Welcome to the UA Campus Repository, a service of the University of Arizona Libraries. The repository shares, archives and preserves unique digital materials from faculty, staff, students and affiliated contributors. Contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu with any questions.

 

Featured submissions

May 2020

  • The Archive and the Guide Series, published by the Center for Creative Photography (CCP), are now available in the repository. The volumes highlight materials in the CCP's research collections.

April 2020

  • Rangelands Volumes 1-38 (1979-2016) are now available in the Campus Repository. These publically available journal archives are made available by the University of Arizona Libraries in partnership with the Society for Range Management.
  • Are you interested in women's history and agriculture in Arizona? Special Collections at the University of Arizona Libraries has digitized Reports of the Home Demonstration Agents. These documents provide a window into Arizona life from 1918-1958.
  • The Arizona Geological Survey continues to add new content, from reports and maps to geospatial data, to the Campus Repository. Explore the latest materials in the AZGS Document Repository.
  • Assessing Arizona Pharmacists’ Knowledge of and Confidence with Photosensitizing Drugs

    Spencer, Jenene; Kilgore, Megan; Throckmorton, Hannah; College of Pharmacy, The University of Arizona (The University of Arizona., 2019)
    Specific Aims: To assess Arizona pharmacists’ knowledge of and confidence with identifying and counseling about photosensitizing drugs to determine the need for further education in this subject area. Methods: A voluntary anonymous questionnaire was administered in person at the 2018 Arizona Pharmacy Association Annual Convention. Sixty of the 136 Arizona licensed pharmacists in attendance completed the questionnaire consisting of opinion, knowledge, and demographic sections. A passing grade for the knowledge section was defined as eighty percent accuracy. A score of eighty percent was chosen as the minimum passing rate based on conventionally used rules of competence. T-tests and chi-square tests were used to analyze any differences between the pass and fail groups. Main Results: There was no difference between pass and fail groups with regard to age, gender, years practicing, years spent in Arizona, and practice setting (p greater than 0.05) or with regard to their confidence with counseling about photosensitizing drugs (p greater than 0.05). Pharmacists reported feeling “mostly confident” about identifying photosensitizing drugs (n equals 33), with a range of “not at all” (n equals 2) to “very” (n equals 11) confident. Only 19 (32 percent) of the 60 pharmacists who completed the survey passed the knowledge section with a score of eighty percent or greater. Conclusions: Twice as many pharmacists did not achieve a passing score for the knowledge assessment despite most pharmacists reporting they feel “mostly confident” counseling about photosensitizing drugs. These results demonstrate a need for more education either in college curriculums or continuing education regarding photosensitizing drugs and reactions.
  • Comparing Evidence-Based Learning Methods in a Self-Care Therapeutics Classroom

    Cooley, Janet; Giblin, Lauren; Gonzales, Caitlin; Lychwick, Megan; College of Pharmacy, The University of Arizona (The University of Arizona., 2019)
    Objectives: The objectives of this study were to examine how teaching using case study or role play affects the retention rate of the material being taught in the form of test scores, as well as to assess which teaching styles students prefer. Methods: This study was a dependent groups design. One group was the case study activity and the other group was the role play activity. All students received both interventions. 106 subjects participated in the study and were second year pharmacy students at the University of Arizona College of Pharmacy who were enrolled in the Self Care Therapeutics course on either the Tucson or Phoenix campus. Data was collected from the final exam on the number of correct answers for topics taught using the two teaching methods. A survey was also administered during class time to record student satisfaction with the activity. The data was analyzed using a paired t-test and an alpha level of 0.05. Results: Case study questions were answered correctly on the final exam 83.7% of the time while role play questions were answered correctly 89% of the time. This produced a p-value of 0.057 with no statistically significant difference between the two groups. Case study activities scored higher in survey responses regarding student satisfaction with a statistically significant p-value of 0.027. Conclusions: In conclusion, case study and role play learning strategies did not produce statistically significant difference in test scores. Students responded significantly more positively to case study activities than role play activities.
  • Up to Date or Out of Date: Pharmacist Knowledge of Plan B Contraceptive Regulations in the United States of America

    Leal, Sandra; Daconta, Jesse; Padilla, Craig; Rosa, Lauren; College of Pharmacy, The University of Arizona (The University of Arizona., 2019)
    Specific Aims:​ To assess pharmacists’ knowledge of emergency contraceptive (EC) regulations in a community pharmacy setting around the United States (U.S.) according to the FDA and their state. Methods: ​Authors collected every community pharmacy phone number from 15 different states by contacting each state board of pharmacy. Over 1% of pharmacies were called and the data collected included whether or not the pharmacist knew the EC laws, the gender of the pharmacist, and the ages each pharmacist responded with. Main Results: ​Out of the 308 pharmacists who completed the interview, 158 were males and 150 were females. 62.0% (98/158) of men and 59.3% (89/150) of women did not know the EC regulations. The average ages each incorrect pharmacist gave were: 18 (96/187; 51.3%), 17 (51/187; 27.3%), 16 (20/187; 10.7%), 15 (14/187; 7.5%), 14 (3/187; 1.6%), 13 (1/187; 0.53%), and 11 (1/187; 0.53%). There was no significant difference between men and women in regards to the correct answer (38.0% males vs. 40.7% women; ​X ​ 2 ​ (2, N = 308) = 0.2338, p > 0.05). Overall, 39.3% (121/308) of pharmacists knew EC regulations and 60.7% (187/308) did not. Conclusions: ​The majority of pharmacists around the U.S. are out of date when dealing with EC regulations.
  • Research-related Curriculum and its Applications in US College of Pharmacy Programs

