Clinical pharmacy services in critical care: results of an observational study comparing ward-based with remote pharmacy services.
Clinical pharmacists
Critical care units
Hospitals
Pharmacist intervention
Telepharmacy
Journal
International journal of clinical pharmacy
ISSN: 2210-7711
Titre abrégé: Int J Clin Pharm
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101554912
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2023
Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
26
09
2022
accepted:
15
02
2023
medline:
26
7
2023
pubmed:
9
4
2023
entrez:
8
4
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Pharmacists are essential team members in critical care and contribute to the safety of pharmacotherapy for this vulnerable group of patients, but little is known about remote pharmacy services in intensive care units (ICU). We compared the acceptance of pharmacist interventions (PI) in ICU patients working remotely with ward-based service. We evaluated both pharmacy services, including further information on PI, including reasons, actions and impact. Over 5 months, a prospective single-centre observational study divided into two sequential phases (remote and ward-based) was performed on two ICU wards at a university hospital. After a structured medication review, PI identified were addressed to healthcare professionals. For documentation, the national database (ADKA-DokuPIK) was used. Acceptance was used as the primary endpoint. All data were analysed using descriptive methods. In total, 605 PI resulted from 1023 medication reviews. Acceptance was 75% (228/304) for remote and 88% (265/301; p < 0.001) for ward-based services. Non-inferiority was not demonstrated. Most commonly, drug- (44% and 36%) and dose-related (36% and 35%) reasons were documented. Frequently, drugs were stopped/paused (31% and 29%) and dosage changed (31% and 30%). PI were classified as "error, no harm" (National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention [NCC MERP] categories B to D; 83% and 81%). The severity and clinical relevance were at least ranked as "significant" (68% and 66%) and at least as "important" for patients (77% and 83%). The way pharmacy services are provided influences the acceptance of PI. Remote pharmacy services may be seen as an addition, but acceptance rates in remote services failed to show non-inferiority.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Pharmacists are essential team members in critical care and contribute to the safety of pharmacotherapy for this vulnerable group of patients, but little is known about remote pharmacy services in intensive care units (ICU).
AIM
OBJECTIVE
We compared the acceptance of pharmacist interventions (PI) in ICU patients working remotely with ward-based service. We evaluated both pharmacy services, including further information on PI, including reasons, actions and impact.
METHOD
METHODS
Over 5 months, a prospective single-centre observational study divided into two sequential phases (remote and ward-based) was performed on two ICU wards at a university hospital. After a structured medication review, PI identified were addressed to healthcare professionals. For documentation, the national database (ADKA-DokuPIK) was used. Acceptance was used as the primary endpoint. All data were analysed using descriptive methods.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In total, 605 PI resulted from 1023 medication reviews. Acceptance was 75% (228/304) for remote and 88% (265/301; p < 0.001) for ward-based services. Non-inferiority was not demonstrated. Most commonly, drug- (44% and 36%) and dose-related (36% and 35%) reasons were documented. Frequently, drugs were stopped/paused (31% and 29%) and dosage changed (31% and 30%). PI were classified as "error, no harm" (National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention [NCC MERP] categories B to D; 83% and 81%). The severity and clinical relevance were at least ranked as "significant" (68% and 66%) and at least as "important" for patients (77% and 83%).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The way pharmacy services are provided influences the acceptance of PI. Remote pharmacy services may be seen as an addition, but acceptance rates in remote services failed to show non-inferiority.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37029858
doi: 10.1007/s11096-023-01559-z
pii: 10.1007/s11096-023-01559-z
pmc: PMC10366025
doi:
Types de publication
Observational Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
847-856Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
J Telemed Telecare. 2020 Jan-Feb;26(1-2):105-112
pubmed: 30253681
Int J Qual Health Care. 2021 Feb 5;33(1):
pubmed: 33515245
Neth J Med. 2018 Apr;76(3):115-124
pubmed: 29667584
J Crit Care. 2015 Oct;30(5):1101-6
pubmed: 26260916
Hosp Pharm. 2013 Dec;48(11):922-30
pubmed: 24474833
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2013 Dec 1;70(23):2130-5
pubmed: 24249763
Int J Clin Pharm. 2020 Apr;42(2):299-304
pubmed: 32222911
Pharmacotherapy. 2006 May;26(5):722-33
pubmed: 16637798
Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed. 2023 Mar;118(2):141-148
pubmed: 35258694
Int J Pharm Pract. 2016 Aug;24(4):253-61
pubmed: 26777752
Pharm World Sci. 2010 Apr;32(2):194-9
pubmed: 20084548
Pharmacotherapy. 2015 Apr;35(4):370-9
pubmed: 25884525
Int J Clin Pharm. 2022 Feb;44(1):64-71
pubmed: 34402022
Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed. 2023 Apr 28;:
pubmed: 37115243
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008 Aug 1;65(15):1464-9
pubmed: 18653818
Crit Care Med. 2000 Nov;28(11):3746-50
pubmed: 11098984
Int J Clin Pharm. 2019 Apr;41(2):414-423
pubmed: 30895502
Crit Care Med. 2008 Dec;36(12):3184-9
pubmed: 18936700
CMAJ. 2009 Apr 28;180(9):936-43
pubmed: 19398740
Int J Clin Pharm. 2012 Apr;34(2):351-7
pubmed: 22354852
Ann Pharmacother. 2010 Mar;44(3):432-8
pubmed: 20164471
J Crit Care. 2015 Aug;30(4):808-13
pubmed: 25971871
Int J Clin Pharm. 2021 Feb;43(1):66-76
pubmed: 32812096
Int J Pharm Pract. 2014 Apr;22(2):146-54
pubmed: 23763333
Am J Hosp Pharm. 1991 Dec;48(12):2611-6
pubmed: 1814201
Int J Clin Pharm. 2018 Oct;40(5):1199-1208
pubmed: 30073611
Chest. 2013 Nov;144(5):1687-1695
pubmed: 24189862
J Crit Care. 2011 Feb;26(1):104.e1-6
pubmed: 20646898
Crit Care. 2010;14(5):R174
pubmed: 20920322
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1999 Dec 1;56(23):2444-50
pubmed: 10595804
Crit Care Med. 2019 Sep;47(9):1243-1250
pubmed: 31135496
Front Pharmacol. 2022 Nov 14;13:1030406
pubmed: 36452222
J Eval Clin Pract. 2014 Dec;20(6):1172-9
pubmed: 25470782
Crit Care Med. 2020 Sep;48(9):e813-e834
pubmed: 32826496
Int J Clin Pharm. 2019 Oct;41(5):1184-1192
pubmed: 31332648
J Telemed Telecare. 2010;16(2):95-9
pubmed: 20139138
JAMA. 1999 Jul 21;282(3):267-70
pubmed: 10422996
Crit Care Med. 2013 Feb;41(2):389-98
pubmed: 23263619
Int J Pharm Pract. 2017 Aug;25(4):311-319
pubmed: 27699912
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571