TY - JOUR
T1 - Enhancing the clinical pharmacy service of a large teaching hospital
T2 - Development of a new clinical prioritisation tool
AU - Clarke, Rebecca
AU - Colleran, Maeve
AU - Melanophy, Gail
AU - Bermingham, Margaret
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023
PY - 2023/12
Y1 - 2023/12
N2 - Background: The number and complexity of patients being admitted to hospitals is rising and some patients may not receive a full clinical pharmacy review or be reviewed as regularly as needed during their inpatient stay. This is a risk factor for medication errors. Clinical prioritisation identifies patients who are high-risk and most in need of a pharmacist review, targeting finite pharmacy resources to patients who will benefit the most. Objectives: Assess and enhance clinical prioritisation within a hospital pharmacy department. Methods: The study was conducted in a large urban academic teaching hospital. A cross-sectional survey of clinical pharmacists in the hospital was conducted to establish the patient clinical criteria they prioritise in their work. A clinical prioritisation tool was developed based on survey findings and was integrated into an existing electronic pharmacy care interface. A pre- and post-intervention study was conducted, consisting of data collection for five days pre- and five days post-implementation of the tool. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Qualitative data were analysed by thematic analysis. Results: Of 39 eligible pharmacists, 37 (95%) responded to the survey. The top-rated prioritisation criteria, including medicines reconciliation tasks and high-risk medicines, helped to inform the content of the clinical prioritisation tool. Post-intervention, there were more Level 1 complex patients reviewed by pharmacists and fewer Level 3 stable patients compared to pre-intervention. Tool sensitivity ranged from 51 to 88%, depending on the experience of the pharmacist using the tool. High levels of satisfaction with clinical prioritisation were reported by those using the tool. Conclusion: This newly developed clinical prioritisation tool has the potential to support pharmacists in identifying and reviewing patients in a more targeted manner than practice prior to tool development. Continued development and validation of the tool is essential, with a focus on developing a fully automated tool.
AB - Background: The number and complexity of patients being admitted to hospitals is rising and some patients may not receive a full clinical pharmacy review or be reviewed as regularly as needed during their inpatient stay. This is a risk factor for medication errors. Clinical prioritisation identifies patients who are high-risk and most in need of a pharmacist review, targeting finite pharmacy resources to patients who will benefit the most. Objectives: Assess and enhance clinical prioritisation within a hospital pharmacy department. Methods: The study was conducted in a large urban academic teaching hospital. A cross-sectional survey of clinical pharmacists in the hospital was conducted to establish the patient clinical criteria they prioritise in their work. A clinical prioritisation tool was developed based on survey findings and was integrated into an existing electronic pharmacy care interface. A pre- and post-intervention study was conducted, consisting of data collection for five days pre- and five days post-implementation of the tool. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Qualitative data were analysed by thematic analysis. Results: Of 39 eligible pharmacists, 37 (95%) responded to the survey. The top-rated prioritisation criteria, including medicines reconciliation tasks and high-risk medicines, helped to inform the content of the clinical prioritisation tool. Post-intervention, there were more Level 1 complex patients reviewed by pharmacists and fewer Level 3 stable patients compared to pre-intervention. Tool sensitivity ranged from 51 to 88%, depending on the experience of the pharmacist using the tool. High levels of satisfaction with clinical prioritisation were reported by those using the tool. Conclusion: This newly developed clinical prioritisation tool has the potential to support pharmacists in identifying and reviewing patients in a more targeted manner than practice prior to tool development. Continued development and validation of the tool is essential, with a focus on developing a fully automated tool.
KW - Clinical pharmacy information systems
KW - Hospital
KW - Pharmacists
KW - Pharmacy
KW - Pharmacy service
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85172414977
U2 - 10.1016/j.rcsop.2023.100335
DO - 10.1016/j.rcsop.2023.100335
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85172414977
SN - 2667-2766
VL - 12
JO - Exploratory Research in Clinical and Social Pharmacy
JF - Exploratory Research in Clinical and Social Pharmacy
M1 - 100335
ER -