Bullock Brooke, Donovan Peter J, Mitchell Charles, Whitty Jennifer A, Coombes Ian
Pharmacy Department, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston QLD 4029, Australia.
School of Pharmacy, University of Queensland, Woolloongabba QLD 4102, Australia.
Pharmacy (Basel). 2020 Feb 20;8(1):23. doi: 10.3390/pharmacy8010023.
There is a scarcity of published research describing the impact of a pharmacist on the post-take ward round (PTWR) in addition to ward-based pharmacy services. The aim of this paper was to evaluate the impact of clinical pharmacists' participation on the PTWR on the risk assessment scores of medication-related recommendations with and without a pharmacist. This includes medication-related recommendations occurring on the PTWR and those recommendations made by the ward-based pharmacist on the inpatient ward. A pre-post intervention study was undertaken that compared the impact of adding a pharmacist to the PTWR compared with ward-based pharmacist services alone. A panel reviewed the risk of not acting on medication recommendations that was made on the PTWR and those recorded by the ward-based pharmacist. The relationship between the risk scores and the number and proportion of recommendations that led to action were compared between study groups. There were more medication-related recommendations on the PTWR in the intervention group when a pharmacist was present. Proportionately fewer were in the 'very high and extreme' risk category. Although there was no difference in the number of ward pharmacist recommendations between groups, there was a significantly higher proportion of ward pharmacist recommendations in the "very high and extreme" category in those patients who had been seen on a PTWR attended by a pharmacist than when a pharmacist was not present. There were a greater proportion of "low and medium" risk actionable medication recommendations actioned on the PTWR in the intervention group; and no difference in the risk scores in ward pharmacist recommendations actioned between groups. Overall, the proportion of recommendations that were actioned was higher for those made on the PTWR compared with the ward. The addition of a pharmacist to the PTWR resulted in an increase in low, medium, and high risk recommendations on the PTWR, more very high and extreme risk recommendations made by the ward-based pharmacist, plus an increased number of recommendations being actioned during the patients' admission.
除了基于病房的药学服务外,关于药剂师对查房后病房巡查(PTWR)影响的已发表研究很少。本文的目的是评估临床药剂师参与PTWR对有药剂师和没有药剂师时药物相关建议风险评估分数的影响。这包括在PTWR上出现的药物相关建议以及住院病房的驻病房药剂师提出的那些建议。进行了一项干预前后研究,比较了在PTWR中增加一名药剂师与仅提供驻病房药剂师服务的影响。一个小组审查了不执行PTWR上提出的药物建议以及驻病房药剂师记录的建议的风险。比较了研究组之间风险分数与导致采取行动的建议数量和比例之间的关系。当有药剂师在场时,干预组在PTWR上有更多与药物相关的建议。按比例计算,处于“非常高和极端”风险类别的建议较少。尽管两组之间驻病房药剂师建议的数量没有差异,但在有药剂师参与的PTWR中看过病的患者中,驻病房药剂师建议处于“非常高和极端”类别的比例明显高于没有药剂师在场时。干预组在PTWR上采取行动的“低和中”风险可采取行动的药物建议比例更高;两组之间采取行动的驻病房药剂师建议的风险分数没有差异。总体而言,与病房相比,PTWR上提出的建议采取行动的比例更高。在PTWR中增加一名药剂师导致PTWR上低、中、高风险建议增加,驻病房药剂师提出的非常高和极端风险建议更多,此外在患者住院期间采取行动的建议数量也增加了。