Secondary uses of electronic prescribing and pharmacy data in UK hospital care: a national survey.

Electronic hospital pharmacy (EHP) systems are ubiquitous in today's hospitals, with many also implementing electronic prescribing (EP) systems; both contain a potential wealth of medication-related data to support quality improvement. The reasons for reuse and users of this data are generally unknown. Our objectives were to survey secondary use of data (SUD) from EHP and EP systems in UK hospitals, to identify users of and factors influencing SUD.A national postal survey was sent out to all hospital chief pharmacists with pre-notifications and follow-up reminders. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed.Of 187 hospital organisations, 65 (35%) responded. All had EHP systems (for ≥20 years) and all reused data; 50 (77%) had EP systems (established 1-10 years) but only 40 (80%) reused data. Reported facilitators for SUD included medication safety, providing feedback, benchmarking, saving time and patient experience. The purposes of SUD included audits, quality improvement, risk management and general medication-related reporting. Earlier introduction of SUD could provide an opportunity to heighten local improvement initiatives.Data from EHP systems is reused for multiple purposes. Evaluating SUD and sharing experiences could provide richer insight into potential SUD and barriers/factors to consider when implementing or upgrading EP/EHP systems.

Development, content validation and standardization of an adult patient prioritization tool for hospital clinical pharmacy services.

BACKGROUND: Patient prioritization is a effective strategy to identify high risk patients for targeted Clinical Pharmacy Service (CPS) in hospital pharmacy. However, there is a paucity of patient prioritization tool to use in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: Describe the development, content validation and standardization of an adult patient prioritization tool for hospital CPS named, PrioFarClinH. METHODS: The tool was developed using a stepwise design multi: Scoping Review to identify prioritization criteria/sub-criteria; Delphi technique to obtain consensus under the identified criteria/sub-criteria; Survey with pharmacists evaluating applicability of the criteria/sub-criteria obtained from Delphi; Definition of criteria/sub-criteria to be included in PrioFarClinH attribution of scores. Content validation was performed by a panel of experts evaluating relevance, feasibility, clarity and adequacy of the score. Content Validity Index (CVI) was calculated. Standardization occurred through a retrospective observational study carried out at 24 and 72 h and median of the patient's hospital stay. An intragroup norm was performed, determining percentile ranks of the instrument's total scores. Patients with a P90 score were classified with a high level of prioritization for CPS. RESULTS: PrioFarClinH is divided into three sections, with prioritization criteria for health issues; therapeutic classes; laboratory parameters. It comprises 51 criteria with specific scores with simple total calculation. None of the criteria presented CVI <0.78, maintaining the items from the initial version of PrioFarClinH. The scores were adjusted per suggestions from the panel of judges. Data were collected from 393 patients. The P90 percentile in the three hospitalization stages (24 h, 72 h, and median) was found, respectively, in the following scores: 18.0, 20.0, and 22.6. CONCLUSIONS: PrioFarClinH is a comprehensive tool to target and to prioritize adults patients most likely to benefit from CPS. Evidence for adequate content validity was provided. However, further validation of this tool is necessary to establish tool performance.

Clinical pharmacy key performance indicators for hospital inpatient setting: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Key performance indicators (KPIs) are quantifiable measures used to monitor the quality of health services. Implementation guidelines for clinical pharmacy services (CPS) do not specify KPIs. AIM: To assess the quality of the studies that have developed KPIs for CPS in inpatient hospital settings. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted by searching in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed, supplemented with citation analyses and grey literature searches, to retrieve studies addressing the development of KPIs in CPS for hospital inpatients. Exclusions comprised drug- or disease-specific studies and those not written in English, French, Portuguese, or Spanish. The Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument assessed methodological quality. Domain scores and an overall score were calculated using an equal-weight principle. KPIs were classified into structure, process, and outcome categories. The protocol is available at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/KS2G3 . RESULTS: We included thirteen studies that collectively developed 225 KPIs. Merely five studies scored over 50% on the AIRE instrument, with domains #3 (scientific evidence) and #4 (formulation and usage) displaying low scores. Among the KPIs, 8.4% were classified as structure, 85.8% as process, and 5.8% as outcome indicators. The overall methodological quality did not exhibit a clear association with a major focus on outcomes. None of the studies provided benchmarking reference values. CONCLUSION: The KPIs formulated for evaluating CPS in hospital settings primarily comprised process measures, predominantly suggested by pharmacists, with inadequate evidence support, lacked piloting or validation, and consequently, were devoid of benchmarking reference values.

