Background The majority of hospitalised patients have drug-related problems. Clinical pharmacist services including medication history, medication reconciliation and medication review may reduce the number of drug-related problems. Acute and emergency hospital services have changed considerably during the past decade in Denmark, and the new fast-paced workflows pose new challenges for the provision of clinical pharmacist service. Objective To describe and evaluate a method for a clinical pharmacist service that is relevant and fit the workflow of the medical care in the acute ward. Setting Acute wards at three Danish hospitals. Methods The clinical pharmacist intervention comprised medication history, medication reconciliation, medication review, medical record entries and entry of prescription templates into the electronic medication module. Drug-related problems were categorised using The PCNE Classification V6.2. Inter-rater agreement analysis was used to validate the tool. Acceptance rates were measured as the physicians' approval of prescription templates and according to outcome in the PCNE classification. Main outcome measure Acceptance rate of the clinical pharmacists' interventions through the described method and inter-rater agreement using the PCNE classification for drug-related problems. Results During 17 months, 188 patients were included in this study (average age 72 years and 55 % women). The clinical pharmacists found drug-related problems in 85 % of the patients. In the 1,724 prescriptions, 538 drug-related problems were identified. The overall acceptance rate by the physicians for the proposed interventions was 76 % (95 % CI 74-78 %). There was a substantial inter-rater agreement when using the PCNE classification system. Conclusion The methods for a clinical pharmacist service in the acute ward in this study have been demonstrated to be relevant and timely. The method received a high acceptance rate, regardless of no need for oral communication, and a substantial inter-rater agreement when classifying the drug-related problems.

The purpose of the study was to investigate the clinical effect of a clinical pharmacist (CP) intervention upon admission to hospital on inpatient harm and to assess a potential educational bias. Over 16 months, 593 adult patients taking ≥4 medications daily were included from three Danish acute medicine wards. Patients were randomized to either the CP intervention or the usual care (prospective control). To assess a potential educational bias, a retrospective control group was formed by randomization. The CP intervention comprised medication history, medication reconciliation, medication review and entry of proposed prescriptions into the electronic prescribing system. The primary outcome of inpatient harm was identified using triggers from the Institute of Healthcare Improvement Global Trigger Tool. Harms were validated and rated for severity by two independent and blinded outcome panels. Secondary end-points were harms per patient, length of hospital stay, readmissions and 1-year mortality. Harm affected 11% of the patients in the intervention group compared to 17% in the combined control group, odds ratio (OR) 0.57 (CI 0.32-1.02, p = 0.06). The incidence of harm was similar in the intervention and prospective control groups, OR 0.80 (CI 0.40-1.59, p = 0.52) but occurred less frequently in the intervention than in the retrospective control group OR 0.46 (CI 0.25-0.85, p = 0.01). An educational bias from the intervention to the control group might have contributed to this negative outcome. In conclusion, the CP intervention at admission to hospital had no statistically significant effect on inpatient harm.