Effects of a nurse-based heart failure clinic on drug utilization and admissions in a community hospital setting

2005 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 199-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mogens K. Andersen ◽  
John D. Markenvard ◽  
Hanne Schjøtt ◽  
Hanne L. Nielsen ◽  
Finn Gustafsson
2007 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. S154-S155
Author(s):  
Rahul Jain ◽  
Uday Nanavaty ◽  
Haneen Aibak ◽  
Allison Sweny ◽  
Jyothi Punnam ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 9-10
Author(s):  
R JAIN ◽  
A EVENSON ◽  
R JAIN ◽  
U NANAVATY ◽  
J PUNNAM ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp18X696713
Author(s):  
David Seamark ◽  
Deborah Davidson ◽  
Helen Tucker ◽  
Angela Ellis-Paine ◽  
Jon Glasby

BackgroundIn 2000 20% of UK GPs had admitting rights to community hospitals. In subsequent years the number of GPs engaged in community hospital clinical care has decreased.AimWhat models of medical care exist in English community hospitals today and what factors are driving changes?MethodInterviews with community hospital clinical staff conducted as part of a multimethod study of the community value of community hospitals.ResultsSeventeen interviews were conducted and two different models of medical care observed: GP led and Trust employed doctors. Factors driving changes were GP workload and recruitment challenges; increased medical acuity of patients admitted; fewer local patients being admitted; frustration over the move from ‘step-up’ care from the local community to ‘step-down’ care from acute hospitals; increased burden of GP medical support; inadequate remuneration; and GP admission rights removed due to bed closures or GP practices withdrawing from community hospital work.ConclusionMultiple factors have driven changes in the role of GP community hospital clinicians with a consequent loss of GP generalist skills in the community hospital setting. The NHS needs to develop a focused strategy if GPs are to remain engaged with community hospital care.


2021 ◽  
pp. 193229682110025
Author(s):  
Urooj Najmi ◽  
Waqas Zia Haque ◽  
Umair Ansari ◽  
Eyerusalem Yemane ◽  
Lee Ann Alexander ◽  
...  

Background: Insulin pen injectors (“pens”) are intended to facilitate a patient’s self-administration of insulin and can be used in hospitalized patients as a learning opportunity. Unnecessary or duplicate dispensation of insulin pens is associated with increased healthcare costs. Methods: Inpatient dispensation of insulin pens in a 240-bed community hospital between July 2018 and July 2019 was analyzed. We calculated the percentage of insulin pens unnecessarily dispensed for patients who had the same type of insulin pen assigned. The estimated cost of insulin pen waste was calculated. A pharmacist-led task force group implemented hospital-wide awareness and collaborated with hospital leadership to define goals and interventions. Results: 9516 insulin pens were dispensed to 3121 patients. Of the pens dispensed, 6451 (68%) were insulin aspart and 3065 (32%) were glargine. Among patients on insulin aspart, an average of 2.2 aspart pens was dispensed per patient, but only an estimated 1.2 pens/patient were deemed necessary. Similarly, for inpatients prescribed glargine, an average of 2.1 pens/patient was dispensed, but only 1.3 pens/patient were necessary. A number of gaps were identified and interventions were undertaken to reduce insulin pen waste, which resulted in a significant decrease in both aspart (p = 0.0002) and glargine (p = 0.0005) pens/patient over time. Reductions in pen waste resulted in an estimated cost savings of $66 261 per year. Conclusions: In a community hospital setting, identification of causes leading to unnecessary insulin dispensation and implementation of hospital-wide staff education led to change in insulin pen dispensation practice. These changes translated into considerable cost savings and facilitated diabetes self-management education.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document