Standardization of key performance indicators and metrics for investigational drug services: Consensus recommendations among IDS specialists.

PURPOSE: There are currently no consensus guidelines on establishing metrics for investigational drug services (IDS). Because of the complexity of research protocols, it remains difficult for sites to track pharmacy productivity and create a baseline for IDS growth within the institution, as well as to perform benchmarking with peer institutions. The goal of this study was to help establish practical guidance for IDS metrics and site utility as applicable. METHODS: This was a survey-based project conducted by the metrics subgroup of the Hematology/Oncology Pharmacy Association (HOPA) IDS special interest group (SIG), which was formed specifically for this analysis. Three surveys developed by the metrics subgroup were sent to members of the IDS HOPA SIG to gather metrics. The first survey included questions about what metrics IDS sites currently collect. The identified metrics were then condensed into categories. Through a consensus-based approach, standardized definitions were established and applied to future surveys. The 2 subsequent surveys sent to HOPA SIG members helped create a list of top recommended metrics that are recommended for every IDS site to track. RESULTS: A total of 3 surveys were sent to 75 recipients, with the response rate ranging from 24% to 38%. From these surveys and consensus with the metrics subgroup, 5 top recommended metrics were identified: (1) active protocols; (2) dispenses; (3) new clinical trials initiated; (4) patients treated; and (5) clinical interventions. CONCLUSION: These recommended metrics should serve as guidance and allow for standardization to help ensure adequate resources are available for IDS pharmacy staff. These recommendations should serve as a basis for standardization and benchmarking with peer institutions.

A Dedicated Outpatient Pharmacy Improves Access to Discharge Medications in a Pediatric Emergency Department: A Quality Improvement Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Following discharge from a pediatric emergency department (ED) or urgent care, many families do not pick up their prescribed medications. The aim of this quality improvement study was to increase the percentage of patients discharged home with medications in-hand from 6% to 30% within 6 months. METHODS: Due to the planned construction of a new ED, urgent care, and dedicated pharmacy, a multidisciplinary team was formed to increase access to discharge medications. We performed a pilot study in the urgent care to improve the discharge prescription process and expanded its scope to the ED. We evaluated the effect of our interventions on the percentage of patients discharged with medications in-hand through statistical process control charts. Process measures included the percentage of prescriptions electronically prescribed and directed to an on-site pharmacy. RESULTS: Between June 21, 2021 and March 27, 2022, 7,678 patients were discharged with at least 1 medication in-hand. The percentage of patients discharged with medications in-hand increased from 6.2% to 60.6%. The percentage of prescriptions e-prescribed and directed to an on-site pharmacy increased to 94.6% and 65.6% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the availability of a 24-hour on-site pharmacy appears to be the most impactful intervention increasing access to discharge medications for families. Other interventions, such as a pilot study in the urgent care and implementing default electronic prescribing, may have potentiated the effect of the new pharmacy.

Deep learning application to automated classification of recommendations made by hospital pharmacists during medication prescription review.

PURPOSE: Recommendations to improve therapeutics are proposals made by pharmacists during the prescription review process to address suboptimal use of medicines. Recommendations are generated daily as text documents but are rarely reused beyond their primary use to alert prescribers and caregivers. If recommendation data were easier to summarize, they could be used retrospectively to improve safeguards for better prescribing. The objective of this work was to train a deep learning algorithm for automated recommendation classification to valorize the large amount of recommendation data. METHODS: The study was conducted in a French university hospital, at which recommendation data were collected throughout 2017. Data from the first 6 months of 2017 were labeled by 2 pharmacists who assigned recommendations to 1 of the 29 possible classes of the French Society of Clinical Pharmacy classification. A deep neural network classifier was trained to predict the class of recommendations. RESULTS: In total, 27,699 labeled recommendations from the first half of 2017 were used to train and evaluate a classifier. The prediction accuracy calculated on a validation dataset was 78.0%. We also predicted classes for unlabeled recommendations collected during the second half of 2017. Of the 4,460 predictions reviewed, 67 required correction. When these additional labeled data were concatenated with the original dataset and the neural network was retrained, accuracy reached 81.0%. CONCLUSION: To facilitate analysis of recommendations, we have implemented an automated classification system using deep learning that achieves respectable performance. This tool can help to retrospectively highlight the clinical significance of daily medication reviews performed by hospital clinical pharmacists.

