Article Text

Download PDFPDF

4CPS-014 Clinical relevance of pharmacists’ interventions in the acute ward
  1. M Pavelics von Hallas,
  2. TR Andersen
  1. Region Zealand Hospital Pharmacy, Clinical Pharmacy, Roskilde, Denmark


Background and importance Clinical pharmacists assist physicians in the medication process when performing Clinical Pharmacist Services. Clinical pharmacist interventions (PI) to medication-related problems are conveyed to the physician though pharmacist notes in the patient record. The attending physician will accept and act on the interventions found to be clinically relevant. Previous studies have measured the acceptance rate of PI, and found varying rates from low to high, but not always reflecting on the reason for the resulting rates.

Aim and objectives The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical relevance of the PI assessed by the attending physician.

Material and methods Clinical pharmacists at acute wards in Region Zealand, Denmark perform Clinical Pharmacy Services including medication history, medication reconciliation and medication review.1 Data for this study were collected during the period January–February 2020. After concluding the pharmacist note in the patient record, the written interventions were copied to a separate sheet of paper, excluding patient- or physician-specific data. The attending physician was asked to assess each intervention for clinical relevance/significance using the Eadon score.2 The Eadon classification ranges from 1 (Intervention is harmful to the patient’s well-being) to 6 (Intervention is potentially life-saving). The physician made the assessment in private and returned the sheet in a sealed mailbox for later analysis. The analysis took place after the end of data collection to avoid affecting the PI during the project period. At the end of the study period, the mailbox was opened and data manually transferred to Microsoft Excel for descriptive statistics.

Results A total of 50 PI were assessed. None of the interventions were considered harmful to the patient, while 6 of the interventions (12%) were assessed as insignificant in relation to the patient’s current treatment. The majority of the interventions (64%) were assigned an Eadon score of 4–6, interpreted as significant (40%), very significant (12%) or potentially life-saving (12%).

Conclusion and relevance In general, clinical pharmacists’ interventions were well accepted by physicians, who classified 64% of interventions as resulting in better treatment, prevention of major organ failure, or potentially life-saving, interpreted as clinically relevant.

References and/or acknowledgements 1. Int J Clin Pharmacy 35 (6):1137–1151.

2. Int J Pharmacy Practice 1 (3):145–147.

PCNE Classification for Drug-Related Problems V9.1.

Conflict of interest No conflict of interest

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.