Validation of a tool for reporting pharmacists' interventions in everyday community pharmacy

Vo, Thi Ha; Bardet, Jean-Didier; Charpiat, B.; Leyrissoux, C.; Gravoulet, Julien; Allenet, Benoît; Conort, O.; Bedouch, Pierrick

doi:10.1111/jcpt.12642

Cited by 19 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Academic pharmacists from the clinical pharmacy department of the faculty of pharmacy gave two study presentations to pharmacy students and their mentors (we refer to both herein as CPs). An e-learning resource was also sent to all pharmacy students and their mentors to help them train to score DRPs and apply standard-of-care PIs according to the French Society of Clinical Pharmacy [ 13 , 14 ]. There was no other training.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From this point, community pharmacists accounted for eGFR while dispensing medications: if they detected a potential DRP, they had to assess it, record it, and suggest (to the patient’s prescriber, typically his/her general practitioner) an appropriate PI using the specific tools of the French Society of Clinical Pharmacy [ 13 , 14 ]. The interventions could be accepted or refused by the practitioner, with or without justification [ 13 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Each patient record was retrospectively and independently reviewed. Each DRP related to eGFR detected as classified according to the French Society of Clinical Pharmacy tool [ 13 ]. All interventions were theoretical because of their retrospective nature, and were also classified in accordance to the SFPC tool.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Role of Community Pharmacists in the Detection of Clinically Relevant Drug-Related Problems in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community pharmacists (CPs) have traditionally had limited access to patients’ estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) during the medication-dispensing process. The increasing access to shared electronic health records is making eGFR available, but the skills needed to detect and manage clinically relevant drug-related problems (DRPs) are poorly documented. The primary objective of this study was to investigate the role of CPs in the medication-dispensation process for elderly patients with renal impairment. A total of 70 CPs participated in this 6 month study. Community pharmacists asked all patients ≥65 years to bring their laboratory test values for the next medication-dispensing process. Drug-related problem detection rates were compared between CPs (prospective period) and expert pharmacists (retrospectively). The clinical relevance of each DRP was assessed by nephrologists and general practitioners using an appropriate tool. Community pharmacists recruited n = 442 patients with eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and detected n = 99 DRPs, whereas expert pharmacists detected n = 184 DRPs. The most frequently detected DRPs were dosage problems and contraindications. According to assessment by clinicians, CPs and expert pharmacists identified 54.0% and 84.7% of clinically relevant DRPs, respectively. This study suggests a positive impact of the systematic availability of eGFR to CPs on the detection of several DRPs with clinical relevance.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Role of Community Pharmacists in the Detection of Clinically Relevant Drug-Related Problems in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…9,10,15,16 Moreover, several international studies have focused on methods and policies of pharmacist documentation. [17][18][19][20][21][22][23] However, only a few studies have discussed the methods or types of pharmacist intervention documentation. 24,25 Therefore, in this study, we aimed to explore the pharmacist intervention documentation system with an emphasis on planning of policies and procedures in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pharmacist Intervention Documentation in Saudi Arabia

Alomi¹,

Badawoud²,

Al-Dosari³

et al. 2020

PTB Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To explore the pharmacist intervention documentation in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Methods: This is a 4-month cross-sectional self-administrated survey on documentation of pharmacist intervention. The study consisted of two parts: the first part collected demographic information and the second part comprised of a questionnaire with 18 questions. The second part included policy and procedure, type of data through pharmacist intervention, reporting workload of pharmacist intervention documentation. All types of pharmacist professionals were included in this survey. We used a 5-point Likert response scale system to obtain the responses. There were open-and close-ended questions. The survey was distributed through the social media (WhatsApp) and other social media to more than 1000 pharmacist professionals in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The survey was distributed in an electronic format and the data were analyzed through Survey Monkey system. Results: A total of 128 pharmacists responded to the survey. Of them, 106 (82.81%) were Saudi and 22 (17.19%) were non-Saudi professionals. The majority of the responders were in the age group of 25-34 years and 35-44 years (44.53% and 25.00%, respectively). Most of the responders had obtained Bachelor of Pharmacy (40 (31.25%)) and Doctor of Pharmacy degree (33 (25.78%)) and the majority of the pharmacists (112 (87.50%)) were not accredited by the Board of Pharmaceutical Specialty. The average score of the administration element of pharmacist intervention documentation was 3.68 (73.66%). Policies and procedures of pharmacist intervention documentation obtained the highest score (4.13 (82.6%)) followed by the quality management (3.78 (75.60%)) and education with training (3.76 (75.20%)). Adverse drug reactions (92.86%) and medication errors (91.19%) were most of the recorded type of documentation and poisoning information inquiries (65.62%) and medication reconciliation (80.31%) were the least type of documentation, with an average 54.66% documented electronically. Conclusion: The pharmacist intervention documentation was found to be acceptable in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The half of pharmacist intervention documentations was an electronic only. In the future, we recommend to improve the system and correct barriers related issues. This will enhance the process of documentation and explore the impact and role of the pharmacist in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

