Literature DB >> 21369961

Documenting clinical pharmacist intervention before and after the introduction of a web-based tool.

Zubeir A Nurgat1, Abdulrazaq S Al-Jazairi, Nada Abu-Shraie, Ahmed Al-Jedai.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To develop a database for documenting pharmacist intervention through a web-based application. The secondary endpoint was to determine if the new, web-based application provides any benefits with regards to documentation compliance by clinical pharmacists and ease of calculating cost savings compared with our previous method of documenting pharmacist interventions.
SETTING: A tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia.
METHOD: The documentation of interventions using a web-based documentation application was retrospectively compared with previous methods of documentation of clinical pharmacists' interventions (multi-user PC software). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The number and types of interventions recorded by pharmacists, data mining of archived data, efficiency, cost savings, and the accuracy of the data generated.
RESULTS: The number of documented clinical interventions increased from 4,926, using the multi-user PC software, to 6,840 for the web-based application. On average, we observed 653 interventions per clinical pharmacist using the web-based application, which showed an increase compared to an average of 493 interventions using the old multi-user PC software. However, using a paired Student's t-test there was no statistical significance difference between the two means (P = 0.201). Using a χ² test, which captured management level and the type of system used, we found a strong effect of management level (P < 2.2 × 10⁻¹⁶) on the number of documented interventions. We also found a moderately significant relationship between educational level and the number of interventions documented (P = 0.045). The mean ± SD time required to document an intervention using the web-based application was 66.55 ± 8.98 s. Using the web-based application, 29.06% of documented interventions resulted in cost-savings, while using the multi-user PC software only 4.75% of interventions did so. The majority of cost savings across both platforms resulted from the discontinuation of unnecessary drugs and a change in dosage regimen. Data collection using the web-based application was consistently more complete when compared to the multi-user PC software.
CONCLUSIONS: The web-based application is an efficient system for documenting pharmacist interventions. Its flexibility and accessibility, as well as its detailed report functionality is a useful tool that will hopefully encourage other primary and secondary care facilities to adopt similar applications.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21369961     DOI: 10.1007/s11096-010-9466-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm


  21 in total

1.  Cost-benefit analysis of a clinical pharmacist-managed medication assistance program in a renal transplant clinic.

Authors:  M A Chisholm; L J Vollenweider; L L Mulloy; J J Wynn; W E Wade; J T DiPiro
Journal:  Clin Transplant       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.863

2.  Clinical pharmacy services, hospital pharmacy staffing, and medication errors in United States hospitals.

Authors:  C A Bond; Cynthia L Raehl; Todd Franke
Journal:  Pharmacotherapy       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 4.705

3.  Use of a PDA-based pharmacist intervention system.

Authors:  Donald H Lynx; Heather R Brockmiller; Rita T Connelly; Stephanie Y Crawford
Journal:  Am J Health Syst Pharm       Date:  2003-11-15       Impact factor: 2.637

4.  Cost savings and avoidance from clinical interventions.

Authors:  A H Mutnick; K J Sterba; J A Peroutka; N E Sloan; E A Beltz; M K Sorenson
Journal:  Am J Health Syst Pharm       Date:  1997-02-15       Impact factor: 2.637

5.  Reliability and validity of hospital pharmacists' clinical intervention data.

Authors:  D Cousins; D Gerrett; D Luscombe
Journal:  Am J Health Syst Pharm       Date:  1997-07-15       Impact factor: 2.637

Review 6.  Clinical pharmacists and inpatient medical care: a systematic review.

Authors:  Peter J Kaboli; Angela B Hoth; Brad J McClimon; Jeffrey L Schnipper
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2006-05-08

7.  A computerized system to improve documentation and reporting of pharmacists' clinical interventions, cost savings, and workload activities.

Authors:  C R Zimmerman; R T Smolarek; J G Stevenson
Journal:  Pharmacotherapy       Date:  1995 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 4.705

8.  Pharmacists on rounding teams reduce preventable adverse drug events in hospital general medicine units.

Authors:  Suzan N Kucukarslan; Michael Peters; Mark Mlynarek; Daniel A Nafziger
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2003-09-22

Review 9.  Use of personal digital assistants for documentation of pharmacists' interventions: a literature review.

Authors:  Brent I Fox; Bill G Felkey; Bruce A Berger; Kem P Krueger; Rex Kelly Rainer
Journal:  Am J Health Syst Pharm       Date:  2007-07-15       Impact factor: 2.637

10.  The impact of clinical pharmacist in a cardiac-surgery intensive care unit.

Authors:  Abdulrazaq S Al-Jazairi; Amal A Al-Agil; Yousif A Asiri; Tariq A Al-Kholi; Nathem S Akhras; Bashar K Horanieh
Journal:  Saudi Med J       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.484

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Application of drug-related problem (DRP) classification systems: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Benjamin J Basger; Rebekah J Moles; Timothy F Chen
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2014-05-02       Impact factor: 2.953

2.  Documentation in the Patient's Medical Record by Clinical Pharmacists in a Canadian University Teaching Hospital.

Authors:  Jean-Philippe Adam; Chloé Trudeau; Charlotte Pelchat-White; Marie-Lou Deschamps; Philippe Labrosse; Marie-Claude Langevin; Benoît Crevier
Journal:  Can J Hosp Pharm       Date:  2018-06-30
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.