Introduction and objectivesDrug-related problems (DRPs) constitute a frequent safety issue among hospitalised patients leading to patient harm and increased healthcare costs. Because many DRPs are preventable, the specific risk factors that facilitate their occurrence are of considerable interest. The objective of our study was to assess risk factors for the occurrence of DRPs with the intention to identify patients at risk for DRPs to guide and target preventive measures where they are needed most in patients.DesignTriangulation process using a mixed methods approach.MethodsWe conducted an expert panel, using the nominal group technique (NGT) and a qualitative analysis, to gather risk factors for DRPs. The expert panel consisted of two consultant hospital physicians (internal medicine and geriatrics), one emergency physician, one independent general practitioner, one clinical pharmacologist, one clinical pharmacist, one registered nurse, one home care nurse and two independent community pharmacists. The literature was searched for additional risk factors. Gathered factors from the literature search and the NGT were assembled and validated in a two-round Delphi questionnaire.ResultsThe NGT resulted in the identification of 33 items with 13 additional risk factors from the qualitative analysis of the discussion. The literature search delivered another 39 risk factors. The 85 risk factors were refined to produce 42 statements for the Delphi online questionnaire. Of these, 27 risk factors were judged to be ‘important’ or ‘rather important’.ConclusionsThe gathered risk factors may help to characterise and identify patients at risk for DRPs and may enable clinical pharmacists to guide and target preventive measures in order to limit the occurrence of DRPs. As a further step, these risk factors will serve as the basis for a screening tool to identify patients at risk for DRPs.

What is known and objective: The evaluation of clinical pharmacy services is essential for their further development and establishment. We analysed drug-related problems (DRPs) and subsequent clinical pharmacists' interventions (PIs) at a Swiss university hospital. Method:We conducted a retrospective analysis of DRPs and subsequent PIs that were identified and implemented during interdisciplinary ward rounds in internal medicine at the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland, between 2015 and 2017. We estimated the potential clinical and economic impact of PIs using a validated evaluation tool (CLEO de ). Results and discussion:Based on medication reviews of 5441 patients, clinical pharmacists identified 5024 DRPs, of which 2892 DRPs (57.6%) were followed by a PI that was directly accepted and implemented by the physician in charge and included in the present analysis. The leading cause and type of PIs were inappropriate dose and dose adjustment, respectively. Overall, 97.8% of DRPs were followed by PIs with an expected clinical benefit for the patients (major: 11.1%; moderate: 27.6%; minor: 59.1%). The drugs most often involved in PIs of major clinical impact were antithrombotics, acid blockers and cardiovascular drugs. With regard to the economic impact, 40.7% of DRPs implied PIs resulting in an increase of immediate therapy costs, whereas 39.3% implied PIs resulting in a decrease of immediate therapy costs. The remaining PIs were cost-neutral. What is new and conclusion:This study emphasizes that clinical pharmacists may help improve the effectiveness and safety of pharmacotherapy on acute care medical wards. K E Y W O R D S clinical pharmacy, drug-related problems, hospital, internal medicine, medication review, pharmacist intervention 1 | WHAT IS K NOWN AND OBJEC TIVE Drug-related problems (DRPs) are defined as events or circumstances involving drug therapy that actually or potentially interfere with desired health outcomes. Underlying causes can be related to the selection of a drug, drug form or dose, treatment duration, the logistics of the prescribing and dispensing process, drug administration, patient behaviour or outcome monitoring. 1 DRPs are common in Swiss hospitals. For instance, on two internal medicine wards at the University Hospital Geneva, a clinical | 925 REINAU Et Al.

IntroductionIdentifying patients with a high risk for drug-related problems (DRPs) might optimise the allocation of targeted pharmaceutical care during the hospital stay and on discharge.ObjectiveTo develop a self-assessment screening tool to identify patients at risk for DRPs and validate the tool regarding feasibility, acceptability and the reliability of the patients’ answers.DesignProspective validation study.SettingTwo mid-sized hospitals (300–400 beds).Participants195 patients, exclusion criteria: under 18 years old, patients with a health status not allowing a meaningful communication (eg, delirium, acute psychosis, advanced dementia, aphasia, clouded consciousness state), palliative or terminally ill patients.MethodsTwenty-seven risk factors for the development of DRPs, identified in a previous study, provided the basis of the self-assessment questionnaire, the Drug-Associated Risk Tool (DART). Consenting patients filled in DART, and we compared their answers with objective patient data from medical records and laboratory data.ResultsOne hundred and sixty-four patients filled in DART V.1.0 in an average time of 7 min. After a first validation, we identified statements with a low sensitivity and revised the wording of the questions related to heart insufficiency, renal impairment or liver impairment. The revised DART (V.2.0) was validated in 31 patients presenting heart insufficiency, renal impairment or liver impairment as comorbidity and reached an average specificity of 88% (range 27–100) and an average sensitivity of 67% (range 21–100).ConclusionsDART showed a satisfying feasibility and reliability. The specificity of the statements was mostly high. The sensitivity varied and was higher in statements concerning diseases that require regular disease control and attention to self-care and drug management. Asking patients about their conditions, medications and related problems can facilitate getting a first, broad picture of the risk for DRPs and possible pharmaceutical needs.

In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Swiss health authorities approved and ordered two mRNA vaccines in 2021. The canton of Zurich was the second in Switzerland to allow community pharmacists to administer the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Moderna to the adult population. We aimed to pilot a customer satisfaction questionnaire regarding COVID-19 vaccinations in Zurich pharmacies. Questions focused on satisfaction with different aspects of the service, motivation for getting the vaccination, and reasons for being vaccinated in a pharmacy. Zurich pharmacies administered 68,169 COVID-19 doses until June 2021, and 421 questionnaires were filled. Respondents’ mean age was 43.5 (±13.2) years, with 42.3% reporting being women and 46.1% being men. Of the 372 complete questionnaires, 98.7% of the respondents would have recommended the service to others. High levels of satisfaction were reported concerning pre-vaccination discussion (98.9%), pharmacies’ information level on COVID-19 vaccines (98.9%), general comfort with receiving the vaccination in a pharmacy (99.5%), injection technique (99.2%), and premises used (98.1%). Most respondents (57.3%) would have had the option of another vaccination provider, but the pharmacies were chosen for their opening hours, ease of access, and perceived trust. The availability of pharmacist-administered services may be an important contributor to a successful vaccination programme in Switzerland.

No abstract