Drug Court: A Pilot Study on an Innovative Pedagogical Approach to Teaching Law and Ethics in Healthcare Education

Drug Court: A Pilot Study on an Innovative Pedagogical Approach to Teaching Law and Ethics in Healthcare Education | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Drug Court: A Pilot Study on an Innovative Pedagogical Approach to Teaching Law and Ethics in Healthcare Education Jisha Myalil Lucca, Vineetha Menon This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7316576/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background A strong grasp of legal and ethical principles is essential for decision-making in healthcare. However, student learning is often hindered by knowledge deficiencies, complex terminology, fragmented regulations, and traditional teaching approaches. Methods This pilot study involved a Drug Court simulation exercise conducted with a small cohort of third-year pharmacy students enrolled in a single-year Pharmacy Law and Ethics course. The simulation aimed to enhance understanding of narcotics laws, ethical decision-making, and judicial processes by bridging theoretical knowledge with real-world application. Pre- and post-tests were used to assess knowledge gains, and a survey evaluated students’ satisfaction with the activity compared to traditional teaching methods. Results The Drug Court activity led to a significant increase in mean scores from 1.17 (pre-test) to 3.33 (post-test). Correct response rates improved from 12.50–83.33% for regulatory compliance, 75.00–95.83% for storage requirements, and 8.33–75.00% for legal enforcement. Student satisfaction was high across all aspects: 62.5% of participants found the activity “much more engaging” than traditional teaching methods, 70.83% reported feeling “very confident” in their understanding of UAE narcotics law, and an equal percentage strongly recommended incorporating similar activities in future classes. Conclusion The Drug Court simulation exercise showed promising improvements in students’ legal and ethical understanding while receiving high satisfaction ratings, suggesting potential effectiveness as an engaging pedagogical method. Drug Court Simulation Interactive Learning Narcotics Law Pharmacy Education Figures Figure 1 1. BACKGROUND A comprehensive understanding of legal and ethical issues, along with their resolutions, is essential for guiding decision-making and behavior in healthcare. 1 , 2 However, significant gaps in legal knowledge persist among healthcare professionals, with studies noting discomfort among physicians due to limited understanding of medical malpractice. 3 – 5 The importance of pharmacy law in shaping future pharmacy practitioners is undeniable, yet both teaching and learning the subject remain challenging. 6 , 7 According to the Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education (CAPE) Outcomes and the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) Standards, pharmacy students are expected to develop competencies in legal and ethical responsibilities. These are primarily addressed under the domains of Professionalism, Personal and Professional Development, and Approach to Practice and Care. However, the format and language of legal and regulatory content are often challenging for pharmacy students, as they tend to be complex and tailored for individuals with legal backgrounds. 10 – 11 The fragmented nature of legal acts and regulations further complicates students’ ability to integrate and connect different aspects of the law, thereby hindering rational decision-making and application of legal knowledge to real-world scenarios. 6 , 7 , 10 – 11 Traditional lecture-based approaches to teaching ethics and law provide foundational knowledge but often fail to motivate or engage students. 1 , 2 To address these challenges, educators continuously strive to adopt innovative teaching strategies that foster critical thinking, collaborative learning, and higher-order reasoning, while also boosting student engagement and motivation. 12 – 13 Studies from various health-related fields emphasize the benefits of interactive learning methods in teaching health policy and law. 10 – 13 One commonly used alternative to traditional lectures is case-based or small group discussions, which effectively engage professional students in understanding legal topics. For example, Gilbert and colleagues highlighted the use of a mock trial setting as an engaging approach for medical students, demonstrating how practical simulations can enhance learning. 12 Similarly, Bess et al. introduced a mock Board of Pharmacy meeting into a pharmacy law course, where students assumed roles of board members and used technology to resolve cases and requests akin to those in actual board meetings. 6 To enhance knowledge, methods such as problem-based learning (PBL), legal training, and mind maps help learners remember and understand key legal concepts, in line with Bloom’s Taxonomy. To shape attitudes, activities like clerkships and legal simulations promote analysis and evaluation of ethical and legal scenarios. For psychomotor skills, approaches such as mock trials provide opportunities for students to apply their learning and create structured legal arguments in realistic settings, targeting higher-order domains of Bloom’s Taxonomy. 14 Moot court serves a similar purpose, offering an experiential platform where students simulate appellate proceedings, develop oral advocacy skills, and engage in the practical application of legal principles, thereby reinforcing psychomotor learning through active participation. This approach addresses the limitations of theoretical legal education by allowing students to apply their knowledge in practical, real-world legal contexts. It combines academic concepts with the realities of judicial proceedings, equipping students with essential skills and experiences. By working on simulated or actual cases across various branches of law, students gain valuable insights into legal procedures and practices, further bridging the gap between theory and application. 15 – 18 Despite the growing emphasis on legal and ethical education in healthcare curricula and the increasing use of innovative teaching methodologies, no standardized strategy currently exists for teaching these topics effectively. This limits students’ ability to navigate the complex legal and ethical landscape of healthcare. Recognizing these challenges, we implemented a moot court exercise to evaluate its effectiveness in improving students’ understanding of legal and ethical principles and to compare their experiences with this approach to traditional teaching methods in pharmacy law and ethics. 2. METHODS 2.1. The concept: Drug court Moot court is an innovative teaching methodology widely used in law school curricula worldwide. It combines academic concepts with the realities of judicial proceedings, providing students with essential skills and practical experience. 16 – 18 Building on this foundation, we introduced a new and dynamic concept: the “Drug Court.” This academic exercise adapted the principles of moot court to replicate the specialized environment of a Drug Court. Drug Courts are designed to serve individuals who use or are addicted to drugs, offering an alternative to conventional legal processes by emphasizing rehabilitation, supervision, and treatment over incarceration. In our Drug Court, we simulated legal judicial proceedings with a specific focus on the application of laws related to substance use and controlled substances. 19 – 21 The primary objective of the exercise was to enhance students’ understanding of drug-related laws, ethical decision-making, judicial processes, associated penalties, and rehabilitation strategies. The Drug Court concept was developed by course instructors as part of an ongoing initiative to improve student engagement and comprehension of pharmacy law and ethics. In response to challenges associated with teaching complex legal content through traditional methods, the instructors designed an interactive and experiential learning activity that bridged the gap between theoretical knowledge and real-world application. The activity was structured to replicate real-world scenarios in a courtroom setting, thereby encouraging students to apply their knowledge in a practical and collaborative manner. 2.2. Participants Participants were third-year pharmacy students enrolled in the Pharmacy Law and Ethics course at Gulf Medical University during the 2023-24 and 2024-25 academic years. This two-credit-hour course primarily covers various aspects of the Ministry of Health and Prevention (MOHAP) Law in the United Arab Emirate (UAE). MOHAP is the federal authority responsible for the regulation, oversight, and delivery of healthcare services in the UAE. Weeks 8 and 9 of the course are specifically dedicated to Ministerial Decree No. (888) of 2016, MOHAP-UAE, which outlines the rules and regulations for prescribing and dispensing of narcotic, controlled, and semi-controlled drugs. This decree served as the foundation for the Drug Court activity. All the sessions in this course are usually delivered through a combination of traditional lectures, small case-based discussions, and group activities. 2.3. Instrumentation The questionnaire used in this study was specifically developed for this research and has not been published elsewhere. An English-language version of the finalized questionnaire has been uploaded as a supplementary file (Supplementary File 1). The initial development of the questionnaire was undertaken by the instructors based on item analysis generated from ExamSoft, a digital assessment platform commonly used in academic institutions to administer exams and provide detailed performance analytics. The items, originally part of the 2022-23 final exam, were reviewed and approved by the Examination Assessment Committee. The item analysis indicated high quality questions, with a Point-Biserial Correlation (r p b) greater than 0.63 and a Difficulty Index of 0.59, indicating that the items were well-constructed and clearly framed. This analysis also identified areas where students demonstrated difficulties or weaker performance. Based on these insights, the questionnaire items were specifically designed to assess key concepts and skills targeted by the Drug Court activity, including students’ understanding of narcotics laws, regulatory compliance, and ethical decision-making. Following the initial draft, content validation was performed to ensure item relevance and comprehensive coverage of the intended constructs. A panel of five academic experts in UAE Pharmacy Law and Ethics independently evaluated each item for relevance, clarity, and alignment with the study objectives. Based on their feedback, minor revisions were made to improve the wording and contextual appropriateness of the items. Using Lawshe’s method, items with a Content Validity Ratio (CVR) greater than 0.78 were retained, while those falling below this threshold were excluded. All items included in the final questionnaire achieved CVR values above 0.78, indicating acceptable item-level content validity. The overall Content Validity Index (CVI) was 0.821, further supporting the instrument’s content validity. Face validity was subsequently assessed by five pharmacy students representative of the target population. Their feedback led to minor linguistic and formatting refinements to improve comprehension without altering the substantive content of the items. Reliability testing was carried out through a pilot study involving a small group of third-year pharmacy students during the 2023-24 academic year. These participants were excluded from the final analysis. The pilot phase was used to evaluate the internal consistency of the questionnaire, as well as the clarity, acceptability, and length of the items. It also provided instructors with an opportunity to refine the structure of the Drug Court activity, ensure alignment with course learning objectives, and enhance student engagement. The insights gained from the pilot were instrumental in implementing a more comprehensive and full-fledged version of the activity in the subsequent academic year. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, which yielded a value of 0.78 for the overall instrument, indicating acceptable reliability. Domain-specific alpha values were also calculated: 0.85 for regulatory compliance, 0.80 for storage requirements, and 0.82 for legal enforcement. All values exceeded the commonly accepted threshold of 0.70, confirming acceptable internal consistency across the questionnaire domains. The finalized study questionnaire consisted of three sections: Section 1 collected demographic information about the students. Section 2 included four case-based multiple-choice questions designed to assess students’ competencies across three key domains of Bloom’s Taxonomy: Knowledge, comprehension, and application of narcotic law in clinical practice. These questions focused on regulatory compliance, storage and inventory management, and legal compliance and enforcement. Section 3 comprised six questions aimed at evaluating students’ satisfaction with the activity. These questions assessed the activity’s impact on engagement compared to traditional teaching methods, understanding of narcotics laws, confidence in applying legal knowledge, clarity regarding roles in narcotics handling, and students’ recommendations for incorporating similar activities into future classes. 