A Comparison of Retrospective and Concurrent Drug Utilization Review of Omeprazole

1998 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 202-208
Author(s):  
Isabelle Chabot ◽  
Johanne Morin ◽  
Kateri Bourbeau ◽  
Jocelyne Moisan

Objective: To compare the appropriateness of omeprazole prescriptions in a concurrent drug utilization review (DUR) with the assessed appropriateness of a retrospective DUR. Methods: A retrospective DUR of omeprazole was conducted on prescriptions written from August 23, 1993, to October 8, 1993, in a 340-bed university hospital. This DUR served as a baseline for a concurrent DUR that began on January 27, 1995, and ended on March 16, 1995. The concurrent DUR integrated three steps aimed at improving the quality of omeprazole use: Approval of the criteria by the pharmacology and therapeutics committee of the hospital, distribution of a drug bulletin to all physicians, and a pharmacist's verbal recommendations to physicians whose prescriptions did not meet explicit criteria. Results: Twenty-nine and 64 prescriptions were reviewed in the retrospective and concurrent DURs, respectively. During the concurrent DUR, the pharmacist made 34 verbal recommendations. Of these, 25 (74%) were agreed to by the prescribers. In comparison with the retrospective DUR, the percentage of prescriptions meeting the criteria of indication, combination therapy, and dosage went from 38% to 75% (p < 0.05), from 76% to 95% (p < 0.05), and from 83% to 100% (p > 0.05), respectively, during the concurrent DUR. Conclusions: The concurrent DUR appeared to successfully improve the quality of omeprazole utilization in the hospital.

1982 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. 930-934 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis K. Helling ◽  
G. Joseph Norwood ◽  
John D. Donner

Drug utilization review screening criteria were applied to a sample of 30000 prescriptions written by Iowa physicians. Characteristics of the physicians who had high percentages of prescriptions violating the explicit criteria were examined. It was found that the proportion of prescriptions failing the screening criteria did not differ significantly among physicians of differing board certification groups, medical school of graduation, year of graduation from medical school, age, or size of town where the physicians practiced. Regardless of the physicians' demographic characteristics, approximately 50 percent of their prescriptions violated the prescribing criteria. The three categories of screening criteria included irrational mixture, quantity prescribed, and daily dosage. An analysis of the relationship between physician ratings obtained for each of the categories revealed that no relationship existed between a physician's quantity prescribed rating and daily dosage rating, or between a physician's irrational mixture rating and daily dosage rating. A negative relationship was found between a physician's quantity prescribed rating and irrational mixture rating. This tends to indicate that the three categories measure different prescribing patterns and each warrants respective monitoring by pharmacists.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 520-525
Author(s):  
Vasudha Gupta ◽  
Jamie Woodyard ◽  
Kimberley Begley ◽  
Stacey Curtis ◽  
Deanna Tran

1994 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 181-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Petit ◽  
J. -P. Delporte ◽  
M. Ansseau ◽  
A. Albert ◽  
F. Jeusette

2004 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas R. Fulda ◽  
Ted Collins ◽  
Julie Kuhle ◽  
Debra S. Devereaux ◽  
Ilene H. Zuckerman

DICP ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-86
Author(s):  
William F. Mcghan ◽  
J. Lyle Bootman ◽  
Raymond J. Townsend ◽  
Morton P. Goldman

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document