show abstract

“…[4][5][6][7] Various international and a few local studies conducted on practice of pharmacist intervention documentation discuss the practice and perception of pharmacist intervention documentation. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] Therefore, in this study, we aimed to investigate the practice and perceptions of pharmacist intervention documentation in the KSA.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Practice and Perception of Pharmacist Intervention Documentation in Saudi Arabia

Alomi¹,

Faraj²,

Al-Dosari³

et al. 2020

PTB Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To explore the practice and perceptions of pharmacist intervention documentation in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Methods: This is a 4-month cross-sectional self-administered survey of documentation of pharmacist intervention. The study consisted of two parts: the first part collected demographic information and the second part comprised of a questionnaire with a total of 18 questions. There were domains: pharmacist intervention documentation elements, documentation of clinical impact and cost avoidance, the perception of pharmacist intervention and the barrier of pharmacist intervention documentation. All kinds of pharmacist professionals were included in the survey. We used 5-point Likert response scale system to obtain responses. There were open and close-ended questions. The survey was distributed in an electronic format through the social media (WhatsApp and others) to more than 1000 pharmacist professionals across the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The data were obtained through the Survey Monkey system. Results: A total of 128 pharmacists responded to the questionnaire. Of them, 106 (82.81%) were Saudi and 22 (17.19%) were non-Saudi pharmacists. Majority of the responders were in the age group of 25-34 years and 35-44 years (44.53% and 25.00%, respectively). Most of the responders had obtained their Bachelor of Science in Pharmacy degree (40 (31.25%)) and Diploma in Pharmacy (33 (25.78%)) with the majority of pharmacists (112 (87.50%)) not having accreditation for the Board of Pharmaceutical Specialty. Most of the pharmacist-reported intervention items was for brief description of the intervention (94.49 %), date of intervention (93.75%) and pharmacist's name/identification (93.70%), whereas least reported items was the effect of cost-saving (45.57%), time spent on providing intervention (51.61%) and drug therapeutic classification (65.73%). Most of the documentation of clinical impact and cost avoidance were related to the general pharmacist intervention (75.78%), adverse drug reaction (72.66%) and drug quality reporting (72.22%). Most of the barriers that prevent documentation of pharmacist intervention was lack of time (98 (76.56%)) followed by the statement "there is no system for pharmacist intervention" (43 (33.59%)) and "the analysis of pharmacist intervention does not exist" (41 (32.03%)). Conclusion: Half of the responder's showed compliance with the practice of pharmacist intervention documentation in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The clinical impact and cost avoidance impact of the pharmacist does not adhere to the documentation with half of the responders. The electronic documentations of pharmacist intervention presented with half of the responders. We recommend to remove the barriers and encourage the pharmacist to carry out documentation. This will improve the system and will improve the clinical and economic benefit of the pharmacist in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

show abstract

Validation of a tool for reporting pharmacists' interventions in everyday community pharmacy

Cited by 19 publications

References 20 publications

The Role of Community Pharmacists in the Detection of Clinically Relevant Drug-Related Problems in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients

The Role of Community Pharmacists in the Detection of Clinically Relevant Drug-Related Problems in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients

Pharmacist Intervention Documentation in Saudi Arabia

Practice and Perception of Pharmacist Intervention Documentation in Saudi Arabia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About