Análise das ações tomadas pela comissão de farmácia e terapêutica do Instituto Dante Pazzanese de Cardiologia em 2021 e 2022 / Analysis of the actions taken by the pharmacy and therapeutics committee of the Instituto Dante Pazzanese de Cardiologia in 2021 and 2022

INTRODUÇÃO E OBJETIVOS: A Comissão de Farmácia e Terapêutica (CFT) é uma instância de caráter consultivo e deliberativo que assessora a Diretoria Geral com objetivo de formular diretrizes e promover uso racional de medicamentos. O objetivo foi mensurar decisões tomadas pela CFT que impactem positivamente para economia de recurso orçamentário sem prejuízo assistencial. MÉTODOS: Estudo descritivo realizado no período de janeiro de 2021 a dezembro de 2022 sobre as ATAS mensais da CFT e sistema de gestão hospitalar eletrônica. Os dados coletados foram: assuntos discutidos, deliberação, valor unitário do medicamento. Foi considerado assuntos com impacto financeiro: substituição da padronização, despadronização, inclusão de medicamento com dosagem de melhor manejo, inclusão de restrição de prescrição para itens de alto valor. Os dados foram coletados em planilha Excel. RESULTADOS E DISCUSSÃO: Foram avaliadas 24 ATAS de CFT, em que foram selecionados temas voltados para farmacoeconomia. Do total, havia 5 pautas (21%) focadas no assunto: despadronização: 2 (40%): metoprolol 100 mg (tem de 50 mg), bosentana 62,5 mg (pertence ao Componente Especializado e o paciente já faz uso domiciliar e passa a ser orientado a trazer de casa), substituição: 1 (20%) sildenafila de 20 mg para 50 mg (preço unit de $12,20 para $0,49), inclusão de dosagem: 1 (20%) alteplase 10 mg ($491,19) sendo que o alteplase 50 mg custa $ 2.356,55 (dose depende do peso e havia desperdício) e inclusão de restrição 1 (20%): levosimendana ($4.900,00). Baseado no consumo anual, fizemos o cálculo de economia: metoprolol e bosentana ($4.373,37), sildenafila ($109.383,11), alteplase ($17.971,22), levosimendana ($ 88.200,00). Essa mudança não deixou o paciente desassistido, pois foi considerado substituições viáveis envolvendo o corpo clínico para adequação de prescrições médicas e apoio da Diretoria Clínica. CONCLUSÃO: Na busca de diminuir gastos com medicamentos sem afetar a assistência do paciente, a Comissão de Farmácia e Terapêutica possibilitou meios para economizar recurso orçamentário, promovendo reuniões extras com alguns setores estratégicos para demonstrar gastos com determinados itens e propor medidas que pudessem minimizar esse impacto financeiro. Houve uma compreensão e aceitação das áreas envolvidas. No montante, o hospital conseguiu economizar R$ 219.927,70. Financiamento e agradecimento: Aos membros da Comissão de Farmácia e Terapêutica que opinaram e sugeriram alternativas terapêuticas plausíveis.

Actualización 2022 de los indicadores para la calidad asistencial y la atención farmacéutica a las personas que viven con el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana / 2022 update of the indicators for quality of care and pharmaceutical care for people living with human immunodeficiency virus

