Pharmacy managers should evaluate the full impact of formulary decisions

Thornton, John P.; Brown, Daniel L.; Stonich, Terry L.; Hutchinson, Richard A.

doi:10.1093/ajhp/46.6.1131a

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The goal of a formulary is to maximize therapeutic benefit to the patient and to contain costs. [21][22][23][24] Therefore, use of pharmaceutical agents should be analyzed before and after formulary decisions to determine effects of formulary changes. 25 Our study documented a decrease of 4% in the use of topical corticosteroid combination products and an increase of 3% in the use of potent topical corticosteroid products after the policy change that removed most of the combination 790 ■ The Annals of Pharmacotherapy ■ 2003 June, Volume 37 www.theannals.com products from the formulary.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Topical Corticosteroid Prescribing Patterns following Changes in Drug Benefit Status

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Topical Corticosteroid Prescribing Patterns following Changes in Drug Benefit Status

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, research has indicated that HDFs are negatively evaluated by many hospitals [ 5]. Moreover, HDFs may have limited or even a negative impact on clinical outcomes and overall hospital expenditure [ 6–10]. Therefore, as in other countries, the process of drug selection in Dutch hospitals has received attention from the government, patient organizations, healthcare professionals, and the media [ 11–14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drug and Therapeutics (D & T) committees in Dutch hospitals: a nation‐wide survey of structure, activities, and drug selection procedures

Fijn

Brouwers

Knaap

et al. 1999

Brit J Clinical Pharma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To determine structure, activities and drug selection processes used by Dutch hospital drug and therapeutics (D & T) committees. Methods A pretested structured survey questionnaire based on the Australian process and impact indicators, previous research, and consultation of professionals was developed. Subsequently, D & T committees that met predefined selection criteria were asked to participate. Results The overall response rate was 70% (38/54). D & T committees varied considerably in size and representation of clinical expertise. Although responsibilities were theoretically alike, actual responsibilities were frequently passed on to other authorities, such as pharmacy staff. Few committees used detailed guidelines or decision supportive matrices to establish transparency in drug selection. With respect to drug selection, the value scores on the information resources used, the factors involved, and the selection criteria used varied. Hospital pharmacists were likely to be most involved and to have the greatest impact. A consensus was most difficult to achieve for drugs used in cardiology, oncology, and psychiatry. Interference of industrial marketing strategies on drug selection was recognized and identified. Conclusions Our results indicate that Dutch hospital D & T committees differ with respect to their clinical expertise and their activities, a situation comparable with that observed in other countries. Furthermore, the lack of transparency in drug selection was considerable. These findings clarify the differences previously found between Dutch hospital drug formularies.

show abstract