chain (23.0%), long-term care (15.4%), and ambulatory care/hospital pharmacies (30.8%). The types of COVID-19 misinformation NPP heard during the pandemic aligns with the techniques and topics of anti-vaccine arguments outlined by the WHO’s algorithm. Evaluation skills of identifying reputable sources and information, along with interpretation of patients’ language tone, and sources, were used to identify misinformation and patients’ willingness to be corrected on the misinformation. All NPP responded to misinformation regardless of the technique or topic of misinformation. However, the mechanism of response may have differed depending on whether a technique of misinformation or topic of misinformation was presented.

Implications

As new recommendations around health misinformation management are being developed, this baseline knowledge of NPP misinformation management practices can 1) guide communication researchers to test the effectiveness of these mechanisms used to responding to misinformation in practice 2) help schools and colleges of pharmacy understand which areas of communication student pharmacists need further training in.

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.