Objetivo: actualizar y definir los indicadores para la mejora de la calidad asistencial y la atención farmacéutica a las personas que viven con infección por VIH en España. Método: el presente proyecto, que actualiza la versión anterior del documento de 2013, se desarrolló en 4 fases de trabajo realizadas entre enero y junio de 2022.En la fase 1, de organización, se creó un grupo de trabajo conformado por 7 especialistas en farmacia hospitalaria con amplia experiencia en atención farmacéutica y procedentes de distintos servicios del territorio nacional. Adicionalmente otros 34 especialistas, participaron en la valoración de los indicadores a través de 2 rondas de evaluación online para generación del consenso.Para la fase 2, inicialmente, se llevó a cabo una revisión bibliográfica con el objetivo de establecer una base a partir de la cual poder definir una propuesta de criterios de calidad e indicadores. A continuación, se realizó una propuesta preliminar de criterios y se establecieron revisiones para su ajuste en varias reuniones de trabajo telemáticas.En la fase 3 se estableció el consenso basado en la metodología de consenso Delphi-Rand/UCLA.Adicionalmente todos los indicadores clasificados como adecuados y necesarios fueron agrupados según 2 niveles de recomendación de monitorización, de manera que pueda orientar a los servicios en la prioridad de su medición: claves y avanzados.Por último, en la fase 4 se elaboró el documento final del proyecto, junto con las fichas descriptivas correspondientes para cada indicador con la finalidad de facilitar su medición y evaluación por parte de los servicios de farmacia hospitalaria. Resultados: se obtuvo un listado consensuado de ítems conformado por 79 indicadores adecuados y necesarios que permiten establecer un seguimiento y monitorización de la calidad y actividad de la atención farmacéutica a las personas que viven con VIH. De los mismos, 60 fueron establecidos como clave y 19 avanzados. Conclusiones: (AU)

Objective: To update and define indicators for improving the quality of care and pharmaceutical care for people living with HIV infection in Spain. Method: The present project, which updates the previous version of the 2013 document, was developed in four work phases carried out between January and June 2022.In phase 1, the organization phase, a working group was created, made up of seven hospital pharmacy specialists with extensive experience in pharmaceutical care and from different SFHs in Spain. In addition, another 34 specialists participated in the evaluation of the indicators through two rounds of online evaluation to generate consensus.For phase 2, initially, a review of the identified reference literature was carried out with the aim of establishing a basis from which to define a proposal for quality criteria and indicators. Then, a preliminary proposal of criteria was made and revisions were established for their adjustment in several telematic work meetings.In phase 3, consensus was established based on the Delphi-Rand/UCLA consensus methodology.In addition, all the indicators classified as appropriate and necessary were grouped according to two levels of monitoring recommendation, so as to guide the hospital pharmacy services in the priority of their measurement: key and advanced.Finally, in phase 4, the final project document was prepared, along with the corresponding descriptive sheets for each indicator in order to facilitate the measurement and evaluation of the indicators by the hospital pharmacy services. Results: Following the consensus methodology used, a list of items made up of 79 appropriate and necessary indicators was drawn up to establish a follow-up and monitoring of the quality and activity of pharmaceutical care for people living with HIV. Of these, 60 were established as key and 19 advanced. Conclusions ... (AU)

Evaluación de la implantación de prácticas seguras con los medicamentos en los Servicios de Medicina Intensiva / Assessment of the implementation of safe medication practices in Intensive Medicine Units

Objetivo Conocer el grado de implantación de las prácticas seguras con los medicamentos en los Servicios de Medicina Intensiva e identificar oportunidades de mejora. Diseño Estudio descriptivo multicéntrico. Ámbito Servicios de Medicina Intensiva. Participantes/procedimiento Cuarenta Servicios de Medicina Intensiva que voluntariamente cumplimentaron el «Cuestionario de autoevaluación de la seguridad del uso de los medicamentos en los Servicios de Medicina Intensiva» entre marzo y septiembre del 2020. El cuestionario contiene 147 ítems de evaluación agrupados en 10 elementos clave. Variables principales de interés Puntuación media y porcentaje medio sobre el valor máximo posible en el cuestionario completo, en los elementos clave y en los ítems de evaluación. Resultados La puntuación media del cuestionario completo en los Servicios de Medicina Intensiva fue de 436,8 (49,2% del valor máximo posible). No se encontraron diferencias según dependencia funcional, tamaño del hospital y tipo de servicio. Los elementos clave referentes a la incorporación de farmacéuticos en estos servicios, así como a la competencia y la formación de los profesionales en prácticas de seguridad, mostraron los valores más bajos (31,2% y 33,2%, respectivamente). Otros tres elementos clave relativos a la accesibilidad a la información sobre los pacientes y los medicamentos; a la estandarización, el almacenamiento y la distribución de los medicamentos, y a los programas de calidad y gestión de riesgos mostraron porcentajes inferiores al 50%. Conclusiones Se han identificado numerosas prácticas seguras efectivas cuyo grado de implantación en los Servicios de Medicina Intensiva es bajo y que es preciso abordar para reducir los errores de medicación en el paciente crítico (AU)

