OBJECTIVE: A multidisciplinary approach is increasingly used in NeuroOncology clinics. Although this model has several advantages, patients report feeling overwhelmed by the complexity of their treatment protocol and staff feel rushed because each provider must evaluate the patient within the limited clinic hours. We hypothesized that the presence of a pharmacist in clinic could address these concerns by (1) reviewing all treatment protocols and side-effect management with patients, (2) being available to address questions outside of clinic and (3) answering staff related medication questions. METHODS: The pharmacist met with consenting patients at the initial clinic visit and followed up by telephone two additional times. The pharmacist was available to answer questions outside of clinic hours. Surveys were developed and given to patient and staff to evaluate their experience. RESULTS: Over 4 months, 13 patients were enrolled. The pharmacist interacted with each patient an average of 9 times with 55% of interactions occurring outside scheduled visits and two-thirds of pharmacist interventions directly involving patient care. A total of 85% of patients and staff responded to the evaluation survey and 90% of respondents indicated that the pharmacist should remain part of the NeuroOncology team. Patients reported less stress related to their treatment and clinical staff experienced improved clinical efficiency directly as a result of the presence of the pharmacist. CONCLUSION: Based on these results, a clinical pharmacist should become a permanent member of the outpatient NeuroOncology clinic.
OBJECTIVE: A multidisciplinary approach is increasingly used in NeuroOncology clinics. Although this model has several advantages, patients report feeling overwhelmed by the complexity of their treatment protocol and staff feel rushed because each provider must evaluate the patient within the limited clinic hours. We hypothesized that the presence of a pharmacist in clinic could address these concerns by (1) reviewing all treatment protocols and side-effect management with patients, (2) being available to address questions outside of clinic and (3) answering staff related medication questions. METHODS: The pharmacist met with consenting patients at the initial clinic visit and followed up by telephone two additional times. The pharmacist was available to answer questions outside of clinic hours. Surveys were developed and given to patient and staff to evaluate their experience. RESULTS: Over 4 months, 13 patients were enrolled. The pharmacist interacted with each patient an average of 9 times with 55% of interactions occurring outside scheduled visits and two-thirds of pharmacist interventions directly involving patient care. A total of 85% of patients and staff responded to the evaluation survey and 90% of respondents indicated that the pharmacist should remain part of the NeuroOncology team. Patients reported less stress related to their treatment and clinical staff experienced improved clinical efficiency directly as a result of the presence of the pharmacist. CONCLUSION: Based on these results, a clinical pharmacist should become a permanent member of the outpatient NeuroOncology clinic.
Authors: Mallika P Patel; Eric S Lipp; Elizabeth S Miller; Patrick N Healy; James E Herndon; Katherine B Peters Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2021-10-22