AIMS: To review current activities promoting Quality Use of Medicines (QUM) in New Zealand hospitals in 2000-2002, and to identify attitudes to possible centralisation of activities. METHOD: Questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey of 30 New Zealand public hospitals. Respondents were chief pharmacists in all hospitals employing at least one pharmacist. RESULTS: Twenty-nine hospitals (96.7%) responded; 3 were linked to a tertiary hospital for QUM activities. From the 26 independent hospitals, 64 Drug Utilisation Reviews (DURs) and 63 hospital-wide campaigns were reported, and 103 medicines information bulletins produced. Nineteen (63.3%) hospitals had their own hospital formulary. Twenty-four percent of respondents reported they would use centrally-developed guidelines only if in total agreement with their own. All hospitals reported disseminating drug expenditure information; feedback comments were predominantly from financial and nursing managers. All hospitals reported providing some form of drug information service (DI) and two-thirds a drug utilisation service (DU); 70% of total dedicated staff-time to these services was in tertiary hospitals. An increase in staff-time (fulltime-equivalent staff/100 beds) for clinical pharmacists, and DU+DI pharmacists, was associated with an increase in the number of DURs undertaken (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: A range of activities to promote QUM were undertaken in New Zealand hospitals, with greater activity in tertiary and secondary hospitals. Respondents reported some resistance to centrally-developed guidelines. Promotion of QUM may be assisted by an increase in clinical pharmacy resources.
AIMS: To review current activities promoting Quality Use of Medicines (QUM) in New Zealand hospitals in 2000-2002, and to identify attitudes to possible centralisation of activities. METHOD: Questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey of 30 New Zealand public hospitals. Respondents were chief pharmacists in all hospitals employing at least one pharmacist. RESULTS: Twenty-nine hospitals (96.7%) responded; 3 were linked to a tertiary hospital for QUM activities. From the 26 independent hospitals, 64 Drug Utilisation Reviews (DURs) and 63 hospital-wide campaigns were reported, and 103 medicines information bulletins produced. Nineteen (63.3%) hospitals had their own hospital formulary. Twenty-four percent of respondents reported they would use centrally-developed guidelines only if in total agreement with their own. All hospitals reported disseminating drug expenditure information; feedback comments were predominantly from financial and nursing managers. All hospitals reported providing some form of drug information service (DI) and two-thirds a drug utilisation service (DU); 70% of total dedicated staff-time to these services was in tertiary hospitals. An increase in staff-time (fulltime-equivalent staff/100 beds) for clinical pharmacists, and DU+DI pharmacists, was associated with an increase in the number of DURs undertaken (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: A range of activities to promote QUM were undertaken in New Zealand hospitals, with greater activity in tertiary and secondary hospitals. Respondents reported some resistance to centrally-developed guidelines. Promotion of QUM may be assisted by an increase in clinical pharmacy resources.