Objective To assess the level of implementation of medication safety practices in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) and to identify opportunities for improvement. Design A descriptive multicenter study was carried out. Setting Intensive Care Units. Participants/procedure A total of 40 ICUs voluntarily completed the “Medication use-system safety self-assessment for Intensive Care Units” between March and September 2020. The survey comprised 147 items for evaluation grouped into 10 key elements. Main variables Calculation was made of the mean scores and mean percentages based on the maximum possible values for the overall survey, for the key elements and for each individual item for evaluation. Results The mean score of the overall questionnaire among the participating ICUs was 436.8 (49.2% of the maximum possible score). No differences were found according to functional dependence, size of the hospital or type of ICU. The key elements referred to the incorporation of clinical pharmacists in these units, as well as the competence and training of the professionals in safety practices yielded the lowest values (31.2% and 33.2%, respectively). Three other key elements related to accessibility to information about patients and medicines; to the standardization, storage and distribution of medicines; and to the quality and risk management programs, yielded percentages below 50%. Conclusions Numerous effective safety medication practices have been identified with a low level of implementation in ICUs. This situation must be addressed in order to reduce medication errors in critically ill patients (AU)

Multi-center survey on the training status of staff working in pharmacy intravenous admixture services (PIVAS) in mainland China: Perspectives of PIVAS staff.

ABSTRACT: The technical level and comprehensive quality of pharmacy intravenous admixture services (PIVAS) staff are central to ensure the safety and effectiveness of intravenous infusions. However, these aspects are lacking in traditional pharmacy education. This study aimed to investigate the training status of staff working in PIVAS and explore factors that affected training status, which might contribute to the establishment of a comprehensive, standardized training system.A multi-center cross-sectional survey was conducted via a WeChat Group targeting PIVAS staff in hospitals to investigate the differences of current training status between different regions, hospital levels, genders, job titles, educational degrees, employment types, and working years.In total, 501 participants completed the questionnaires. The main contents of training for PIVAS staff included: professional theoretical knowledge (99.40%, 498/501), practical operation abilities (97.01%, 486/501), pre-job training (92.61%, 464/501), and standard operating procedures (90.22%, 452/501). The most common frequency of staff training was 1-2 times a month (51.9%, 260/501). Overall, 56.5% (283/501) of participants thought staff training was sufficient and 60.1% (301/501) of participants thought PIVAS attached importance to staff training. However, only 45.7% (229/501) of the participants were satisfied with the training modes.The contents of training for PIVAS staff in mainland China were relatively rich, but the aspects of management tools, comprehensive ability development, and career development planning tend to be relatively weak. It is necessary to develop training standards for PIVAS staff to improve employee capabilities and job satisfaction.

Time to review how injectable medicines are prepared and administered in European hospitals.

It has been known, for decades, that the use of injectable medicines in European hospitals has been associated with frequent medication errors, some of which cause preventable severe harms and deaths. There  have been national and European inquiries and reports concerning  improving patient safety by recommending greater use of pharmacy  aseptic preparation services and provision of ready-to administer  injectables, which have not been widely implemented.In England experience of treating patients with COVID-19 infections has  brought into focus other benefits of significantly extending pharmacy aseptic preparation services. These benefits include saving  nursing time, having systems in place which have resilience and capacity,  reducing variation in practice, improving clinical staff and patient  experience, and enabling more injectable medicines to be administered to  patients at home. It has also been recognised that more action is required  to standardise policies and procedures for injectable medicines and  mplement the use of smart infusion devices with dose error reduction  software, to help minimise drug administration errors.Hospital pharmacists have a key role in developing these services to bring  European hospitals more in line with those provided by hospital pharmacies in North America.