2.4. Procedures In the academic year 2023-24, the Drug Court activity was conducted as a pilot to assess its feasibility and to support reliability testing of the associated questionnaire. Based on insights gained during this pilot phase, a full-scale implementation of the Drug Court activity was carried out in the following academic year (2024-25) during a regular two-hour class session. This activity focused on the practical application of narcotics law in an engaging format, offering an interactive experience that bridged the gap between theoretical knowledge and real-world practice. It aimed to help students appreciate the importance of legal compliance while emphasizing key aspects such as legal accountability, interdisciplinary collaboration, ethical considerations, and the penalties associated with narcotics violations. The Drug Court activity was introduced during the initial sessions of the Pharmacy Law and Ethics course, and students were invited to participate voluntarily. A case scenario was shared one week in advance to allow sufficient preparation time. Students were free to select their roles, including judges, members of the plaintiff/prosecution and defense teams, witnesses, and the court clerk. In situations where a selected role was already filled, the instructor intervened to assign alternative roles to ensure that all positions were covered and that no student was left without a role. A pre-test was administered 30 minutes before the Drug Court activity to evaluate students’ baseline knowledge of narcotics law, with 10 minutes allocated for its completion. Following the pre-test, the classroom was arranged to simulate a courtroom setting, with judges seated at the center and the prosecution and defense teams positioned on opposite sides. The session began with the court clerk introducing the case, followed by opening statements from both teams outlining their arguments. The prosecution team conducted direct examinations of witnesses and reviewed various types of evidence, including pharmacy records, prescription details, lab findings, and any documented errors. They also evaluated the pharmacy’s layout, inventory management system, and security of the narcotics storage area to identify regulatory violations. The defense team then presented its own evidence and witnesses, followed by cross-examinations conducted by the prosecution team. At the conclusion of the session, both teams delivered closing statements summarizing their cases. The judges reviewed all evidence and arguments presented, then announced the penalties, explaining the legal consequences for each violation committed by the pharmacist, clinic, or other involved parties, in accordance with UAE narcotics law. A post-test was administered 10 minutes after the conclusion of the Drug Court activity to the same group of students to assess their knowledge in the same domains evaluated by the pre-test. Additionally, students’ satisfaction with the activity was assessed through the third section of the questionnaire, which formed part of the post-test. 2.5. Statistical analysis Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS), version 29.0.2.0. Knowledge scores were calculated by assigning a score of “1” for each correct response and “0” for each incorrect response, resulting in a maximum total score of 4. Nominal data were presented as frequencies and percentages, while continuous variables were summarized using the mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum values. To evaluate differences in knowledge scores, an independent t-test was used to compare pre- and post-test scores between groups, while a paired t-test was employed to assess within-group changes. A p -value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. 3. RESULTS Twenty-four students completed both the pre- and post-tests. Demographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table 1. The majority were female (75%), and the mean age was 20.08 years. The average cumulative GPA (cGPA) was 3.19, with 38% of students having a GPA between 3.50 and 4.00. Approximately 29% of the students actively participated in the Drug Court activity, while the remaining 71% attended as audience members. Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the study participants Variable Categories n (%) Gender Male 6 (25.00) Female 18 (75.00) Age Mean±SD 20.08±0.6539 cGPA Below 3.00 8 (33.33) 3.00-3.49 7 (29.17) 3.50-4.00 9 (37.50) Mean±SD 3.19±0.4902 Role of student Participant in activity 7 (29.17) Audience 17 (70.83) Abbreviations: cGPA: Cumulative Grade Point Average; SD: Standard Deviation Description: Demographic characteristics of the study participants (n= 24), including gender distribution, mean age, cumulative grade point average, and student role in the activity. Table 2 presents the pre-test and post-test scores of students who participated in the Drug Court activity. There was a statistically significant improvement in overall test performance following the activity. The mean score increased from 1.17 (SD = 0.94) in the pre-test to 3.33 (SD = 0.56) in the post-test ( p < 0.0001). The median and mode also increased from 1 to 3, and the score range shifted from 0-3 in the pre-test to 1-4 in the post-test. A visual representation of score distribution is provided in Supplementary File 2 Figure A. Compared to the pre-test, the post-test scores demonstrated reduced variability and improved central tendency, with the interquartile range shifting upward and no outliers observed. Table 2. Comparative analysis of pre-test and post-test scores in the Drug Court activity Variable Pre-test Post-test Number of students 24 24 Valid missing 0 0 Mean 1.17 3.33 Median 1 3 Mode 1 3 SD 0.9168 0.7614 Minimum 0 1 Maximum 3 4 Abbreviations: SD: Standard Deviation Description: Comparative analysis of students’ pre-test and post-test scores in the Drug Court activity, including mean, median, mode, standard deviation, and score range (n = 24). Item-level analysis is presented in Table 3. For Question 1 (validity period of narcotics prescriptions), the proportion of correct responses increased from 12.50% to 83.33% ( p < 0.0001). Question 2 (security requirements for storage) showed an increase from 75.00% to 95.83%, though the change was not statistically significant ( p = 0.0568). Substantial improvements were observed in Question 3 (penalty for unauthorized narcotic use), with correct responses increasing from 8.33% to 75.00% ( p < 0.0001), and in Question 4 (strategy to improve security), from 20.83% to 79.17% ( p = 0.0001). Domain-level improvements are illustrated in Supplementary File 2 Figure B. Domain 1 (Regulatory compliance) showed the largest increase, from 12.50% to 83.33%. Domain 2 (Storage and inventory management) improved from 47.92% to 87.50%, and Domain 3 (Legal compliance and enforcement) from 8.33% to 75.00%. Table 3. Comparative assessment of pre-test and post-test performance on individual questions in the Drug Court activity Statements Answer Pre-test Post-test P- value Correct answer Incorrect answer Mean Correct answer Incorrect answer Mean N % N % N % N % What is the maximum validity period for a prescription of narcotic or/and semi-controlled medicine in UAE? B 3 12.50 21 87.50 0.125 20 83.33 4 16.67 0.8333 0.0001 Which of the following statements is true regarding the security requirements for storing narcotic and controlled drugs in a clinical area or pharmacy store? B 18 75.00 6 25.00 0.75 23 95.83 1 4.17 0.9583 0.0568 What is the penalty for an individual who uses narcotics or psychotropic substances without authorization or in doses higher than prescribed, for the first offense? B 2 8.33 22 91.67 0.0833 18 75.00 6 25.00 0.75 0.0001 What would be the most effective strategy to improve narcotics security in a clinic? A 5 20.83 19 79.17 0.2083 19 79.17 5 20.83 0.7916 0.0001 *paired t-test to compare pre- and post-test scores of individual question Description: Comparative assessment of pre-test and post-test performance on individual questions in the Drug Court activity, showing the distribution of correct and incorrect responses, and mean scores. Table 4 presents subgroup comparisons of the mean pre-test and post-test scores between active participants and audience members. Among participants, the mean score increased from 1.00 to 3.71 ( p = 0.0003), while the audience group improved from 1.24 to 3.18 ( p < 0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in either the pre-test ( p = 0.5792) or the post-test scores ( p = 0.1177), indicating that both groups benefited comparably from the activity. Table 4. Comparison of pre-test and post-test mean scores between participants and audience in the Drug Court activity Mean scores Participants Audience P -value * Pre-test 1.00 1.24 0.5792 Post-test 3.71 3.18 0.1177 P -value** 0.0003 0.0001 *independent t-test to compare pre- and post-test scores across participants and audience **paired t-test to compare pre- and post-test scores within each group Description: Comparison of pre-test and post-test mean scores between participants and audience in the Drug Court activity Student satisfaction with the Drug Court activity is summarized in Figure 1. Most students (62.5%) found the activity “much more engaging” than traditional teaching methods, while 29.17% reported it was “slightly more engaging,” and 8.33% found it “about the same.” In terms of understanding narcotics laws and perceived learning, 45.83% indicated the activity “significantly enhanced” their understanding, with an additional 45.83% reporting it “somewhat enhanced” their comprehension. Regarding the effectiveness of the role-playing format, it was rated as “very effective” by 62.5% of students and “somewhat effective” by 33.33%. Following the activity, 70.83% reported feeling “very confident” in their understanding of UAE narcotics law. The activity also provided significant clarity on the roles and responsibilities of healthcare professionals in handling narcotics, as 70.83% of students indicated their understanding was “significantly clearer.” Finally, 70.83% of respondents “strongly recommended” incorporating similar simulation-based exercises into future classes. 4. DISCUSSION Health educators continually seek innovative teaching methods to equip graduates with advanced communication skills, strong problem-solving abilities, critical thinking, and sound decision-making capabilities.The Drug Court activity offers a structured, experiential learning opportunity that engages students in a dynamic and interactive process. Its key strength lies in immersing students in real-world legal scenarios, encouraging them to apply theoretical knowledge in a practical context. While reading the law is essential, the activity actively engages students in critical thinking, collaboration, and decision-making, which are core competencies for health professionals. Furthermore, studies have shown that mock activities enhance students’ psychomotor and application-level skills more effectively than traditional reading or lecture-based methods. 6-7 The Drug Court activity provides students with a valuable opportunity to enhance their understanding and application of Bloom’s Taxonomy across various levels. 22-23 At the knowledge level, students recall and understand the foundational principles of narcotic laws. At the comprehension stage, they interpret legal frameworks and regulations. During the application stage, they demonstrate their ability to apply these laws to real-world scenarios presented in the Drug Court. In the analysis phase, they examine evidence, identify legal issues, and critically evaluate case details. At the synthesis level, they collaborate to construct coherent arguments, formulate legal strategies, and propose solutions. Finally, at the evaluation stage, they assess the case outcomes, justify their decisions, and reflect on the legal and ethical implications of their judgments. The results of the Drug Court activity demonstrated a significant improvement in students’ understanding of the subject matter, as evidenced by an increase in the mean score from 1.17 in the pre-test to 3.33 in the post-test, indicating a marked enhancement in knowledge acquisition and application following the intervention. Similarly, the increase in the median and mode from 1 to 3 further supports the positive shift in central tendency, suggesting that most students achieved a higher performance level after the activity. The reduction in standard deviation from 0.9168 in the pre-test to 0.7614 in the post-test suggests that the Drug Court was effective in reducing variability in learning outcomes. Furthermore, the minimum score increased from 0 in the pre-test to 1 in the post-test, and the maximum score rose from 3 to 4, showing that even the lowest-performing students improved, while more students achieved the highest score possible. Collectively, these findings demonstrate that interactive, simulation-based methods like the Drug Court activity enhance students’ understanding and application of concepts by immersing them in real-world scenarios and encouraging hands-on problem-solving. This approach improves knowledge acquisition, as reflected in higher mean, median, and mode scores, while reducing variability and fostering consistent performance. By bridging the gap between theory and practice, the activity reinforced understanding and retention. Additionally, its collaborative environment and multi-faceted approach fostered deeper comprehension, ensuring substantial improvement even among lower-performing students. Existing literature has already demonstrated that simulations or case-based learning bridge the gap between theoretical understanding and practical application of laws in various sectors of health education. 