Balance of Academic Responsibilities of Clinical Track Pharmacy Faculty in the US

Purpose:  To assess the distribution of effort and balance of academic and clinical responsibilities of clinical track pharmacy faculty.

Methods: A web-based, 23-item, cross-sectional survey of clinical track pharmacy faculty of select Practice and Research Networks of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy was conducted December 2011 – January 2012. Responses were summarized using descriptive statistics, chi-square or Fisher’s exact test for binary and nominal variables, and Wilcoxon’s t-test for continuous variables.

Results: Response rate was 38% (n=344). The majority of respondents were (clinical) assistant professor (54%), followed by associate (26%) and professor (11%). More faculty practiced in inpatient settings (52%) vs ambulatory care (33%), and affiliation with a state vs private school was 57.6% vs 42.4%. While department expectations did not significantly differ from actual % effort spent on clinical service (30% vs 31%), didactic/clinical teaching (37% vs 38%), and scholarship/research (12% vs 8%), department expectations and actual time spent on clinical service were higher in state-affiliated vs private schools (35% vs. 30%, p = 0.03 and 36% vs. 30%, p = 0.04 respectively). “Protected” time to perform academic/scholarly activities was reported by 26% of respondents. Increased teaching load, research funding, and administrative responsibilities were the most common factors cited to justify “protected” time. While 27% of clinical faculty reported tenure eligibility within their department, this number was lower in state-affiliated vs private schools (21% vs. 36%, p = 0.01). 70% of clinical faculty disagreed or strongly disagreed they have sufficient time to fulfill their academic and scholarly activities. This measure did not differ between state-affiliated and private schools.

Conclusions: Faculty in state-affiliated schools reported spending more time on clinical service compared to private schools. Availability of “protected” time and satisfaction with having sufficient time to adequately fulfill academic and scholarly responsibilities was generally low among the clinical track faculty.