Desde hace décadas se conoce que el uso de los medicamentos  nyectables en los hospitales europeos se encuentra asociado a numerosos  errores de medicación, algunos de los cuales provocan daños graves y  muertes prevenibles. Se han publicado investigaciones e informes  nacionales y europeos sobre la mejora de la seguridad del paciente que  recomiendan una mayor utilización de las unidades de preparación  aséptica de los servicios de farmacia y la provisión de los medicamentos  inyectables listos para su administración, recomendaciones que apenas se  han implementado.En Inglaterra, la experiencia de tratar a los pacientes con infección por  COVID-19 ha puesto de manifiesto otros beneficios que conlleva la ampliación de las unidades de preparación aséptica de los servicios de farmacia. Estos beneficios incluyen ahorrar tiempo de enfermería,  disponer de sistemas con mayor resiliencia y capacidad, reducir la  variabilidad en la práctica, mejorar la satisfacción del personal clínico y del paciente, y facilitar la administración de más medicamentos inyectables a  los pacientes en sus domicilios. También se ha reconocido que se precisan  actuaciones dirigidas a estandarizar las directrices y procedimientos de  utilización de los medicamentos inyectables e implementar el uso de  dispositivos de infusión inteligentes con software de reducción de errores  de dosis, con el fin de minimizar los errores en la administración de estos  medicamentos. Los farmacéuticos de hospital tienen un papel clave en el desarrollo de  stas actividades para que los servicios que prestan las farmacias  hospitalarias europeas estén más en consonancia con los que se  proporcionan en Norteamérica.

Pharmacist-led, prescription intervention system-assisted feedback to reduce prescribing errors: A retrospective study.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Prescribing errors are prevalent in hospital settings, with provision of feedback recommended to support prescribing by doctors. To evaluate the impact of a pharmacist-led prescription intervention system on prescribing error rates and to measure intervention efficiency. METHODS: All prescribers in Shandong Provincial Third Hospital received feedback from ward pharmacists using a pharmacist-led prescription intervention system. The prescribing error rate was calculated from Oct 2019 to December 2020. After the intervention was applied, the rates of PASS 1 (System pass), PASS 2 (Pharmacist pass) and PASS 3 (Pharmacist-doctor pass) events and the feedback time were calculated each month. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Irrational use of drugs was reduced and the prescription rate increased significantly. The error rate reduced from 6.94% to 1.96%, representing an estimated 71.76% decrease overall (p < 0.05). The PASS 1 rate gradually increased from 88% to 96% (p < 0.05), the PASS 2 rate gradually decreased from 5.06% to 2.04% (p < 0.05), the PASS 3 rate gradually decreased from 6.94% to 1.96% (p < 0.05). WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The pharmacist-led prescription intervention system has the potential to reduce prescribing errors and improve prescribing outcomes and patient safety.

Impact of pharmacist involvement on medication safety in interprofessional transfer of care activity.

AIM: Any transition of patient care is a high-risk time for communication error. This paper explores whether the presence of a pharmacist as part of an interprofessional group provides additional benefit and safety in transitions of care. METHOD: Six pharmacy interns and newly qualified pharmacists joined participants from seven other health professional training programmes to take part in an interprofessional education activity. Participants were assigned to 24 mixed-professional groups. Each group was required to craft a discharge summary for the same simulated patient. Groups without a pharmacist were given additional written documentation, including medication reconciliation, discharge prescription and discharge recommendations. The 24 discharge summaries were assessed for any medication-related information, both positive and negative. Groups with a pharmacist (6) were compared with groups who did not have a pharmacist (18) for completeness and accuracy of medication management. RESULTS: An in-person pharmacist provided more thorough, comprehensive, accessible and accurate information for the community team (p=0.003). Although there was no difference in the absolute number of medication errors between the groups (p=0.057), the groups with a pharmacist showed a significant reduction in the severity of the errors (p=0.009). This result happened despite the groups without a pharmacist being provided with all the required medication information for safe transition of care. CONCLUSION: These findings support the case for greater involvement from a pharmacist in a patient's healthcare team, particularly for any transition of care. Healthcare teams that include a pharmacist are more likely to exceed minimum safety expectations and make less severe errors.

Multi-center investigation on personnel training and scientific research status of pharmacy intravenous admixture services (PIVAS) in mainland China based on the perspectives of PIVAS leaders.