6-7,10-13,24,25 The assessment of individual questions further underscores the educational impact. Importantly, the four case questions assessed in the study go beyond simple knowledge recall. They require students to apply, analyze, and make judgments based on their understanding of narcotics law. This higher-order thinking cannot be fully achieved through reading alone. The role-playing format fosters deeper retention, as students must not only recall information but also evaluate, synthesize, and apply it in a simulated legal context. This alignment with Bloom’s higher cognitive domains further strengthens the case for using simulation-based education to develop advanced competencies in pharmacy law and ethics. Questions addressing critical concepts, such as the validity period of narcotic prescriptions, penalties for unauthorized narcotics use, and strategies for improving narcotics security, showed dramatic increases in the percentage of correct responses. For instance, correct responses to Question 2 regarding the validity period for a prescription of narcotic or semi-controlled medicines in the UAE, and Question 3 on penalties for unauthorized narcotic use, increased from 12.50% to 83.33% and from 8.33% to 75.00% ( p < 0.05), respectively, highlighting substantial knowledge acquisition. Similarly, Question 4 on strategies to improve narcotic security in clinics showed a significant increase in the percentage of correct responses, rising from 20.83% to 79.17% ( p = 0.0001), emphasizing the activity’s role in enhancing awareness on inventory management. However, while Question 2, concerning security requirements for narcotic storage, showed an increase in correct responses, the improvement was not statistically significant ( p = 0.0568). This may indicate a higher baseline understanding of this topic, potentially due to prior exposure or training. Global literature has extensively documented that adolescents are increasingly gaining awareness about drug abuse and misuse, starting from the school level. 26-29 The comparison of pre-test and post-test mean scores between participants and audience members revealed significant gains in both groups. The mean pre-test score for participants increased from 1.00 to 3.71 ( p = 0.0003) in the post-test, while for the audience, it rose from 1.24 to 3.18 ( p < 0.0001). However, the independent t-test comparing the post-test scores between participants and the audience showed no statistically significant difference ( p = 0.1177), suggesting that both groups benefited equally from the activity, regardless of their level of direct involvement. Several factors may explain these improvements. Firstly, students were not passive recipients of information; rather, they were actively involved in solving problems, making decisions, and applying their knowledge to real-world scenarios. Another possible explanation for the observed improvement is the repetition of material from multiple perspectives. The Drug Court activity provided different viewpoints, with students engaging as members of the prosecution or defense, and later reviewing the evidence as summarized by the judge. This multi-angle approach may have helped to reinforce the material by presenting it in varied contexts, enabling students to process and internalize the information more thoroughly. In terms of student satisfaction with the Drug Court activity, there were high levels of satisfaction across multiple evaluation criteria, showcasing its potential effectiveness in improving engagement, understanding, and application of narcotics laws. Students’ responses reflected positive perceptions of the activity, indicating its success in clarifying complex aspects of narcotics regulation and compliance. The increased student satisfaction likely stemmed from the interactive, engaging nature of the Drug Court activity, which offered a break from traditional lectures. Moreover, its hands-on, role-playing approach enabled active participation and the application of theoretical knowledge to real-world scenarios, creating a more meaningful and enjoyable learning experience. The Drug Court simulation represents a scalable and adaptable model that can be adopted by faculty members at other institutions teaching pharmacy law, ethics, or related healthcare regulations. Its experiential design is not limited to narcotics law alone; the format is highly transferable to other areas of pharmacy education, such as regulatory compliance, medication safety, interprofessional ethics, or even broader healthcare law curricula. To implement such an exercise effectively, collaboration among faculty from pharmacy, law, and ethics is essential. Interdisciplinary coordination can enrich the learning experience by bringing diverse perspectives to scenario development, role-play facilitation, and outcome evaluation. However, faculty may encounter challenges in implementation, including time constraints, limited classroom space, and the need for additional personnel or resources. To mitigate these barriers, instructors may consider starting with smaller-scale pilot simulations, integrating the activity into scheduled course hours, or using virtual platforms to simulate courtroom proceedings. Practical toolkits, including case templates, role descriptions, and evaluation rubrics, can also support efficient execution. Despite these highly encouraging results, it is important to acknowledge certain limitations associated with the study. One such limitation is the short study period, which restricts the ability to assess long-term knowledge retention and its transferability to real-world practice. While the immediate learning gains are evident and promising, more comprehensive research with extended follow-up is needed to determine whether these improvements are sustained over time and meaningfully influence students’ professional behaviors and decision-making. An additional limitation is the absence of a formal comparison group. Without a control or comparator arm, it is difficult to attribute the observed improvements solely to the Drug Court activity, as other factors such as course progression or repeated exposure to content may have contributed. These findings should be interpreted as preliminary, given the pilot nature of the study and its methodological limitations. Future research using larger samples and controlled comparisons is needed to confirm the effectiveness and generalizability of this approach. 5. CONCLUSIONS A strong understanding of pharmacy regulations is essential for developing competent healthcare professionals, highlighting the importance of innovative educational strategies in pharmacy curricula. The Drug Court simulation offers a dynamic, experiential approach to teaching pharmacy law by encouraging students to apply legal concepts in realistic, practice-based scenarios. This model not only enhances knowledge acquisition but also promotes critical thinking, decision-making, and collaboration. With appropriate modifications, the Drug Court framework can be adapted to various academic contexts, including nursing, medical, and public health programs. Future iterations may incorporate interprofessional collaboration, virtual formats, or context-specific legal cases to expand its applicability. Careful planning around time, resources, and facilitation can support successful implementation across institutions. Continued research exploring how similar models are employed in different settings will further inform best practices and support the broader integration of simulation-based legal education into health professions training. Abbreviations ACPE – Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education CAPE – Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education cGPA – Cumulative Grade Point Average CVI – Content Validity Index CVR – Content Validity Ratio IRB – Institutional Review Board MOHAP – Ministry of Health and Prevention PBL – Problem-Based Learning rpb – Point-Biserial Correlation SD – Standard Deviation SPSS – Statistical Package for the Social Sciences UAE – United Arab Emirates Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Gulf Medical University (Ref. no. IRB-COP-FAC-39-Jan-2025), ensuring compliance with data protection policies, adherence to ethical standards, and prioritization of participant safety (Clinical trial number: Not applicable). The study was conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Participation in the Drug Court simulation and completion of the assessments were voluntary. Students were assured that their decision to participate or not would have no impact on their grades or academic standing. Written informed consent was obtained from all student participants prior to their involvement in the study. Consent was collected after a comprehensive explanation of the study objectives, procedures, and the voluntary nature of participation. This process took place before the administration of the pre-test questionnaire and the commencement of the Drug Court simulation exercise. All responses were anonymized to protect confidentiality. Availability of data and materials The study questionnaire and database will be available on reasonable request from the corresponding author. Competing interests The authors declare that the research was carried out without any commercial or financial ties that could be interpreted as a potential conflict of interest. Funding The authors declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Author contributions Conceptualization and Investigation, J.M.L.; Data Curation, Formal Analysis, and Visualization, V.M; Writing - Original Draft, J.M.L.,V.M.; Writing - Review & Editing, J.M.L.,V.M. References Chen WT, Fu CP, Chang YD, et al. Developing an innovative medical ethics and law curriculum—Constructing a situation-based, interdisciplinary, court-based learning course: A mixed methods study. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22:284. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03349-z . Campbell AT. Teaching law in medical schools: First, reflect. J Law Med Ethics. 2012;40:301–10. White BP, Willmott L, Feeney R, et al. Limitations in health professionals’ knowledge of end-of-life law: A cross-sectional survey. BMJ Supportive Palliat Care. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjspcare-2021-003061 . Hariharan S, Jonnalagadda R, Walrond E, Moseley H. Knowledge, attitudes and practice of healthcare ethics and law among doctors and nurses in Barbados. BMC Med Ethics. 2006;7:e7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-7-7 . Roy AD, Chen L, Santucci K. What do pediatric residents know about malpractice? Pediatr Emerg Care. 2011;27(6):586–90. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEC.0b013e31821b85b8 . Bess DT, Taylor J, Schwab CA, Wang J, Carter JA. An innovative approach to pharmacy law education utilizing a mock Board of Pharmacy meeting. Innovations Pharm. 2016;7(1). Article 9. https://doi.org/10.24926/iip.v7i1.419 . Chetty S, Bangalee V, Oosthuizen F. A new way of teaching an old subject: Pharmacy law and ethics. Afr J Health Professions Educ. 2018;10(1):61–5. https://doi.org/10.7196/AJHPE.2018.v10i1.714 . Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education. (2024, July). Accreditation standards and key elements for the professional program in pharmacy leading to the Doctor of Pharmacy degree (Standards 2025) (38 pp.). https://www.acpe-accredit.org/pdf/ACPEStandards2025.pdf Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education. (2025, May 25). Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education (CAPE) educational outcomes (6 pp.). https://www.acpe-accredit.org/pdf/CAPE_Outcomes.pdf Slick R. It’s ethical, but is it legal? Teaching ethics and law in the medical school curriculum. Anat Rec. 2001;265(1):5–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.1035 . Blechner B, Hager CL, Williams NR. The Jay Healey technique: Teaching law and ethics to medical and dental students. Am J Law Med. 1994;20(4):439–55. Gilbert WM, Fadjo DE, Bills DJ, Morrison FK, Sherman MP. Teaching malpractice litigation in a mock trial setting: A center for perinatal medicine and law. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;101(3):589–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-7844(02)03133-2 . Broeseker AE, Jones MM. An interdisciplinary mock trial involving pharmacy, law, and ethics. Annals Pharmacotherapy. 1999;33(7–8):850–8. https://doi.org/10.1345/aph.18355 . Abbasi M, Shirazi M, Torkmandi H, Homayoon S, Abdi M. Impact of teaching, learning, and assessment of medical law on cognitive, affective and psychomotor skills of medical students: A systematic review. