Public Health and Patient Care Aspects in Indian Pharmacy Curricula: A Comparison with USA, Finland and Denmark

Aim(s): This study was designed to compare Indian pharmacy curricula with Pharmacy curriculum of USA, Finland and Denmark to assess differences with a focus on pharmaceutical policies and public health, patient care and pharmacy practice aspects in the programs. Study Design: This is a programmatic research conducted between March 2013 and August 2014. Methods: Curricula of pharmacy programs leading to registered pharmacist in India, USA, Finland and Denmark were selected. By using conversion references, all curricula were converted into number of hours-format to make them comparable. The curriculum contents were divided into four core areas and number of hours were collated and analyzed. Results: The proportions of 4 core areas remarkably vary between the curricula assessed. Diploma in Pharmacy (D Pharm) and Bachelor of Pharmacy (B Pharm) programs in India are allocating about 60% of total time to pharmaceutical sciences against National Association of Boards of Pharmacies's (NABP) Pharmacy Curriculum Outcomes Assessment (PCOA) recommended 30%. D Pharm curriculum is covering 12% (175 hours), B Pharm and Doctor of Pharmacy (Pharm D) cover 8% (315 hours and 462 hours, respectively) against PCOA recommended 22% of social/behavioral/administrative sciences. Indian D Pharm covers 8% (125 hours) and BPharm 2% (90 hours) of clinical sciences, while Indian Pharm D covers 36% which is in par with PCOA recommendation (32%). Finnish and Danish curricula have more electives when compared to Indian curricula. Pharmaceutical policy and public health topics are least allocated in all the programs studied. Conclusion: Indian and US Pharm D programs contain most and Indian D Pharm and B Pharm least public health and patient care aspects. Consequently, India has high number of trained pharmacists, but curriculum is industry focused, although they work in community pharmacies. It is important that the workforce and competency needs of pharmaceutical industry are met. It would be useful to have an alternative curriculum line focusing on patient care and pharmacy practice aspects in Indian D Pharm and B Pharm programs. Further research is needed to assess how well current D Pharm, B Pharm and Pharm D curricula prepare graduating pharmacists to contribute to public health and patient care. This study is first of its kinds, it will be helpful to statutory authorities and curriculum reform committees in India and other countries where pharmacists' role is continuing to evolve towards inclusion of public health and patient care.