ABSTRACT: We sought to analyze the current situation of personnel training and scientific research regarding pharmacy intravenous admixture services (PIVAS), to provide evidence-based medical knowledge to inform personnel training for PIVAS in mainland China.A cross-sectional survey was used to examine the current status of PIVAS personnel training, research capabilities, needs, and research output of PIVAS personnel based from the perspective of leaders in PIVAS in China. The survey period was from March to April 2019.A total of 137 hospitals in China participated in this survey. The main training content areas of PIVAS staff in each hospital were professional theoretical knowledge (100.00%, 137/137) and practical operation ability (98.54%, 135/137). The frequency of training was typically 1 to 2 times/month (56.9%, 78/137). The average duration of a single training session was typically 1 h or less (68.6%, 94/137). The most common forms of PIVAS training were lectures (94.89%, 130/137) and practical operations (79.56%, 109/137). A total of 51.8% (71/137) of PIVAS leaders believed that PIVAS personnel had a high degree of scientific research needs, but 61.3% (84/137) believed that few personnel had mastered scientific research methodology, and 41.6% (57/137) believed that the scientific research ability of personnel was relatively poor. Among PIVAS personnel, only 38.7% (53/137) had specialized scientific training. The annual total SCI output was 0 to 18 articles (median 0 articles) and the total number of national-level funding grants was 0 to 2 (median 0). There were no significant differences in the training of PIVAS personnel and scientific research between different provinces and hospital levels.The training content of PIVAS personnel in China was found to be relatively rich, but management tools, career development, and training in scientific research were found to be relatively weak, and the scientific research output was very low. It is necessary to build a comprehensive training system for career development among PIVAS personnel.

Alignment of diagnosis and pharmacy claims data coding of medication adherence among patients with diabetes or hypertension.

BACKGROUND: ICD-10-CM codes exist that facilitate provider designation of patients as "nonadherent to therapy"; however, it is unclear whether this label accurately reflects patient behavior according to widely accepted medication adherence metrics using pharmacy claims data. OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent to which patients are accurately coded for and have calculated rates of nonadherence using ICD-10-CM codes and claims, respectively. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using commercial insurance and Medicare Advantage claims data from 2015 to 2016. The analysis focused on adults aged 18 years and older who had been diagnosed with and were being treated for hypertension and/or diabetes and had been coded as nonadherent by a provider during an outpatient encounter. Adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC]) to oral antihypertensive and/or antidiabetic therapy was calculated 6 months before and after the first nonadherence diagnosis identified in outpatient encounters, using 2 distinct calculation methods. Inferential statistics and multivariable logistic regression were used to determine predictors of coding agreement and changes in adherence after the nonadherence diagnosis controlling for available patient characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 1,142 patients who had been coded as nonadherent were identified, of which between 5.3% and 22.0% (depending on metric and condition) had PDCs before the nonadherence code deeming them adherent according to claims, conflicting with nonadherence diagnosis codes documented by their providers. Mean PDCs increased significantly (20.5%-24.3%, all P < 0.001) among both conditions following the nonadherent code, as did the proportion adherent (PDC > 80%), irrespective of disease (all P < 0.01). The odds of being correctly labeled nonadherent according to claims decreased with age (diabetes odds ratio [OR]: 0.82, 95% CI = 0.694-0.976; hypertension OR: 0.86, 95% CI = 0.773-0.944) but were higher among those taking more medications (diabetes OR: 2.97, 95% CI = 1.658-5.326; hypertension OR: 3.0, 95% CI = 2.095-4.305). Following the nonadherence coding, the odds of being adherent increased with age in both models (diabetes OR: 1.17, 95% CI = 1.012-1.363; hypertension OR: 1.13, 95% CI = 1.048-1.223) yet decreased with increasing medications (diabetes OR: 0.25, 95% CI = 0.138-0.468; hypertension OR: 0.47, 95% CI = 0.368-0.592) and were lower if the patient was observed to be nonadherent before the index encounter (diabetes OR: 0.33, 95% CI = 0.146-0.760; hypertension OR: 0.25, 95% CI = 0.152-0.423). CONCLUSIONS: In general, providers are properly classifying patients as nonadherent using ICD-10-CM codes, but additional assessment is needed to determine the reasons for the remaining mismatch between claims- and diagnosis-based nonadherence. In addition, the correct claims-based metric needs to be established to improve alignment with provider interpretation of patient medication use. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. Gatwood reports grants from GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Co., and AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. Kovesdy reports consulting fees from Amgen, Sanofi, Fresenius Medical Care, Keryx, Bayer, Abbott, Abbvie, Dr. Schar, Astra-Zeneca, Takeda, Tricida, and Reata and grants from Shire, outside the submitted work. The other authors have nothing to disclose. Findings described in this article were presented as a poster at the American College of Clinical Pharmacy Annual Meeting in New York City, October 2019.