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1). Article 703. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04695-2 . Preston-Shoot M, McKimm J. Towards effective outcomes in teaching, learning and assessment of law in medical education. Med Educ. 2011;45(4):339–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03882.x . Abu Issa H, Kaddumi T, Alwerikat N. The impact of moot courts on the quality of legal education: Students of the Faculty of Law at the Applied Science Private University as a model. J High Educ Theory Pract. 2023;23(19). https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v23i19.6681 . Kammerer E. Coaching and teaching competitive moot court: Comparing faculty approaches. J Political Sci Educ. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2018.1521287 . Kammerer E. Using moot court in introduction to law courses. In: Harvey M, Fielder J, Gibb R, editors. Simulations in the political science classroom. Routledge; 2023. pp. 185–99. Judicial Branch of California. (n.d.). What is a drug court? https://courts.ca.gov/programs/collaborative-justice-courts/adult-courts/drug-courts U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2023). Adult drug court programs: Factors related to eligibility and acceptance of offers to participate in DOJ-funded adult drug courts (GAO-23-105272). https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-23-105272 Guastaferro K, Guastaferro WP, Brown JR, Holleran D, Whitaker DJ. Drug court as an intervention point to affect the well-being of families of parents with substance use disorders. Subst Use Misuse. 2020;55(7):1068–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/10826084.2020.1713816 . Krathwohl D. A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Pract. 2002;41(4):212–8. Bloom BS, editor. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals (Vol. 1: Cognitive domain). McKay. Daly YM, Higgins N. (2011). The place and efficacy of simulations in legal education: A preliminary examination. All Irel J Teach Learn High Educ, 3 (2), 58.1–58.14. Fantinelli S, Cortini M, Di Fiore T, Iervese S, Galanti T. Bridging the gap between theoretical learning and practical application: A qualitative study in the Italian educational context. Educ Sci. 2024;14:198. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14020198 . United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2004). School-based education for drug abuse prevention (Report No. E.04.XI.21). United Nations. McBride N. A systematic review of school drug education. Health Educ Res. 2003;18(6):729–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyf050 . Shope JT, Elliott MR, Raghunathan TE, Waller PF. Long-term follow-up of a high school alcohol misuse prevention program’s effect on students’ subsequent driving. Alcoholism: Clin Experimental Res. 2001;25(3):403–10. Heckman CJ, Dykstra JL, Collins BN. Substance-related knowledge, attitude, and behavior among college students: Opportunities for health education. Health Educ J. 2011;70(4):383–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0017896910379694 . Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files SupplementaryFile1Questionnaire.docx SupplementaryFile2.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7316576","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":513160016,"identity":"219b425a-649e-4c18-9dc1-9a4924311abd","order_by":0,"name":"Jisha Myalil Lucca","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Gulf Medical University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jisha","middleName":"Myalil","lastName":"Lucca","suffix":""},{"id":513160017,"identity":"536d04b3-089e-4808-a069-a95153066760","order_by":1,"name":"Vineetha Menon","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Gulf Medical University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Vineetha","middleName":"","lastName":"Menon","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-08-07 08:38:41","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7316576/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7316576/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":91306844,"identity":"74f9a724-257d-4947-8bea-a21f95943c27","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-15 06:33:34","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":33917,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eStudent satisfaction with the Drug Court activity:\u003cstrong\u003e \u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(A) \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eEngagement levels of Drug Court activity compared to traditional teaching methods. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(B)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eImpact of Drug Court activity on understanding narcotics laws. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(C)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eEffectiveness of interactive role-playing in applying theoretical knowledge to real-life scenarios. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(D)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e Confidence in understanding UAE narcotics law post-Drug Court activity. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(E)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e Clarity on healthcare professionals' roles in narcotics handling through Drug Court activity. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(F) \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eRecommendations for incorporating Drug Court-like activities in future classes.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7316576/v1/4a2a651d634b757bddf539f3.png"},{"id":108520767,"identity":"49ab7b63-8e88-4007-b50a-dbc286d838eb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-05 14:12:20","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":363679,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7316576/v1/3a1b4673-8f91-4f79-be62-ebf9a6b8a447.pdf"},{"id":91308173,"identity":"b397afb8-9505-426c-9e5c-675fc4155b78","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-15 06:49:34","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":43180,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"SupplementaryFile1Questionnaire.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7316576/v1/d7945c8c2ad90febfcf22fac.docx"},{"id":91306847,"identity":"1398558e-28d4-47b9-9e98-2db7b7e89cbc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-15 06:33:34","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":376299,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"SupplementaryFile2.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7316576/v1/ed4c2dadb5a831d5b9e85d7b.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Drug Court: A Pilot Study on an Innovative Pedagogical Approach to Teaching Law and Ethics in Healthcare Education","fulltext":[{"header":"1. BACKGROUND","content":"\u003cp\u003eA comprehensive understanding of legal and ethical issues, along with their resolutions, is essential for guiding decision-making and behavior in healthcare.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e However, significant gaps in legal knowledge persist among healthcare professionals, with studies noting discomfort among physicians due to limited understanding of medical malpractice.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR4\" citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e The importance of pharmacy law in shaping future pharmacy practitioners is undeniable, yet both teaching and learning the subject remain challenging.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e According to the Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education (CAPE) Outcomes and the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) Standards, pharmacy students are expected to develop competencies in legal and ethical responsibilities. These are primarily addressed under the domains of Professionalism, Personal and Professional Development, and Approach to Practice and Care. However, the format and language of legal and regulatory content are often challenging for pharmacy students, as they tend to be complex and tailored for individuals with legal backgrounds.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e The fragmented nature of legal acts and regulations further complicates students\u0026rsquo; ability to integrate and connect different aspects of the law, thereby hindering rational decision-making and application of legal knowledge to real-world scenarios.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e Traditional lecture-based approaches to teaching ethics and law provide foundational knowledge but often fail to motivate or engage students.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo address these challenges, educators continuously strive to adopt innovative teaching strategies that foster critical thinking, collaborative learning, and higher-order reasoning, while also boosting student engagement and motivation.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e Studies from various health-related fields emphasize the benefits of interactive learning methods in teaching health policy and law. \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR11 CR12\" citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e One commonly used alternative to traditional lectures is case-based or small group discussions, which effectively engage professional students in understanding legal topics. For example, Gilbert and colleagues highlighted the use of a mock trial setting as an engaging approach for medical students, demonstrating how practical simulations can enhance learning.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e Similarly, Bess et al. introduced a mock Board of Pharmacy meeting into a pharmacy law course, where students assumed roles of board members and used technology to resolve cases and requests akin to those in actual board meetings.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo enhance knowledge, methods such as problem-based learning (PBL), legal training, and mind maps help learners remember and understand key legal concepts, in line with Bloom\u0026rsquo;s Taxonomy. To shape attitudes, activities like clerkships and legal simulations promote analysis and evaluation of ethical and legal scenarios. For psychomotor skills, approaches such as mock trials provide opportunities for students to apply their learning and create structured legal arguments in realistic settings, targeting higher-order domains of Bloom\u0026rsquo;s Taxonomy.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e Moot court serves a similar purpose, offering an experiential platform where students simulate appellate proceedings, develop oral advocacy skills, and engage in the practical application of legal principles, thereby reinforcing psychomotor learning through active participation. This approach addresses the limitations of theoretical legal education by allowing students to apply their knowledge in practical, real-world legal contexts. It combines academic concepts with the realities of judicial proceedings, equipping students with essential skills and experiences. By working on simulated or actual cases across various branches of law, students gain valuable insights into legal procedures and practices, further bridging the gap between theory and application.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR16 CR17\" citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite the growing emphasis on legal and ethical education in healthcare curricula and the increasing use of innovative teaching methodologies, no standardized strategy currently exists for teaching these topics effectively. This limits students\u0026rsquo; ability to navigate the complex legal and ethical landscape of healthcare. Recognizing these challenges, we implemented a moot court exercise to evaluate its effectiveness in improving students\u0026rsquo; understanding of legal and ethical principles and to compare their experiences with this approach to traditional teaching methods in pharmacy law and ethics.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. METHODS","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.1. The concept: Drug court\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eMoot court is an innovative teaching methodology widely used in law school curricula worldwide. It combines academic concepts with the realities of judicial proceedings, providing students with essential skills and practical experience.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR17\" citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e Building on this foundation, we introduced a new and dynamic concept: the \u0026ldquo;Drug Court.\u0026rdquo; This academic exercise adapted the principles of moot court to replicate the specialized environment of a Drug Court.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDrug Courts are designed to serve individuals who use or are addicted to drugs, offering an alternative to conventional legal processes by emphasizing rehabilitation, supervision, and treatment over incarceration. In our Drug Court, we simulated legal judicial proceedings with a specific focus on the application of laws related to substance use and controlled substances.