Alemanni Jordane, Brisseau Lionel, Lebel Denis, Vaillancourt Régis, Rocheleau Louis, Bussières Jean-François
is a pharmacy resident with the Université de Toulouse III, Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France. She is also a Research Assistant with the Research Unit in Pharmacy Practice, CHU Sainte-Justine, Montréal, Quebec.
Can J Hosp Pharm. 2011 Mar;64(2):116-23. doi: 10.4212/cjhp.v64i2.995.
There are few data comparing the drug management standards of the US and Canadian agencies that accredit health care institutions.
To evaluate the clarity and assessability of criteria in the drug management standards adopted by Accreditation Canada and the Joint Commission (United States).
A pilot study was conducted to compare the clarity and assessability of the criteria listed in the 2 standards. Criteria that were common to the 2008 versions of the Canadian and US drug management standards were identified. A panel of 12 health care professionals was assembled to independently rate the clarity (i.e., clear or unclear) and the assessability (i.e., assessable or not assessable) of each statement, using a validated comparative grid.
In total, there were 143 Canadian standards and 103 US standards. Sixty-two (43%) of the 143 Canadian criteria could be directly paired with a US criterion, whereas 70 (68%) of the 103 US criteria could be paired with one or more Canadian criteria. Six of the US criteria were paired with more than one Canadian criterion, and 12 of the Canadian criteria could be paired with more than one US criterion. Four of the 22 themes in the Canadian standards had no equivalent criteria in the US standards. Panel members from the pharmaceutical practice group evaluated the clarity and assessability of the Canadian criteria more severely than panel members from the nursing practice group: 86% versus 95% of individual ratings were deemed "clear" by these two groups, respectively (p < 0.001) and 64% versus 88% of individual ratings were deemed "assessable" (p < 0.001). There were no criteria that were considered unclear or unassessable by all of the panel members.
Few data are available on drug management standards and their impact on health care. A better understanding of these standards, as well as comparisons of Canadian standards with those of other countries, might help in determining their clarity and assessability. A larger-scale study is required to validate the observations reported here.
比较美国和加拿大认证医疗机构的机构在药物管理标准方面的数据很少。
评估加拿大认证委员会和联合委员会（美国）采用的药物管理标准中标准的清晰度和可评估性。
进行了一项试点研究，以比较这两个标准中列出的标准的清晰度和可评估性。确定了2008年版加拿大和美国药物管理标准中的共同标准。召集了一个由12名医疗保健专业人员组成的小组，使用经过验证的比较网格独立对每条陈述的清晰度（即清晰或不清晰）和可评估性（即可评估或不可评估）进行评分。
加拿大标准共有143条，美国标准有103条。143条加拿大标准中的62条（43%）可以直接与一条美国标准配对，而103条美国标准中的70条（68%）可以与一条或多条加拿大标准配对。美国的6条标准与多条加拿大标准配对，加拿大的12条标准可以与多条美国标准配对。加拿大标准的22个主题中有4个在美国标准中没有等效标准。药学实践组的小组成员对加拿大标准的清晰度和可评估性的评估比护理实践组的小组成员更为严格：这两组分别有86%和95%的个人评分被认为“清晰”（p<0.001），64%和88%的个人评分被认为“可评估”（p<0.001）。没有所有小组成员都认为不清晰或不可评估的标准。
关于药物管理标准及其对医疗保健的影响的数据很少。更好地理解这些标准，以及将加拿大标准与其他国家的标准进行比较，可能有助于确定其清晰度和可评估性。需要进行更大规模的研究来验证此处报告的观察结果。
