Objectives: Pharmaceutical interventions are implicit components of the enhanced role that clinical pharmacists provide in clinical settings. We aimed to study the clinical significance and analyze the presumed cost avoidance achieved by clinical pharmacists’ interventions. Methods: A retrospective study of documented clinical pharmacists’ interventions at a tertiary care hospital in Oman was conducted between January and March 2022. The interventions were electronically recorded in the patients’ medical records as routine practice by clinical pharmacists. Data on clinical outcomes were extracted and analyzed. Cost implications were cross checked by another clinical pharmacist, and then, cost avoidance was calculated using the Rx Medi-Trend system values. Results: A total of 2032 interventions were analyzed, and 97% of them were accepted by the treating physicians. Around 30% of the accepted interventions were for antimicrobials, and the most common type was dosage adjustment (30%). Treatment efficacy was enhanced in 60% and toxicity was avoided in 22% of the interventions. The presumed cost avoided during the study period was USD 110,000 with a projected annual cost avoidance of approximately USD 440,000. Conclusion: There was an overall positive clinical and financial impact of clinical pharmacists’ interventions. Most interventions have prevented moderate or major harm with a high physician acceptance rate. Optimal documentation of the interventions is crucial for emphasizing clinical pharmacists’ value in multi-specialty hospitals.

Objectives: Disagreement between health care providers on medication-related interventions can affect clinical outcomes. We aimed to study the outcomes and significance of clinical pharmacists' interventions and evaluate the levels of agreement between different clinical pharmacists on the impact of pharmaceutical interventions. Methodology: A retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Oman. The study included all documented interventions by clinical pharmacists for all categories of admitted patients that met the inclusion criteria. Results: The originator clinical pharmacists interjected to improve the efficacy of treatment in (58%, n=1740) of the interventions, followed by toxicity reduction (24%). The level of agreement in the clinical significance resulted in substantial Scotts' kappa (k) between the originator and the first reviewer, the first and second reviewers, and the second reviewer and supervisor (86%; k=0.77; P<.001), (77%; k=0.63; P<.001), (84%; k=0.77; P<.001), respectively. In terms of grading of clinical significance, the originator clinical pharmacists recorded moderate significance in 50% of the interventions, followed by major (30%), not applicable (8.4%), and minor (7.3%). The level of agreement in the clinical significance resulted in substantial Scotts' k between the originator and the first reviewer, and between the second reviewer and supervisor (82%; k=0.72; P<.001), (84%; k=0.77; P<.001), respectively. The level of agreement between the first and second reviewer was fair (55%; k=0.28; p<0.001). Conclusion: Clinical pharmacists' interventions have a crucial impact on patient safety, improving efficacy and reducing toxicities. Overall, there was a substantial agreement among clinical pharmacists on the clinical significance and grading of the interventions..