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR20\" citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e The primary objective of the exercise was to enhance students\u0026rsquo; understanding of drug-related laws, ethical decision-making, judicial processes, associated penalties, and rehabilitation strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Drug Court concept was developed by course instructors as part of an ongoing initiative to improve student engagement and comprehension of pharmacy law and ethics. In response to challenges associated with teaching complex legal content through traditional methods, the instructors designed an interactive and experiential learning activity that bridged the gap between theoretical knowledge and real-world application. The activity was structured to replicate real-world scenarios in a courtroom setting, thereby encouraging students to apply their knowledge in a practical and collaborative manner.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2. Participants\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e Participants were third-year pharmacy students enrolled in the Pharmacy Law and Ethics course at Gulf Medical University during the 2023-24 and 2024-25 academic years. This two-credit-hour course primarily covers various aspects of the Ministry of Health and Prevention (MOHAP) Law in the United Arab Emirate (UAE). MOHAP is the federal authority responsible for the regulation, oversight, and delivery of healthcare services in the UAE. Weeks 8 and 9 of the course are specifically dedicated to Ministerial Decree No. (888) of 2016, MOHAP-UAE, which outlines the rules and regulations for prescribing and dispensing of narcotic, controlled, and semi-controlled drugs. This decree served as the foundation for the Drug Court activity. All the sessions in this course are usually delivered through a combination of traditional lectures, small case-based discussions, and group activities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.3. Instrumentation\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe questionnaire used in this study was specifically developed for this research and has not been published elsewhere. An English-language version of the finalized questionnaire has been uploaded as a supplementary file (Supplementary File 1).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe initial development of the questionnaire was undertaken by the instructors based on item analysis generated from ExamSoft, a digital assessment platform commonly used in academic institutions to administer exams and provide detailed performance analytics. The items, originally part of the 2022-23 final exam, were reviewed and approved by the Examination Assessment Committee. The item analysis indicated high quality questions, with a Point-Biserial Correlation (r\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003eb) greater than 0.63 and a Difficulty Index of 0.59, indicating that the items were well-constructed and clearly framed. This analysis also identified areas where students demonstrated difficulties or weaker performance. Based on these insights, the questionnaire items were specifically designed to assess key concepts and skills targeted by the Drug Court activity, including students\u0026rsquo; understanding of narcotics laws, regulatory compliance, and ethical decision-making.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFollowing the initial draft, content validation was performed to ensure item relevance and comprehensive coverage of the intended constructs. A panel of five academic experts in UAE Pharmacy Law and Ethics independently evaluated each item for relevance, clarity, and alignment with the study objectives. Based on their feedback, minor revisions were made to improve the wording and contextual appropriateness of the items. Using Lawshe\u0026rsquo;s method, items with a Content Validity Ratio (CVR) greater than 0.78 were retained, while those falling below this threshold were excluded. All items included in the final questionnaire achieved CVR values above 0.78, indicating acceptable item-level content validity. The overall Content Validity Index (CVI) was 0.821, further supporting the instrument\u0026rsquo;s content validity. Face validity was subsequently assessed by five pharmacy students representative of the target population. Their feedback led to minor linguistic and formatting refinements to improve comprehension without altering the substantive content of the items.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eReliability testing was carried out through a pilot study involving a small group of third-year pharmacy students during the 2023-24 academic year. These participants were excluded from the final analysis. The pilot phase was used to evaluate the internal consistency of the questionnaire, as well as the clarity, acceptability, and length of the items. It also provided instructors with an opportunity to refine the structure of the Drug Court activity, ensure alignment with course learning objectives, and enhance student engagement. The insights gained from the pilot were instrumental in implementing a more comprehensive and full-fledged version of the activity in the subsequent academic year. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha, which yielded a value of 0.78 for the overall instrument, indicating acceptable reliability. Domain-specific alpha values were also calculated: 0.85 for regulatory compliance, 0.80 for storage requirements, and 0.82 for legal enforcement. All values exceeded the commonly accepted threshold of 0.70, confirming acceptable internal consistency across the questionnaire domains.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe finalized study questionnaire consisted of three sections:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eSection 1 collected demographic information about the students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eSection 2 included four case-based multiple-choice questions designed to assess students\u0026rsquo; competencies across three key domains of Bloom\u0026rsquo;s Taxonomy: Knowledge, comprehension, and application of narcotic law in clinical practice. These questions focused on regulatory compliance, storage and inventory management, and legal compliance and enforcement.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eSection 3 comprised six questions aimed at evaluating students\u0026rsquo; satisfaction with the activity. These questions assessed the activity\u0026rsquo;s impact on engagement compared to traditional teaching methods, understanding of narcotics laws, confidence in applying legal knowledge, clarity regarding roles in narcotics handling, and students\u0026rsquo; recommendations for incorporating similar activities into future classes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.4. Procedures\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the academic year 2023-24, the Drug Court activity was conducted as a pilot to assess its feasibility and to support reliability testing of the associated questionnaire. Based on insights gained during this pilot phase, a full-scale implementation of the Drug Court activity was carried out in the following academic year (2024-25) during a regular two-hour class session. This activity focused on the practical application of narcotics law in an engaging format, offering an interactive experience that bridged the gap between theoretical knowledge and real-world practice. It aimed to help students appreciate the importance of legal compliance while emphasizing key aspects such as legal accountability, interdisciplinary collaboration, ethical considerations, and the penalties associated with narcotics violations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e The Drug Court activity was introduced during the initial sessions of the Pharmacy Law and Ethics course, and students were invited to participate voluntarily. A case scenario was shared one week in advance to allow sufficient preparation time. Students were free to select their roles, including judges, members of the plaintiff/prosecution and defense teams, witnesses, and the court clerk. In situations where a selected role was already filled, the instructor intervened to assign alternative roles to ensure that all positions were covered and that no student was left without a role.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA pre-test was administered 30 minutes before the Drug Court activity to evaluate students\u0026rsquo; baseline knowledge of narcotics law, with 10 minutes allocated for its completion. Following the pre-test, the classroom was arranged to simulate a courtroom setting, with judges seated at the center and the prosecution and defense teams positioned on opposite sides. The session began with the court clerk introducing the case, followed by opening statements from both teams outlining their arguments. The prosecution team conducted direct examinations of witnesses and reviewed various types of evidence, including pharmacy records, prescription details, lab findings, and any documented errors. They also evaluated the pharmacy\u0026rsquo;s layout, inventory management system, and security of the narcotics storage area to identify regulatory violations. The defense team then presented its own evidence and witnesses, followed by cross-examinations conducted by the prosecution team.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAt the conclusion of the session, both teams delivered closing statements summarizing their cases. The judges reviewed all evidence and arguments presented, then announced the penalties, explaining the legal consequences for each violation committed by the pharmacist, clinic, or other involved parties, in accordance with UAE narcotics law. A post-test was administered 10 minutes after the conclusion of the Drug Court activity to the same group of students to assess their knowledge in the same domains evaluated by the pre-test. Additionally, students\u0026rsquo; satisfaction with the activity was assessed through the third section of the questionnaire, which formed part of the post-test.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.5. Statistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eData were analyzed using the Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS), version 29.0.2.0. Knowledge scores were calculated by assigning a score of \u0026ldquo;1\u0026rdquo; for each correct response and \u0026ldquo;0\u0026rdquo; for each incorrect response, resulting in a maximum total score of 4. Nominal data were presented as frequencies and percentages, while continuous variables were summarized using the mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum values. To evaluate differences in knowledge scores, an independent t-test was used to compare pre- and post-test scores between groups, while a paired t-test was employed to assess within-group changes. A \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. RESULTS","content":"\u003cp\u003eTwenty-four students completed both the pre- and post-tests. Demographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table\u0026nbsp;1. The majority were female (75%), and the mean age was 20.08 years. The average cumulative GPA (cGPA) was 3.19, with 38% of students having a GPA between 3.50 and 4.00. Approximately 29% of the students actively participated in the Drug Court activity, while the remaining 71% attended as audience members.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;1.\u003c/b\u003e Demographic characteristics of the study participants\u003c/p\u003e\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 144px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCategories\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003en (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 144px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6 (25.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18 (75.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 144px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u0026plusmn;SD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.08\u0026plusmn;0.6539\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 144px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ecGPA\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBelow 3.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8 (33.33)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.00-3.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7 (29.17)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.50-4.00\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9 (37.50)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u0026plusmn;SD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.19\u0026plusmn;0.4902\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 144px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRole of student\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eParticipant in activity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7 (29.17)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAudience\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17 (70.83)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAbbreviations: cGPA: Cumulative Grade Point Average; SD: Standard Deviation\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescription: Demographic characteristics of the study participants (n= 24), including gender distribution, mean age, cumulative grade point average, and student role in the activity.