scholarly journals Targeted and Tailored Pharmacist-led Medication Reviews

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Stijn Crutzen
Keyword(s):  
2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Casey E. Gallimore ◽  
Dimmy Sokhal ◽  
Elizabeth Zeidler Schreiter ◽  
Amanda R. Margolis

Author(s):  
Kaeshaelya Thiruchelvam ◽  
Julie Byles ◽  
Syed Shahzad Hasan ◽  
Therese Kairuz
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 950-962 ◽  
Author(s):  
Domenica Disalvo ◽  
Tim Luckett ◽  
Alexandra Bennett ◽  
Patricia Davidson ◽  
Meera Agar

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. iii1-iii16
Author(s):  
Claire Kavanagh ◽  
Eimear O'Dwyer ◽  
Róisín Purcell ◽  
Niamh McMahon ◽  
Morgan Crowe ◽  
...  

Abstract Background This study assessed the pharmacist role in an 80 bed residential care unit by: Quantifying the number and type of pharmacist interventions made and their acceptance rate.Assessing impact of pharmacist interventions on patient care.Assessing staff attitudes towards the clinical pharmacist service. Methods This was a non-blinded, non-comparative evaluation of the existing clinical pharmacist service in the unit. All residents were included. All pharmacist interventions over a 10-week period were recorded, then graded according to the Eadon scale1 by a consultant gerontologist and an experienced pharmacist to assess their impact on patient care. Results There were 615 pharmacist interventions. The most common interventions were: Drug Therapy Review, 34% (n=209) Technical Prescription, 26.5% (n=163) Administration, 15.3% (n=94) Drug Interaction, 10.4% (n=64) Medication Reconciliation, 8.5% (n=52) 98% (n=596) of interventions were rated as having significance to patient care, of which: 48.4% (n=298) and 41.8% (n=257) of the interventions rated as ‘significant and resulting in an improvement in the standard of care’1% (n=6) and 0.5% (n=3) rated as ‘very significant and preventing harm’. There was a statistically significant agreement between the evaluators, κw = 0.231 (95% CI, 0.156 to 0.307), p < .0005. The strength of agreement was fair. Of interventions requiring acceptance by medical team (n=335), 89.9% (n=301) were accepted. 95% (n=36) of staff who responded agreed or strongly agreed that improved patient safety resulted from the pharmacist’s involvement in multidisciplinary medication reviews. Over 92% (n=35) agreed or strongly agreed that their experience of the pharmacist was positive. Conclusion The pharmacist has an important role in our residential care unit. Their involvement in the medicines optimisation process positively impacts patient outcomes and prevents harm. Staff perceived a positive impact of the clinical pharmacist service provided on patient care and patient safety.


2018 ◽  
Vol 58 (6) ◽  
pp. 659-666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christa E. Tetuan ◽  
Kendall D. Guthrie ◽  
Steven C. Stoner ◽  
Justin R. May ◽  
D. Matthew Hartwig ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Patricia McCormick ◽  
Bridget Coleman ◽  
Ian Bates

AbstractBackground Medication reviews are recognised as essential to tackling problematic polypharmacy. Domiciliary medication reviews (DMRs) have become more prevalent in recent years. They are proclaimed as being patient-centric but published literature mainly focuses on clinical outcomes. However, it is not known where the value of DMRs lies for patients who participate in them. Objective To determine the value of domiciliary medication reviews to service users. Setting Interviews took place with recipients of domiciliary medication reviews residing in the London boroughs of Islington and Haringey. Method Semi-structured interviews analysed using thematic analysis. Main outcome measure Themes and sub-themes identified from interview transcripts. Results Five themes were identified: advantages over traditional settings, attributes of the professional, adherence, levels of engagement and knowledge. Conclusion For many patients, the domiciliary setting is preferred to traditional healthcare settings. Patients appreciated the time spent with them during a DMR and felt listened to. Informal carers felt reassured that the individual medication needs of their relative had been reviewed by an expert.


2022 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-43
Author(s):  
Makayla W. Nelson ◽  
Tara N. Downs ◽  
Gina M. Puglisi ◽  
Brent A. Simpkins ◽  
Amy Schmelzer Collier

Objective: To pilot the VIONE approach in a single Primary Care Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT). The authors aim for the Clinical Pharmacy Specialist (CPS) to perform 20 comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) and the pilot PACT physician (PCP) to complete 200 VIONE discontinuations. Cost avoidance and CPS recommendations will also be analyzed. Polypharmacy is associated with increased risk of adverse drug events, falls, hospitalizations, and death. VIONE is a deprescribing tool that assists providers in identifying inappropriate medications. Design: Quality Improvement Setting: Single VA Health Care System (VAHCS) Participants: High-risk veterans in pilot PACT Interventions: The CPS educated the PCP regarding VIONE methodology and assisted with CMRs. When deprescribing was warranted, VIONE discontinuation reasons were selected in the Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS). Data were electronically stored in a national dashboard. Results: The authors identified 231 veterans at risk for polypharmacy-related adverse events. The PCP and CPS were able to reach 99 veterans and make 136 medication discontinuations between September 1, 2019, and March 1, 2020. The CPS performed 20 CMRs, resulting in 90 deprescribing recommendations. Thirty-eight CPS recommendations were accepted and contributed $18,835.95 to the sum annualized cost avoidance of $21,904.80. Conclusion: The VIONE methodology was successfully implemented in the pilot PACT. The utilization of the CPS was associated with an increased average number of medication discontinuations per veteran and contributed to cost avoidance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document