RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Hospital pharmacist interventions in a central hospital
JF European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy
JO Eur J Hosp Pharm
FD British Medical Journal Publishing Group
SP 94
OP 97
DO 10.1136/ejhpharm-2014-000491
VO 22
IS 2
A1 Falcão, Fátima
A1 Viegas, Erica
A1 Lopes, Carla
A1 Branco, Rita
A1 Parrinha, Ana
A1 Alves, Marina Lobo
A1 Leal, Filipa
A1 Pina, Vanessa
A1 Madureira, Brenda
A1 Cavaco, Patrícia
A1 Santos, Sofia
A1 Carreira, Sandra
YR 2015
UL http://ejhp.bmj.com/content/22/2/94.abstract
AB Objective The aim of this study is to describe and categorise pharmacist interventions (PIs) in a central hospital and report acceptance rates by physicians. Methods A retrospective study was carried out in a 350-bed central hospital between January and June 2013. Eleven pharmacists screened the pharmacotherapy charts for drug-related problems leading to PIs. The recommendations resulting from this analysis were entered in the electronic prescribing system. All the PIs registered on the electronic medical record system during the study period were eligible for inclusion. Interventions were quantified and characterised. Computer records were consulted to assess acceptance rate by physicians. Results A total of 1249 PIs were made by 11 pharmacists, and covered 147 drugs, with the most common being antibacterial (25%) and for the central nervous system (24%) and cardiovascular system (18%). Of the 1249 PIs, 18% concerned acetaminophen, 13% enoxaparin and 10% amoxicillin/clavulanic acid. The PIs were classified into three main categories: drug, dosage and administration related. When we analysed the most relevant PI type (n>20), the highest acceptance rate was for dosage adjustment according to therapeutic indication (58.1%) and renal function (57.4%). The global rate of acceptance was 53%. Conclusions Pharmacists’ recommendations entered in the electronic prescribing system with a short explanation, as well as the pharmacotherapy recommendation, are immediately available to the doctor; however, the relatively low acceptance rate suggests that a further study also evaluating verbal interventions is needed, since the most urgent recommendations are made verbally, and this would likely increase the acceptance rate.