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 2 presents the pre-test and post-test scores of students who participated in the Drug Court activity. There was a statistically significant improvement in overall test performance following the activity. The mean score increased from 1.17 (SD = 0.94) in the pre-test to 3.33 (SD = 0.56) in the post-test (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.0001). The median and mode also increased from 1 to 3, and the score range shifted from 0-3 in the pre-test to 1-4 in the post-test. A visual representation of score distribution is provided in Supplementary File 2 Figure A. Compared to the pre-test, the post-test scores demonstrated reduced variability and improved central tendency, with the interquartile range shifting upward and no outliers observed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eComparative analysis of pre-test and post-test scores in the Drug Court activity\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 108px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePre-test\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 114px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePost-test\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of students\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 108px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 114px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eValid missing\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 108px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 114px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 108px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 114px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMedian\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 108px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 114px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMode\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 108px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 114px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 108px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.9168\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 114px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.7614\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMinimum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 108px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 114px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMaximum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 108px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 114px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAbbreviations: SD: Standard Deviation\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescription: Comparative analysis of students\u0026rsquo; pre-test and post-test scores in the Drug Court activity, including mean, median, mode, standard deviation, and score range (n = 24).\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eItem-level analysis is presented in Table 3. For Question 1 (validity period of narcotics prescriptions), the proportion of correct responses increased from 12.50% to 83.33% (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.0001). Question 2 (security requirements for storage) showed an increase from 75.00% to 95.83%, though the change was not statistically significant (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.0568). Substantial improvements were observed in Question 3 (penalty for unauthorized narcotic use), with correct responses increasing from 8.33% to 75.00% (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.0001), and in Question 4 (strategy to improve security), from 20.83% to 79.17% (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.0001). Domain-level improvements are illustrated in Supplementary File 2 Figure B. Domain 1 (Regulatory compliance) showed the largest increase, from 12.50% to 83.33%. Domain 2 (Storage and inventory management) improved from 47.92% to 87.50%, and Domain 3 (Legal compliance and enforcement) from 8.33% to 75.00%.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3.\u003c/strong\u003e Comparative assessment of pre-test and post-test performance on individual questions in the Drug Court activity\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 157px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStatements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAnswer\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 195px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePre-test\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 192px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePost-test\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eP-\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003evalue\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 72px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCorrect answer\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 72px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIncorrect answer\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 72px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCorrect answer\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIncorrect answer\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 45px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 157px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWhat is the maximum validity period for a prescription of narcotic or/and semi-controlled medicine in UAE?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e87.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.125\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e83.33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 45px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.8333\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 157px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWhich of the following statements is true regarding the security requirements for storing narcotic and controlled drugs in a clinical area or pharmacy store?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e95.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 45px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.9583\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0568\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 157px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWhat is the penalty for an individual who uses narcotics or psychotropic substances without authorization or in doses higher than prescribed, for the first offense?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e91.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0833\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 45px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 157px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWhat would be the most effective strategy to improve narcotics security in a clinic?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eA\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e79.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.2083\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e79.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 45px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.7916\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 51px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e*paired t-test to compare pre- and post-test scores of individual question\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescription: Comparative assessment of pre-test and post-test performance on individual questions in the Drug Court activity, showing the distribution of correct and incorrect responses, and mean scores.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 4 presents subgroup comparisons of the mean pre-test and post-test scores between active participants and audience members. Among participants, the mean score increased from 1.00 to 3.71 (\u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= 0.0003), while the audience group improved from 1.24 to 3.18 (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in either the pre-test (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.5792) or the post-test scores (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.1177), indicating that both groups benefited comparably from the activity.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4.\u003c/strong\u003e Comparison of pre-test and post-test mean scores between participants and audience in the Drug Court activity\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 132px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean scores\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 132px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParticipants\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAudience\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 107px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e-value *\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 132px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePre-test\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 132px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 107px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.5792\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 132px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePost-test\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 132px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.71\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 107px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.1177\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 132px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e-value**\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 132px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0003\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 107px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e*independent t-test to compare pre- and post-test scores across participants and audience\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e**paired t-test to compare pre- and post-test scores within each group\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescription: Comparison of pre-test and post-test mean scores between participants and audience in the Drug Court activity\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudent satisfaction with the Drug Court activity is summarized in Figure 1. Most students (62.5%) found the activity \u0026ldquo;much more engaging\u0026rdquo; than traditional teaching methods, while 29.17% reported it was \u0026ldquo;slightly more engaging,\u0026rdquo; and 8.33% found it \u0026ldquo;about the same.\u0026rdquo; In terms of understanding narcotics laws and perceived learning, 45.83% indicated the activity \u0026ldquo;significantly enhanced\u0026rdquo; their understanding, with an additional 45.83% reporting it \u0026ldquo;somewhat enhanced\u0026rdquo; their comprehension. Regarding the effectiveness of the role-playing format, it was rated as \u0026ldquo;very effective\u0026rdquo; by 62.5% of students and \u0026ldquo;somewhat effective\u0026rdquo; by 33.33%. Following the activity, 70.83% reported feeling \u0026ldquo;very confident\u0026rdquo; in their understanding of UAE narcotics law. The activity also provided significant clarity on the roles and responsibilities of healthcare professionals in handling narcotics, as 70.83% of students indicated their understanding was \u0026ldquo;significantly clearer.\u0026rdquo; Finally, 70.83% of respondents \u0026ldquo;strongly recommended\u0026rdquo; incorporating similar simulation-based exercises into future classes.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4.\tDISCUSSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eHealth educators continually seek innovative teaching methods to equip graduates with advanced communication skills, strong problem-solving abilities, critical thinking, and sound decision-making capabilities.The Drug Court activity offers a structured, experiential learning opportunity that engages students in a dynamic and interactive process. Its key strength lies in immersing students in real-world legal scenarios, encouraging them to apply theoretical knowledge in a practical context. While reading the law is essential, the activity actively engages students in critical thinking, collaboration, and decision-making, which are core competencies for health professionals. Furthermore, studies have shown that mock activities enhance students’ psychomotor and application-level skills more effectively than traditional reading or lecture-based methods.\u003csup\u003e6-7\u003c/sup\u003e The Drug Court activity provides students with a valuable opportunity to enhance their understanding and application of Bloom’s Taxonomy across various levels.