2022
DOI: 10.1093/ajhp/zxac067
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Response to Haas et al

Abstract: Disclaimer In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

2
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While intervention counting captures many direct patient care activities (e.g., renal dose adjustments), it does not capture the myriad of indirect activities critical care pharmacists perform (e.g., developing treatment protocols) (4, 28). Further, tying “value” to these interventions is prone to significant limitations and debate among experts (29–33). Thus, intervention counting not only does not entirely capture what a pharmacist does but also does so relatively poorly, and for these reasons, pure intervention counting is colloquially termed “widget counting,“ to denote its somewhat ineffective nature (5).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…While intervention counting captures many direct patient care activities (e.g., renal dose adjustments), it does not capture the myriad of indirect activities critical care pharmacists perform (e.g., developing treatment protocols) (4, 28). Further, tying “value” to these interventions is prone to significant limitations and debate among experts (29–33). Thus, intervention counting not only does not entirely capture what a pharmacist does but also does so relatively poorly, and for these reasons, pure intervention counting is colloquially termed “widget counting,“ to denote its somewhat ineffective nature (5).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To date, robust analysis of critical care pharmacist practice has been limited by the "before-after" design of studies (34)(35)(36)(37)(38). Indeed, most every study evaluating the value a pharmacist brings compares one pharmacist to zero pharmacists and observes improvement in outcomes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These metrics must bridge the administrator‐clinician chasm. As such, they must be objective, reproducible, and related to hard outcomes (e.g., mortality, length of stay), but they also must reflect what the clinician truly does at the bedside to improve care (i.e., “A pharmacist is an agent of patient care, not a productivity unit”) 6,38 . Clinician‐oriented dashboards that include metrics reflective of the Triple Domain may set a foundation for future meaningful evaluation of models 39 …”
Section: Elements Of the Ideal Critical Care Pharmacist Practice Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%