Which hematology/oncology patients are high priority for ambulatory clinical pharmacist review? A three-round Delphi survey by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

INTRODUCTION: Prioritization and acuity tools have been leveraged to facilitate targeted and efficient clinical pharmacist interventions. However, there is a lack of established pharmacy-specific acuity factors in the ambulatory hematology/oncology setting. Therefore, National Comprehensive Cancer Network's Pharmacy Directors Forum conducted a survey to establish consensus on acuity factors associated with hematology/oncology patients that are high priority for ambulatory clinical pharmacist review. METHODS: A three-round electronic Delphi survey was conducted. During the first round, respondents were asked an open-ended question to suggest acuity factors based on their expert opinion. Respondents were then asked in the second round to agree or disagree with the compiled acuity factors, in which those with ≥75% agreement were included in the third round. The final consensus was defined as a mean score ≥3.33 on a modified 4-point Likert scale (4 = strongly agree, 1 = strongly disagree) during the third round. RESULTS: A total of 124 hematology/oncology clinical pharmacists completed the first round of the Delphi survey (invitation response rate, 36.7%), of which 103 completed the second round (response rate, 83.1%) and 84 the third round (response rate, 67.7%). A final consensus was achieved for 18 acuity factors. Acuity factors were identified in the following themes: antineoplastic regimen characteristics, drug interactions, organ dysfunction, pharmacogenomics, recent discharge, laboratory parameters, and treatment-related toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi panel of 124 clinical pharmacists achieved consensus on 18 acuity factors that would identify a hematology/oncology patient as a high priority for ambulatory clinical pharmacist review. The research team envisions incorporating these acuity factors into a pharmacy-specific electronic scoring tool.

Description of the role of pharmacist independent double checks during cognitive order verification of outpatient parenteral anti-cancer therapy.

INTRODUCTION: To describe pharmacist interventions as a result of an independent double check during cognitive order verification of outpatient parenteral anti-cancer therapy. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective analysis of all individual orders for outpatient, parenteral anti-cancer agents within a hematology/oncology infusion center during a 30 day period was conducted. The primary endpoint was error identification rates during first and second verification. Secondary endpoints included the type, frequency, and severity of errors identified during second verification using a modified National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention Index. RESULTS: A total of 1970 anti-cancer parenteral orders were screened, from which 1645 received an independent double check and were included. The number of errors identified during first and second verification were 30 (1.8%) and 10 (0.6%) respectively; second verification resulted in a 33.3% increase in corrected errors. The 10 errors identified during second verification included: four rate transcriptions to optimize pump interoperability, three rate and/or volume modifications, two dosage adjustments, and one treatment deferral due to toxicity. The severity was classified as Category A for four (40%), Category C for three (30%), and Category D for three (30%) errors. This correlated to a low capacity for harm for seven (70%) and a serious capacity for three (30%) errors. CONCLUSIONS: Second verification of outpatient, parenteral anti-cancer medication orders resulted in a 33.3% increase in corrected errors. Three errors detected during second verification were determined to have a serious capacity for harm, supporting the value of independent double checks during pharmacist cognitive order verification.

Describing the role of the hematology/oncology clinical pharmacist in health information technology.

PURPOSE: To describe the role of hematology/oncology clinical pharmacists in health information technology as well as their perceptions of the impact of technology expansion on patient care. METHODS: A single-center, web-based survey was distributed to 30 hematology/oncology clinical pharmacists by email over the two-week-period of 24 September 2018 to 8 October 2018. The anonymous survey was composed of 19 questions, with varying formats including multiple choice, fill-in-the-blank, and rank order. Primary endpoints were quantification of time spent in the electronic health record and perceptions on how technology expansion has impacted the safety, quality, and efficiency of patient care. RESULTS: Twenty-seven hematology/oncology clinical pharmacists (90% response rate) completed the survey in its entirety. Respondents reported that they spend an average of 84.1% of their work day in the electronic health record. Based on a 40-h work week, clinical pharmacists indicated that they spend approximately 32.2 h each week performing direct patient care tasks in the electronic health record compared to 3.7 h on indirect patient care tasks. All respondents reported a greater utilization of technology over the last five years, and most respondents felt that patient care is safer, of better quality, and more efficient with technology expansion. The majority of respondents (81.5%) indicated that clinical pharmacists have the best understanding of the health information technology system, followed by generalist pharmacists and informatics pharmacists. CONCLUSION: The hematology/oncology clinical pharmacist is well positioned to serve as a health information technology leader on the interdisciplinary healthcare team.

Development of a tool to allocate inpatient specialized pharmacy resources at a comprehensive cancer center.

PURPOSE: Develop an objective tool to align the needs of inpatient services at a Comprehensive Cancer Center with the available resources of hematology/oncology clinical specialist pharmacists. SUMMARY: The shift of the pharmacy profession from product-centered to patient-centered care has expanded the scope of practice of the clinical pharmacist and their ability to specialize in a therapeutic area. However, these specialized resources are limited. The pharmacy department at The James Comprehensive Cancer Center at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center developed a tool to objectively determine which inpatient services would receive the most benefit from having a hematology/oncology clinical specialist pharmacist on their healthcare team. A Steering Committee was created to determine the necessary metrics needed across the 29 inpatient services at The James, and data was collected from the electronic medical record. The metrics evaluated were: patient acuity, inpatient intravenous anticancer administrations, inpatient oral anticancer administrations, presence of an outpatient anticancer treatment plan for patients admitted for an inpatient stay, and the use of high-risk hematology/oncology therapies. CONCLUSION: A novel and data-driven tool was created to allocate hematology/oncology clinical specialist pharmacists across a Comprehensive Cancer Center. Annual use of this objective tool can aid institutions in appropriate distribution of limited hematology/oncology specialized pharmacy resources.

The pharmacist's role in chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy.

The emergence and efficacy of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy in previously incurable malignancies represents a promising paradigm shift in cancer care. However, it is not without significant clinical, operational, and financial considerations. Pharmacists should be prepared to fulfill the various roles in CAR T cell therapy provision including: policy development; electronic medical record build; patient and staff education; patient selection; procurement, storage, and handling; medication administration and supportive care; management of adverse reactions; and quality tracking. Our commentary provides an overview of the opportunities for pharmacy involvement in the implementation and maintenance of a CAR T cell therapy program with an emphasis on the importance of pharmacy involvement as part of a multidisciplinary approach to care. Although some institutions have dedicated a CAR T cell pharmacist to meet the demands of emerging CAR T cell therapy, we believe that clinical pharmacists practicing in hematopoietic stem cell transplant and hematology/oncology have the skills and training to fulfill the pharmacist's role in CAR T cell therapy.