Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Increasing the number of pharmacist-led medication order reviews using the available workforce: a retrospective study
  1. Elsa Reallon1,
  2. Anne-Laure Yailian1,2,
  3. Carole Paillet1,
  4. Audrey Janoly-Dumenil1,2
  1. 1Pharmacy Department, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, France
  2. 2UR 4129 Parcours Santé Systémique, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Lyon, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, France
  1. Correspondence to Elsa Reallon, Pharmacy department Edouard Herriot hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon 69003, France; elsa.reallon{at}


Background Due to staffing constraints, several hospitals have defined targeting strategies for pharmacist-led medication order review, leaving non-targeted patients exposed to potential harmful drug-related problems (DRPs). Using targeting criteria to stratify medication order review level (level 1 (L1): orders, basic patient characteristics; level 2 (L2) or comprehensive medication order review: orders, patient characteristics, medical records, laboratory results) could make it possible to save time and increase the overall number of medication order reviews. This study aims to define targeting criteria to stratify medication order review level and estimate the time saved for the performance of additional medication order reviews.

Method This retrospective single-centre study included all medication order reviews performed in 2020; DRPs were collected to assess the medication order review level required to detect them. Logistic regressions were performed to define patient characteristics associated with L2. These targeting criteria were applied to the cohort to estimate the time saved and the number of additional medication order reviews which could have been performed using this approach.

Results 2478 DRPs were reported; 54.2% (1343/2748) could have been detected using an L1 medication order review (representing 48.2% of the patients (829/1721)). L2 medication order reviews were significantly associated with age ≥65 years, male, and renal clearance <60 mL/min (OR≥75yo=1.79; OR65–74yo=1.74; ORfemale=0.74; OR30–59mL/min=1.67; OR<30mL/min=2.62; p<0.05). Sex being a confounding factor, only age and renal clearance were used as targeting criteria. The time saved was estimated at 274 hours per year, leading to an additional 1720 medication order reviews (54 hospital beds).

Conclusion The proposed approach would maintain a satisfying level of safety and quality for patients, by performing an L2 medication order review for targeted patients based on age and renal clearance, while improving medication order review coverage with an L1 medication order review for non-targeted patients, using the available workforce.

  • drug monitoring
  • pharmacy service, hospital
  • drug-related side effects and adverse reactions
  • health care rationing
  • quality of health care

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request.

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.