Developing statewide remdesivir use criteria.

PURPOSE: This report describes our process of 4 health systems coming together to agree on standard use criteria for remdesivir as a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment for patients in Utah. We hope our process provides a framework for remdesivir use in other states and insights on future use of other therapeutic agents that may also be in short supply, such as vaccines and monoclonal antibodies. SUMMARY: Emergency use authorization (EUA) criteria for COVID-19 treatments often allow for broad use of a treatment relative to limited supplies. Without national criteria, each health system must develop further rationing criteria. Health systems in Utah worked together as part of the state's crisis standards of care workgroup to develop a framework for how to limit the EUA criteria for remdesivir to match available supplies. The 4 largest health systems were represented by infectious diseases specialists, chief medical officers, and pharmacists. The group met several times online and communicated via email over a 9-day period to develop the criteria. The clinicians agreed to use this framework to develop criteria for future therapeutics such as monoclonal antibodies. CONCLUSION: The unique collaboration of the 4 health systems in Utah led to statewide criteria for use of remdesivir for patients with COVID-19, ensuring similar access to this limited resource for all patients in Utah.

Clinical pharmacy interventions in intensive care unit patients.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: The drug therapy of critically ill patients requires intensive evaluation and management due to their severity of illness. These patients often require complex medication regimens. This study analysed the pharmaceutical care provided by clinical pharmacists (CPs) in a single medical centre in Taiwan. In addition, we explored the drug-related problems (DRPs) experienced by patients in intensive care units (ICUs) to determine how to improve the quality and safety of drug therapy. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted from February 2019 to January 2020. The CPs implemented Taiwan's National Health Insurance (NHI) Scheme for Improving Hospital Drug Safety and Quality programme to improve the safety and quality of drug therapy. The CPs included in the study had at least 2 years' clinical experience and had participated in an ICU team for at least 6 consecutive months. They provided individualized drug treatment evaluation and intervention. Content of care was documented in the Clinical Pharmacy Service Record. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: A total of 4374 pharmacy care records were evaluated by 12 CPs. The major category of ICU pharmaceutical care was medication reconciliation (n = 2938; 67.2%). Most of the medication interventions were for errors in dosing or dosing frequency (n = 218; 55.8%). Patients with renal dysfunction required more pharmaceutical interventions than did patients with normal renal function (odds ratio = 1.63; 95% confidence interval 1.31-2.01). The main interventions were related to antimicrobial agents (n = 386; 81.3%). During the study period, 99.2% of interventions were accepted and 90.8% were changed within 24 hours. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Increased pharmaceutical interventions for patients with renal dysfunction compared with patients with normal renal function were observed. Most cases of inappropriate frequency of dosing or dosing of antimicrobial agents required intervention.

Impact of interventions targeting the inappropriate use of proton-pump inhibitors by clinical pharmacists in a hepatobiliary surgery department.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: At present, studies on the usage of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) have universal significance. In clinical practice, PPIs are widely used to treat a variety of acid-related diseases, but they can be inappropriately prescribed, leading to increased medical costs and patient harm. The study comprehensively evaluated the clinical effects of a clinical pharmacist intervention on inappropriate PPI prescriptions in a tertiary general hospital hepatobiliary surgery ward. METHODS: A retrospective, single-centre intervention study covering the periods of July-December 2018 and July-December 2019 was conducted. In the intervention group, clinical pharmaceutical care was initiated by a clinical pharmacist in the hepatobiliary surgery ward. Outcomes, including the clinical pattern of PPI utilization, the rate of inappropriate PPI use and safety outcomes, were compared between the two periods. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: In total, 1150 patients were admitted to the hepatobiliary surgery ward in our hospital in the study periods. Of these, 717 patients met the inclusion criteria for this study, and 420 and 297 patients were included in the preintervention and post-intervention groups, respectively. The PPI utilization rates before and after the intervention were 82.0% and 55.0%, respectively. The rates of inappropriate PPI use before and after the intervention were 48.9 and 22.7 per 100 patient-days, respectively. Clinical safety outcomes were nearly identical between before and after the intervention, but patients treated with PPIs were more likely to experience nosocomial pneumonia (2.4% vs. 0.6%). WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The implementation of a clinical pharmacist intervention for PPI use decreased inappropriate PPI use during hospitalization without sacrificing clinical safety outcomes.