RESIDENCY EQUIVALENCY

To acknowledge the distinct role of ASHP-accredited residency training in preparing pharmacists to be direct patient-care providers; further,

To recognize the importance of clinical experience in developing practitioner expertise; further,

To affirm that there are no objective means to convert or express clinical experience as equivalent to or a substitute for the successful completion of an ASHP-accredited residency.

Rationale

ASHP’s position on the need for residency-trained pharmacists is well established and described in the ASHP Long-Range Vision for the Pharmacy Workforce in Hospitals and Health Systems. It has been suggested that a way to achieve the goal of having all pharmacists in direct patient-care roles be residency trained would be to establish a process for reviewing a “portfolio” against pre-established criteria to grant a “residency equivalency.” The Council, Board, and House concluded that both residency training and experience are important and valuable, but different, and that it would not be appropriate to create a process that attempts to convert one into the other. The intent of the goal of having all new college of pharmacy graduates who provide direct patient care residency trained by 2020 is to enhance the skills of those practitioners, and the creation of a residency equivalency process might dilute the value of that residency training and undermine achievement of the goal. 

The Council, Board, and House also discussed the process used by ASHP to waive the requirement for a postgraduate year one (PGY1) residency for experienced practitioners who wish to enter a postgraduate year two (PGY2) residency directly. While this process does consider total experience in granting the waiver, and may seem to contradict the recommended policy, the applicant still completes a residency, ultimately gaining those experiences unique to residency training.