\u003csup\u003e22-23\u003c/sup\u003e At the knowledge level, students recall and understand the foundational principles of narcotic laws. At the comprehension stage, they interpret legal frameworks and regulations. During the application stage, they demonstrate their ability to apply these laws to real-world scenarios presented in the Drug Court. In the analysis phase, they examine evidence, identify legal issues, and critically evaluate case details. At the synthesis level, they collaborate to construct coherent arguments, formulate legal strategies, and propose solutions. Finally, at the evaluation stage, they assess the case outcomes, justify their decisions, and reflect on the legal and ethical implications of their judgments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of the Drug Court activity demonstrated a significant improvement in students’ understanding of the subject matter, as evidenced by an increase in the mean score from 1.17 in the pre-test to 3.33 in the post-test, indicating a marked enhancement in knowledge acquisition and application following the intervention. Similarly, the increase in the median and mode from 1 to 3 further supports the positive shift in central tendency, suggesting that most students achieved a higher performance level after the activity. The reduction in standard deviation from 0.9168 in the pre-test to 0.7614 in the post-test suggests that the Drug Court was effective in reducing variability in learning outcomes. Furthermore, the minimum score increased from 0 in the pre-test to 1 in the post-test, and the maximum score rose from 3 to 4, showing that even the lowest-performing students improved, while more students achieved the highest score possible. Collectively, these findings demonstrate that interactive, simulation-based methods like the Drug Court activity enhance students’ understanding and application of concepts by immersing them in real-world scenarios and encouraging hands-on problem-solving. This approach improves knowledge acquisition, as reflected in higher mean, median, and mode scores, while reducing variability and fostering consistent performance. By bridging the gap between theory and practice, the activity reinforced understanding and retention. Additionally, its collaborative environment and multi-faceted approach fostered deeper comprehension, ensuring substantial improvement even among lower-performing students. Existing literature has already demonstrated that simulations or case-based learning bridge the gap between theoretical understanding and practical application of laws in various sectors of health education.\u003csup\u003e6-7,10-13,24,25\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe assessment of individual questions further underscores the educational impact. Importantly, the four case questions assessed in the study go beyond simple knowledge recall. They require students to apply, analyze, and make judgments based on their understanding of narcotics law. This higher-order thinking cannot be fully achieved through reading alone. The role-playing format fosters deeper retention, as students must not only recall information but also evaluate, synthesize, and apply it in a simulated legal context. This alignment with Bloom’s higher cognitive domains further strengthens the case for using simulation-based education to develop advanced competencies in pharmacy law and ethics. Questions addressing critical concepts, such as the validity period of narcotic prescriptions, penalties for unauthorized narcotics use, and strategies for improving narcotics security, showed dramatic increases in the percentage of correct responses. For instance, correct responses to Question 2 regarding the validity period for a prescription of narcotic or semi-controlled medicines in the UAE, and Question 3 on penalties for unauthorized narcotic use, increased from 12.50% to 83.33% and from 8.33% to 75.00% (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.05), respectively, highlighting substantial knowledge acquisition. Similarly, Question 4 on strategies to improve narcotic security in clinics showed a significant increase in the percentage of correct responses, rising from 20.83% to 79.17% (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.0001), emphasizing the activity’s role in enhancing awareness on inventory management. However, while Question 2, concerning security requirements for narcotic storage, showed an increase in correct responses, the improvement was not statistically significant (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.0568). This may indicate a higher baseline understanding of this topic, potentially due to prior exposure or training. Global literature has extensively documented that adolescents are increasingly gaining awareness about drug abuse and misuse, starting from the school level.\u003csup\u003e26-29\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe comparison of pre-test and post-test mean scores between participants and audience members revealed significant gains in both groups. The mean pre-test score for participants increased from 1.00 to 3.71 (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.0003) in the post-test, while for the audience, it rose from 1.24 to 3.18 (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.0001). However, the independent t-test comparing the post-test scores between participants and the audience showed no statistically significant difference (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.1177), suggesting that both groups benefited equally from the activity, regardless of their level of direct involvement. \u0026nbsp;Several factors may explain these improvements. Firstly, students were not passive recipients of information; rather, they were actively involved in solving problems, making decisions, and applying their knowledge to real-world scenarios. Another possible explanation for the observed improvement is the repetition of material from multiple perspectives. The Drug Court activity provided different viewpoints, with students engaging as members of the prosecution or defense, and later reviewing the evidence as summarized by the judge. This multi-angle approach may have helped to reinforce the material by presenting it in varied contexts, enabling students to process and internalize the information more thoroughly.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn terms of student satisfaction with the Drug Court activity, there were high levels of satisfaction across multiple evaluation criteria, showcasing its potential effectiveness in improving engagement, understanding, and application of narcotics laws. Students’ responses reflected positive perceptions of the activity, indicating its success in clarifying complex aspects of narcotics regulation and compliance. The increased student satisfaction likely stemmed from the interactive, engaging nature of the Drug Court activity, which offered a break from traditional lectures. Moreover, its hands-on, role-playing approach enabled active participation and the application of theoretical knowledge to real-world scenarios, creating a more meaningful and enjoyable learning experience.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe Drug Court simulation represents a scalable and adaptable model that can be adopted by faculty members at other institutions teaching pharmacy law, ethics, or related healthcare regulations. Its experiential design is not limited to narcotics law alone; the format is highly transferable to other areas of pharmacy education, such as regulatory compliance, medication safety, interprofessional ethics, or even broader healthcare law curricula. To implement such an exercise effectively, collaboration among faculty from pharmacy, law, and ethics is essential. Interdisciplinary coordination can enrich the learning experience by bringing diverse perspectives to scenario development, role-play facilitation, and outcome evaluation. However, faculty may encounter challenges in implementation, including time constraints, limited classroom space, and the need for additional personnel or resources. To mitigate these barriers, instructors may consider starting with smaller-scale pilot simulations, integrating the activity into scheduled course hours, or using virtual platforms to simulate courtroom proceedings. Practical toolkits, including case templates, role descriptions, and evaluation rubrics, can also support efficient execution.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDespite these highly encouraging results, it is important to acknowledge certain limitations associated with the study. One such limitation is the short study period, which restricts the ability to assess long-term knowledge retention and its transferability to real-world practice. While the immediate learning gains are evident and promising, more comprehensive research with extended follow-up is needed to determine whether these improvements are sustained over time and meaningfully influence students’ professional behaviors and decision-making. An additional limitation is the absence of a formal comparison group. Without a control or comparator arm, it is difficult to attribute the observed improvements solely to the Drug Court activity, as other factors such as course progression or repeated exposure to content may have contributed. These findings should be interpreted as preliminary, given the pilot nature of the study and its methodological limitations. Future research using larger samples and controlled comparisons is needed to confirm the effectiveness and generalizability of this approach.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5.\tCONCLUSIONS","content":"\u003cp\u003eA strong understanding of pharmacy regulations is essential for developing competent healthcare professionals, highlighting the importance of innovative educational strategies in pharmacy curricula. The Drug Court simulation offers a dynamic, experiential approach to teaching pharmacy law by encouraging students to apply legal concepts in realistic, practice-based scenarios. This model not only enhances knowledge acquisition but also promotes critical thinking, decision-making, and collaboration. With appropriate modifications, the Drug Court framework can be adapted to various academic contexts, including nursing, medical, and public health programs. Future iterations may incorporate interprofessional collaboration, virtual formats, or context-specific legal cases to expand its applicability. Careful planning around time, resources, and facilitation can support successful implementation across institutions. Continued research exploring how similar models are employed in different settings will further inform best practices and support the broader integration of simulation-based legal education into health professions training.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eACPE \u0026ndash; Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCAPE \u0026ndash; Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ecGPA \u0026ndash; Cumulative Grade Point Average\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCVI \u0026ndash; Content Validity Index\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCVR \u0026ndash; Content Validity Ratio\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eIRB \u0026ndash; Institutional Review Board\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMOHAP \u0026ndash; Ministry of Health and Prevention\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePBL \u0026ndash; Problem-Based Learning\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003erpb \u0026ndash; Point-Biserial Correlation\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSD \u0026ndash; Standard Deviation\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSPSS \u0026ndash; Statistical Package for the Social Sciences\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eUAE \u0026ndash; United Arab Emirates\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Gulf Medical University (Ref. no. IRB-COP-FAC-39-Jan-2025), ensuring compliance with data protection policies, adherence to ethical standards, and prioritization of participant safety (Clinical trial number: Not applicable). The study was conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Participation in the Drug Court simulation and completion of the assessments were voluntary. Students were assured that their decision to participate or not would have no impact on their grades or academic standing. Written informed consent was obtained from all student participants prior to their involvement in the study. Consent was collected after a comprehensive explanation of the study objectives, procedures, and the voluntary nature of participation. This process took place before the administration of the pre-test questionnaire and the commencement of the Drug Court simulation exercise. All responses were anonymized to protect confidentiality.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study questionnaire and database will be available on reasonable request from the corresponding author.