A 2023 Nationwide Survey Of Immunizing Pharmacy Technicians

• By: MCKEIRNAN, Kimberly (Washington State University College Of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, United States)
• Co-author(s): Prof Kimberly McKeirnan (Washington State University College of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Spokane, United States)
  Dr. Taylor Bertsch (Washington State University College of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Spokane, United States)
  Prof Shane Desselle (Touro University California, Vallejo, United States)
  Prof Kenneth Hohmeier (University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Nashville, United States)
  Dr. Maya Harris (American Pharmacists Association, Washington DC, United States)
  Mr. Bronhed Shaw (American Pharmacists Association, Washington DC, United States)
  Dr. Daniel Zlott (American Pharmacists Association, Washington DC, United States)
  
• Abstract:

  Introduction: Pharmacy technicians began administering immunizations in one U.S. state in 2017. At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, a Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) amendment expanded the legal authorization of pharmacy technicians to immunize in all U.S. states as long as specific criteria for training and certification were met. Although past research has evaluated the role of the immunizing technician, opinions of the technicians themselves regarding the impact of immunization training have not been explored in detail. The objective of this research was to evaluate the perceptions of immunization-trained pharmacy technicians.
  Methods: In 2023, a cross-sectional survey was sent to 6000 pharmacy technicians who had previously been trained to administer immunizations using the American Pharmacists Association (APhA) Pharmacy-Based Immunization Delivery for Pharmacy Technician training program. Potential participant technicians were emailed an electronic link to the survey questionnaire using contact information provided during the training. The questionnaire was created by the developers of the APhA program and piloted by national immunization and pharmacy technician workforce experts. The Institutional Review Board at Washington State University found this work to be exempt from the need for full board review.
  Results: Two-hundred thirty-six technicians responded to the survey. When asked what percentage of the immunizations given in the pharmacy were administered by a technician, 34% reported that the majority of immunizations were given by a technician and an additional 45% reported that about half were given by a technician. Eighty percent of technicians report feeling supported by their pharmacist(s) to immunize. Sixty-four percent of technicians also reported that their job satisfaction has increased since becoming an immunizing technician. The most commonly factors in the decision to participate in immunization administration training reported by technicians included wanting to learn a new skill (27%), obtain an advanced role (16%), assist with pharmacy workflow/workload (15%), because they were financially incentivized by their employer (13%), and to build their CV/resume (12%). Financial incentives reported by the technicians included the employer paying for the training (39%), a one-time financial incentive such as a bonus (32%), and a wage increase (15%). The majority (90%) of the trained technicians believe that properly trained technicians should be allowed to immunize in all U.S. states.
  Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic and PREP Act have led to rapid expansion of immunizing technicians in the U.S. Although many technicians were incentivized to participate in immunization training, they report that their job satisfaction has improved since they began immunizing. Immunizing technicians surveyed reported they are giving half or more of the immunizations in their pharmacies. The majority of technicians feel supported by supervising pharmacists in this new role and believe properly trained technicians should be allowed to immunize in all U.S. states.