    Slack, Marion; Cushing, Justin; Merchant, Stephen; Schapker, Allie; May, Rebecca; College of Pharmacy, The University of Arizona (The University of Arizona., 2019)
    Specific Aims: To quantify the number of PharmD programs that require completion of a research project. To describe the types of research being undertaken within PharmD programs. To compare current responses with those obtained in the last survey (2007). Methods: Collaborative effort including students and faculty at three pharmacy programs (AZ, FL and MI). Cross-sectional analysis utilizing the survey (with modifications) developed in 2007. Peer review of questions (face-validity); format included dichotomous response, multiple-choice, and open response. Qualtrics® survey distributed via email to Academic Affairs (or comparative) Dean at AACP affiliate institutions. Descriptive analyses; duplicate responses combined when possible. Project was deemed exempt by IRB. Main Results: Seventy-four programs responded (54% response rate). A total of 22 (30%) programs have a required student research project compared to 25% in 2007. Project requirements were similar among the programs requiring a project: proposal (95%), IRB application (90%), collect and analyze data (77%), prepare a written report (86%), and present findings (82%). The most common methods of collecting data were surveys (91%) and chart reviews (86%). Research related coursework was similar between programs except for research methods courses, which were 36% among programs requiring a research project, and 14% among those not requiring a project. Conclusions: The number of programs requiring student research appears to have increased since 2007. Based on the survey data, students could expect to have similar research experiences in any of the colleges requiring a research project. Most colleges provide coursework related to research.
  • Preformulation studies on trametinib and panobinostat for a prospective topical combination product for the treatment of melanoma

    Myrdal, Paul; Younis, Usir; Slack, Marion; Horn, Jonah; Patel, Sid; College of Pharmacy, The University of Arizona (The University of Arizona., 2019)
    Specific Aims: Specific Aim #1: Evaluate the stability of both pharmacologic agents in the varying conditions (pH and temperature). Our working hypothesis #1 is that both agents will degrade readily at an elevated temperature (65°C) and pH (>7). Specific Aim #2: Determine the solubility profiles of both pharmacologic agents in varying conditions (pH and solvent). Our working hypothesis #2 is that solubility of panobinostat and trametinib will be greatest at a pH <7, as well as in a polyethylene glycol (PEG) solvent. Methods: Data for quantity, solubility, and stability will be recorded for trametinib and panobinostat. 1. Standards: Stock solutions of both compounds will be repeatedly diluted into 5 concentrations in varying solvents until a quantifiable, distinct peak is present on the HPLC around 6-8 minutes. 2. Solubility: In order to test the solubility of both compounds, 1-2 mg of each drug will be put into varying solvents and buffers. If the drug is visibly in solution, 1-2 mg more of drug will be added at a time until a limit of solubility is determined. a. Trametinib: The solubility as a function of pH will be conducted at four pH values between 3.0 and 9.0, as well as with various solvents (ACN, EtOH, PEG400, and PG). Each sample will be saturated with raw drug and allowed to agitate for at least 30 min. Samples will then be visually inspected to ensure that solid drug is still in excess, then will be filtered through an RC filter. The filtrate will be diluted appropriately with distilled water and analyzed using the HPLC assay. b. Panobinostat: The solubility as a function of pH will be conducted at ten pH values between 4.0 and 10.0, as well as with various solvents (10% ACN, 10% DMSO, 10% PEG, and 100% PEG). Each sample will be saturated with raw drug and allowed to agitate for at least 30 min. Samples will then be visually inspected to ensure that solid drug is still in excess, then will be filtered through an RC filter. The filtrate will be diluted appropriately with distilled water and analyzed using the HPLC assay. 3. Stability: The stability of both agents will be tested in various conditions including temperature, pH, and solvents. Stability results will be obtained until peaks varied from that of the original determined during respective standards. a. Trametinib: The influence of pH will be studied with a citrate buffer (pH 2.0), and a borate buffer (pH 9.0). The pH will be adjusted with distilled water. b. Panobinostat: The influence of pH on the stability will be studied with a citrate buffer (pH 4.0 and 5.1), a phosphate buffer (pH 6.0, 7.0, 7.4, and 8.0), and a borate buffer (pH 9 and 10). The pH will be adjusted with NaOH or concentrated HCl. The influence of solvents will be studied with 10% ACN, 10% DMSO, 10% PEG, and 100% PEG. Main Results: 1. Panobinostat: a. Solubility – Increased solubility around pH < 6.5, and > 8.5. Intrinsic solubility seems to be around 7.4 to 7.8. Solubility in 100% PEG appears to be roughly 2750 ug/mL, while in 10% showed moderate solubility (~140 ug/mL). b. Stability – 1st order degradation is noted, with higher rates with an increase in pH for the most part. The most distinguished degradation is seen at pH 7 for this experiment. Higher temperatures (65 C) yielded faster degradation. With respect to both experimented temperatures (48 C and 65 C), pH 4 and 5.1 appeared to be most stable (see attached graphs). Stability in PEG complex was poor. c. Dermabase: Drug crystals present in both phases: Not in solution. 2. Trametinib: a. Solubility – @63 C: Not soluble in MeOH, low solubility in EtOH and PG, pH 3 solubility > 2 mg/mL, ~1.93 mg/mL in PEG, 0.73 mg/mL in ACN. Limit of quantification > 40 nanograms. b. Stability – Relatively stable in light, degrades fast a pH 9, slow at pH 2. New peak present at pH 2, degradation around 11%. c. Dermabase: Drug crystals present in both phases: Not in solution. Conclusion: 1. The two medications in combination were incompatible in solution in Dermabase. 2. Additional research will need to be completed in efforts to get these two medications to go into a solution. 3. However, time, money, and the unfortunate death of the preceptor terminated further research for this project.

View more