Integrating psychiatric PharmD services into an emergency department psychiatry team

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 279-282
Author(s):  
Amy M. VandenBerg ◽  
Diana Mullis

Typical services for psychiatric pharmacists include inpatient psychiatry units and outpatient psychiatry clinics. An increasingly common portal of entry to psychiatric hospitals, however, is the emergency department (ED). We describe a new clinical pharmacy service for psychiatric patients in the ED at our institution.

Author(s):  
Ashraf ElMalik ◽  
Rawan Khalil Salemeh ◽  
Asmaa Mohamed ◽  
Shahzad Anwer ◽  
Mona Al Bakri

Background: Throughout COVID-19, complex therapeutics and medication protocols left clinicians overwhelmed by contradicting information leading to drug-related problems (DRPs) potentially leading to ineffective pharmacotherapy and drug-related morbidity and mortality. DRPs queries are time consuming, utilize numerous resources, and require skills and experience to provide accurate answers. Quick answers are paramount in the Emergency Department (ED) especially during a pandemic period. Clinical pharmacists (CP) can identify and resolve DRPs but are only available in the ED during daytime hours. We set up an out-of-office CP service for ED DRPs. This study aimed to assess the capacity of the service to capture 100% of calls received and to measure the time taken to resolve DRP queries compared to the international standard. Methods: A dedicated ED CP on-call phone line and rota until 10 pm daily was arranged by the Hamad General Hospital Pharmacy (Doha, Qatar). Data was documented in a logbook and within the Electronic Medical Records (EMR) and analysed using predefined parameters. Results: Between March-September 2020, 133 DRPs calls were received and resolved by a CP. 38% were related to drug interaction/safety (often about medications used in COVID-19 treatment protocols), adverse drug reactions, dose-adjustments, drug allergies and drug in pregnancy. 30% were about medication administration, such as infusion rates, titration, and intravenous compatibility. Those questions were mostly from nurses. Appropriate dose selection and appropriate indication represented 21% and 11% respectively . Caller's acceptance rate to responses provided by CP was 100%. Responses were documented in the patients’ EMR. The call-history-log showed an average duration of 4.66 minutes per call which is below the average standard of 15-30 minutes. Conclusion: The availability of clinical pharmacists to provide quick, acceptable, responses to DRPs queries is crucial given the complexity and diversity of ED patients. During COVID-19, an on-call clinical pharmacy service has proven its capability to resolve DRPs and support the clinical decision-making process in a relatively short time.


2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola Lombardi ◽  
Li Wei ◽  
Maisoon Ghaleb ◽  
Enrico Pasut ◽  
Silvia Leschiutta ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. iii17-iii65
Author(s):  
Ciara McGann ◽  
Bernie Love ◽  
James Carr ◽  
Marie O'Connor ◽  
Eamon Dolan

Abstract Background Intensive clinical pharmacy input from admission to discharge has been shown to improve patient outcomes. The clinical pharmacy service in our institution has historically been under-resourced. The aim of this study is to develop a ward-based clinical pharmacy service and to evaluate its impact using a number of clinical, safety and financial metrics. Methods A clinical pharmacist was assigned to provide pharmaceutical care to patients on a Medicine for the Older Person ward. Over an eight week period, the pharmacist prospectively recorded her interventions/activities. To assess impact on patient care, interventions were graded according to the Eadon criteria. The potential cost avoidance associated with interventions was estimated. Medication incident reporting was analysed to assess the impact on patient safety. Results 87% of patients had at least one pharmacist intervention, across a spectrum of activities including medication reconciliation and clinical review. 90% of interventions requiring follow-up with the medical team were accepted and resulted in a change to patient’s care. Eadon grading of interventions deemed 99% to be significant, with 81% improving the standard of patient care. Two different methods were used to estimate potential cost avoidance: one estimated annual savings of €154,103 - €344,926; the other estimated these at €174,373. Given current pharmacist salary costs, this equates to a cost-benefit ratio of 2.8:1 to 6.3:1. (This does not include the 27% reduction in drug spend observed during the study period. However, more longitudinal data are required to confirm and characterise this phenomenon.) A five-fold increase in medication incident reporting from the ward was observed, suggestive of an enhanced culture of patient safety. Conclusion This study assessed and quantified a wide spectrum of pharmacist contributions to medication management and safety. Costing of these contributions estimates the cost-benefit ratio of the clinical pharmacy service, providing compelling support for the extension of this service throughout the hospital.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. 1785-1788
Author(s):  
Kenneth C. Hohmeier ◽  
Chasity Shelton ◽  
Dawn Havrda ◽  
Justin Gatwood

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document