Lind Katrine Brodersen, Soerensen Charlotte Arp, Salamon Suheil Andreas, Kirkegaard Hans, Lisby Marianne
Emergency Department, Randers Regional Hospital, Randers, Denmark.
Randers Department, Hospital Pharmacy Central Denmark Region, Randers, Denmark.
Eur J Hosp Pharm. 2017 Sep;24(5):272-277. doi: 10.1136/ejhpharm-2016-000990. Epub 2016 Jul 21.
Studies have shown that medication histories obtained by clinical pharmacists (CPs) are more complete, and that medication reviews by CPs reduce healthcare costs, drug-related readmissions and emergency readmissions. The aim of this study was to identify the consequences of delegating medication-related tasks from physicians to CPs.
An analytical study based on data from a prospective cluster randomised trial was performed. The intervention consisted of CPs obtaining medication history, performing medication reconciliation and medication review. The physician had to approve the prescriptions and assess changes proposed by the CP. The primary outcome measure was a comparison of changes in the Electronic Medication Module (EMM) and changes proposed by CPs.
232 and 216 patients were included on control days (n=63) and intervention days (n=63). In total, 1018 changes were made in the control group (by physicians). In the intervention group 2123 changes were made, 1808 by CPs and 315 by physicians. In particular, the number of substitutions, registration of drugs and change of instructions for use (eg, administration times) differed between physicians and pharmacists. CPs made 341 written proposals in the intervention group and, of these, 22.9% (95% CI 18.7% to 27.8%) and 50.9% (95% CI 45.5% to 56.2%) were accepted by a physician at discharge from the acute admission unit (AAU) and hospital, respectively.
CPs updated the EMM more thoroughly than physicians, especially entering new prescriptions, substitutions and changing instructions for use. Half of the written proposals were accepted. The extent to which patients benefit from a CP intervention is unknown.
研究表明,临床药师获取的用药史更完整,且临床药师进行的用药评估可降低医疗成本、药物相关再入院率和急诊再入院率。本研究的目的是确定将与用药相关的任务从医生委托给临床药师的后果。
基于一项前瞻性整群随机试验的数据进行了一项分析性研究。干预措施包括临床药师获取用药史、进行用药核对和用药评估。医生必须批准处方并评估临床药师提出的变更。主要结局指标是比较电子用药模块(EMM)中的变更与临床药师提出的变更。
在对照组(n = 63)和干预组(n = 63)的日子里分别纳入了232例和216例患者。对照组(由医生)总共进行了1018处变更。干预组进行了2123处变更,其中1808处由临床药师进行,315处由医生进行。特别是,医生和药师在替代药物数量、药物登记以及使用说明变更(如给药时间)方面存在差异。干预组中临床药师提出了341份书面建议,其中分别有22.9%(95%置信区间18.7%至27.8%)和50.9%(95%置信区间45.5%至56.2%)在患者从急性入院单元(AAU)出院和出院时被医生接受。
临床药师比医生更全面地更新了EMM,尤其是录入新处方、进行替代药物以及更改使用说明。一半的书面建议被接受。患者从临床药师干预中获益的程度尚不清楚。