Direct patient care services by community and ambulatory care pharmacists in Idaho

2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (6) ◽  
pp. 1480-1489
Author(s):  
Elaine Nguyen ◽  
John T. Holmes ◽  
Radhika Narsinghani ◽  
Shanna O’Connor ◽  
Matthew W. Fuit ◽  
...  
2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (6) ◽  
pp. 642-648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer L. Rodis ◽  
Timothy R. Ulbrich ◽  
Brandon T. Jennings ◽  
Betsy M. Elswick ◽  
Rebekah Jackowski McKinley

2013 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 307-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Cawley ◽  
Jean Moon ◽  
Jennifer Reinhold ◽  
Vincent J. Willey ◽  
William J. Warning

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amie Jo Digatono

Objective: To describe Medication Therapy Management (MTM) services in Minnesota, quantifying how many patient encounters occur per week and compiling provider and practice site characteristics. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Minnesota practice sites surveyed in June and July 2010. Participants: MTM providers in Minnesota who are registered users of the Assurance™ documentation system or are members of the Minnesota Pharmacists Association MTM Academy. Intervention: Self-administered online questionnaire completed by study participants. Main Outcome Measures: The number of patient encounters per week, practice site location, practitioner length of time as a MTM service provider, and the motivating factors for providing direct patient care services. Results: There were 56 respondents, reporting a median of 5 MTM patient encounters per week (range 0 to 35) and a median length of service of 4 years (range15). Clinic-based practices were reported by 66% of providers and community pharmacy-based practices by 30%. Eighty-five percent practice in an urban setting, 9% in a large rural town and 6% in a small rural town. Nearly half (46%) of providers are the sole practitioner at their site. The most commonly cited motivation for providing direct patient care services was to improve patient outcomes. Conclusion: MTM service providers in Minnesota were more likely to report practicing in an urban area and in a clinic. Many practices were low-volume or newly established, with half of all respondents reporting 5 or fewer MTM patient encounters per week and a length of service of four years or less. Type: Student Project


2000 ◽  
Vol 57 (21) ◽  
pp. 1994-1996 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie A. Chisholm ◽  
Leslie J. Vollenweider ◽  
Laura L. Mulloy ◽  
Muralidharan Jagadeesan ◽  
William E. Wade ◽  
...  

2000 ◽  
Vol 57 (17) ◽  
pp. 1599-1601 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie A. Chisholm ◽  
Leslie J. Vollenweider ◽  
Laura L. Mulloy ◽  
Muralidharan Jagadeesan ◽  
William E. Wade ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 4
Author(s):  
AK Mohiuddin

Ambulatory care pharmacy practice is defined as the provision of integrated, accessible healthcare services by pharmacists who are accountable for addressing medication needs, developing sustained partnerships with patients, and practicing in the context of family and community. This is accomplished through direct patient care and medication management for ambulatory patients, long-term relationships, coordination of care, patient advocacy, wellness and health promotion, triage and referral, and patient education and self-management. The ambulatory care pharmacists may work in both an institutional and community-based clinic involved in direct care of a diverse patient population. A variety of specialty clinics are available for allergy and immunology, pulmonology, endocrinology, cardiology, nephrology, neurology, behavioral health, and infectious disease. Such services for this population may exist as a primary care clinic or an independent specialty clinic, typically in a PCMH, which is instrumental in coordinating care between various providers. Once a practice site is identified, it is important to establish a strong, trusting, and mutually beneficial relationship with the various decision-makers (e.g., administrators, providers) involved with the clinic. If pharmacy services are currently in existence, the pharmacy director may be able to identify and initially contact the appropriate person. If another pharmacist is providing clinical services, this person would be a resource to help determine areas for expansion of patient care and to whom to direct the proposed business plan. Additional individuals to consider as an initial point of contact include the clinic manager, clinic medical director, or administrative assistant to either of these persons. If the clinic setting is affiliated with a medical school, it may be necessary to contact the Department of Family Medicine head.   Article Type: Commentary  


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s27-s28
Author(s):  
Gita Nadimpalli ◽  
Lisa Pineles ◽  
Karly Lebherz ◽  
J. Kristie Johnson ◽  
David Calfee ◽  
...  

Background: Estimates of contamination of healthcare personnel (HCP) gloves and gowns with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) following interactions with colonized or infected patients range from 17% to 20%. Most studies were conducted in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting where patients had a recent positive clinical culture. The aim of this study was to determine the rate of MRSA transmission to HCP gloves and gown in non-ICU acute-care hospital units and to identify associated risk factors. Methods: Patients on contact precautions with history of MRSA colonization or infection admitted to non-ICU settings were randomly selected from electronic health records. We observed patient care activities and cultured the gloves and gowns of 10 HCP interactions per patient prior to doffing. Cultures from patients’ anterior nares, chest, antecubital fossa and perianal area were collected to quantify bacterial bioburden. Bacterial counts were log transformed. Results: We observed 55 patients (Fig. 1), and 517 HCP–patient interactions. Of the HCP–patient interactions, 16 (3.1%) led to MRSA contamination of HCP gloves, 18 (3.5%) led to contamination of HCP gown, and 28 (5.4%) led to contamination of either gloves or gown. In addition, 5 (12.8%) patients had a positive clinical or surveillance culture for MRSA in the prior 7 days. Nurses, physicians and technicians were grouped in “direct patient care”, and rest of the HCPs were included in “no direct care group.” Of 404 interactions, 26 (6.4%) of providers in the “direct patient care” group showed transmission of MRSA to gloves or gown in comparison to 2 of 113 (1.8%) interactions involving providers in the “no direct patient care” group (P = .05) (Fig. 2). The median MRSA bioburden was 0 log 10CFU/mL in the nares (range, 0–3.6), perianal region (range, 0–3.5), the arm skin (range, 0-0.3), and the chest skin (range, 0–6.2). Detectable bioburden on patients was negatively correlated with the time since placed on contact precautions (rs= −0.06; P < .001). Of 97 observations with detectable bacterial bioburden at any site, 9 (9.3%) resulted in transmission of MRSA to HCP in comparison to 11 (3.6%) of 310 observations with no detectable bioburden at all sites (P = .03). Conclusions: Transmission of MRSA to gloves or gowns of HCP caring for patients on contact precautions for MRSA in non-ICU settings was lower than in the ICU setting. More evidence is needed to help guide the optimal use of contact precautions for the right patient, in the right setting, for the right type of encounter.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document