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that the research was carried out without any commercial or financial ties that could be interpreted as a potential conflict of interest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eFunding\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAuthor contributions\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConceptualization and Investigation, J.M.L.; Data Curation, Formal Analysis, and Visualization, V.M; Writing - Original Draft, J.M.L.,V.M.; Writing - Review \u0026amp; Editing, J.M.L.,V.M.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen WT, Fu CP, Chang YD, et al. Developing an innovative medical ethics and law curriculum\u0026mdash;Constructing a situation-based, interdisciplinary, court-based learning course: A mixed methods study. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22:284. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03349-z\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12909-022-03349-z\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCampbell AT. Teaching law in medical schools: First, reflect. J Law Med Ethics. 2012;40:301\u0026ndash;10.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWhite BP, Willmott L, Feeney R, et al. Limitations in health professionals\u0026rsquo; knowledge of end-of-life law: A cross-sectional survey. BMJ Supportive Palliat Care. 2021. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1136/bmjspcare-2021-003061\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1136/bmjspcare-2021-003061\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHariharan S, Jonnalagadda R, Walrond E, Moseley H. Knowledge, attitudes and practice of healthcare ethics and law among doctors and nurses in Barbados. BMC Med Ethics. 2006;7:e7. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-7-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/1472-6939-7-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRoy AD, Chen L, Santucci K. What do pediatric residents know about malpractice? Pediatr Emerg Care. 2011;27(6):586\u0026ndash;90. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1097/PEC.0b013e31821b85b8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1097/PEC.0b013e31821b85b8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBess DT, Taylor J, Schwab CA, Wang J, Carter JA. An innovative approach to pharmacy law education utilizing a mock Board of Pharmacy meeting. Innovations Pharm. 2016;7(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003eArticle 9. https://doi.org/10.24926/iip.v7i1.419\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"Article 9. 10.24926/iip.v7i1.419\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChetty S, Bangalee V, Oosthuizen F. A new way of teaching an old subject: Pharmacy law and ethics. Afr J Health Professions Educ. 2018;10(1):61\u0026ndash;5. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.7196/AJHPE.2018.v10i1.714\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.7196/AJHPE.2018.v10i1.714\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAccreditation Council for Pharmacy Education. (2024, July). \u003cem\u003eAccreditation standards and key elements for the professional program in pharmacy leading to the Doctor of Pharmacy degree (Standards 2025)\u003c/em\u003e (38 pp.). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.acpe-accredit.org/pdf/ACPEStandards2025.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.acpe-accredit.org/pdf/ACPEStandards2025.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAccreditation Council for Pharmacy Education. (2025, May 25). \u003cem\u003eCenter for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education (CAPE) educational outcomes\u003c/em\u003e (6 pp.). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.acpe-accredit.org/pdf/CAPE_Outcomes.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.acpe-accredit.org/pdf/CAPE_Outcomes.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSlick R. It\u0026rsquo;s ethical, but is it legal? Teaching ethics and law in the medical school curriculum. Anat Rec. 2001;265(1):5\u0026ndash;9. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/ar.1035\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/ar.1035\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBlechner B, Hager CL, Williams NR. The Jay Healey technique: Teaching law and ethics to medical and dental students. Am J Law Med. 1994;20(4):439\u0026ndash;55.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGilbert WM, Fadjo DE, Bills DJ, Morrison FK, Sherman MP. Teaching malpractice litigation in a mock trial setting: A center for perinatal medicine and law. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;101(3):589\u0026ndash;93. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-7844(02)03133-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/S0029-7844(02)03133-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBroeseker AE, Jones MM. An interdisciplinary mock trial involving pharmacy, law, and ethics. Annals Pharmacotherapy. 1999;33(7\u0026ndash;8):850\u0026ndash;8. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1345/aph.18355\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1345/aph.18355\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbbasi M, Shirazi M, Torkmandi H, Homayoon S, Abdi M. Impact of teaching, learning, and assessment of medical law on cognitive, affective and psychomotor skills of medical students: A systematic review. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003eArticle 703. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04695-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"Article 703. 10.1186/s12909-023-04695-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePreston-Shoot M, McKimm J. Towards effective outcomes in teaching, learning and assessment of law in medical education. Med Educ. 2011;45(4):339\u0026ndash;46. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03882.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03882.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbu Issa H, Kaddumi T, Alwerikat N. The impact of moot courts on the quality of legal education: Students of the Faculty of Law at the Applied Science Private University as a model. J High Educ Theory Pract. 2023;23(19). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v23i19.6681\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.33423/jhetp.v23i19.6681\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKammerer E. Coaching and teaching competitive moot court: Comparing faculty approaches. J Political Sci Educ. 2018. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2018.1521287\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/15512169.2018.1521287\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKammerer E. Using moot court in introduction to law courses. In: Harvey M, Fielder J, Gibb R, editors. Simulations in the political science classroom. Routledge; 2023. pp. 185\u0026ndash;99.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJudicial Branch of California. (n.d.). What is a drug court? \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://courts.ca.gov/programs/collaborative-justice-courts/adult-courts/drug-courts\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://courts.ca.gov/programs/collaborative-justice-courts/adult-courts/drug-courts\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eU.S. Government Accountability Office. (2023). \u003cem\u003eAdult drug court programs: Factors related to eligibility and acceptance of offers to participate in DOJ-funded adult drug courts\u003c/em\u003e (GAO-23-105272). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-23-105272\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-23-105272\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuastaferro K, Guastaferro WP, Brown JR, Holleran D, Whitaker DJ. Drug court as an intervention point to affect the well-being of families of parents with substance use disorders. Subst Use Misuse. 2020;55(7):1068\u0026ndash;78. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10826084.2020.1713816\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10826084.2020.1713816\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKrathwohl D. A revision of Bloom\u0026rsquo;s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Pract. 2002;41(4):212\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBloom BS, editor. (1956). \u003cem\u003eTaxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 1: Cognitive domain). McKay.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDaly YM, Higgins N. (2011). The place and efficacy of simulations in legal education: A preliminary examination. All Irel J Teach Learn High Educ, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(2), 58.1\u0026ndash;58.14.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFantinelli S, Cortini M, Di Fiore T, Iervese S, Galanti T. Bridging the gap between theoretical learning and practical application: A qualitative study in the Italian educational context. Educ Sci. 2024;14:198. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14020198\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/educsci14020198\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUnited Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2004). \u003cem\u003eSchool-based education for drug abuse prevention\u003c/em\u003e (Report No. E.04.XI.21). United Nations.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcBride N. A systematic review of school drug education. Health Educ Res. 2003;18(6):729\u0026ndash;42. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyf050\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/her/cyf050\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShope JT, Elliott MR, Raghunathan TE, Waller PF. Long-term follow-up of a high school alcohol misuse prevention program\u0026rsquo;s effect on students\u0026rsquo; subsequent driving. Alcoholism: Clin Experimental Res. 2001;25(3):403\u0026ndash;10.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHeckman CJ, Dykstra JL, Collins BN. Substance-related knowledge, attitude, and behavior among college students: Opportunities for health education. Health Educ J. 2011;70(4):383\u0026ndash;99. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0017896910379694\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0017896910379694\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Drug Court Simulation, Interactive Learning, Narcotics Law, Pharmacy Education","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7316576/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7316576/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eBackground\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e A strong grasp of legal and ethical principles is essential for decision-making in healthcare. However, student learning is often hindered by knowledge deficiencies, complex terminology, fragmented regulations, and traditional teaching approaches.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMethods\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis pilot study involved a Drug Court simulation exercise conducted with a small cohort of third-year pharmacy students enrolled in a single-year Pharmacy Law and Ethics course. The simulation aimed to enhance understanding of narcotics laws, ethical decision-making, and judicial processes by bridging theoretical knowledge with real-world application. Pre- and post-tests were used to assess knowledge gains, and a survey evaluated students\u0026rsquo; satisfaction with the activity compared to traditional teaching methods.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eResults\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Drug Court activity led to a significant increase in mean scores from 1.17 (pre-test) to 3.33 (post-test). Correct response rates improved from 12.50\u0026ndash;83.33% for regulatory compliance, 75.00\u0026ndash;95.83% for storage requirements, and 8.33\u0026ndash;75.00% for legal enforcement. Student satisfaction was high across all aspects: 62.5% of participants found the activity \u0026ldquo;much more engaging\u0026rdquo; than traditional teaching methods, 70.83% reported feeling \u0026ldquo;very confident\u0026rdquo; in their understanding of UAE narcotics law, and an equal percentage strongly recommended incorporating similar activities in future classes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eConclusion\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Drug Court simulation exercise showed promising improvements in students\u0026rsquo; legal and ethical understanding while receiving high satisfaction ratings, suggesting potential effectiveness as an engaging pedagogical method.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Drug Court: A Pilot Study on an Innovative Pedagogical Approach to Teaching Law and Ethics in Healthcare Education","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-15 06:33:29","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7316576/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"1949de22-4863-4dca-b5f1-dfed6a9f2cb9","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 15th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-05T14:11:03+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-15 06:33:29","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7316576","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7316576","identity":"rs-7316576","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}