High-Alert Medication Stratification Tool-Revised Phase II: A Multisite Study Examining the Validity, Interrater Reliability, and Ease of Use of the High-Alert Medication Stratification Tool-Revised.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this multisite study, High-Alert Medication Stratification Tool-Revised (HAMST-R) phase II, was to assess the content validity of HAMST-R. Secondary outcomes included interrater reliability and ease of use. METHODS: HAMST-R was designed as an objective tool to evaluate high-alert medications (HAMs) at a single site during HAMST-R Phase I. Medication safety experts from 7 health systems across the United States volunteered to participate in this phase II study. Participants completed a demographic survey, oversaw evaluation of 47 HAMs and 35 non-HAMs using HAMST-R, and submitted scores for each medication evaluated. In addition, participants rated each question of HAMST-R on its relevance to assess a medication's safety risk, measured as scale-content validity index. Positive and negative predictive values were evaluated in a post hoc analysis. Interrater reliability was evaluated using the Kendall coefficient of concordance (K), and ease of use was assessed using a mixed-methods approach. RESULTS: Scale-content validity index was 0.80, indicating that the tool was valid. Positive predictive value was 90.5% (95% confidence interval, 87.2%-93.0%), and negative predictive value was 98.2% (95% confidence interval, 95.4%-99.3%). A score of 4 or more differentiated between HAMs and non-HAMs, confirming phase I findings. K was 0.56, indicating moderate agreement. Participants confirmed that the tool was easy to use and plan to incorporate the tool into HAM policies and procedures, formulary review, and safety strategy implementation. CONCLUSIONS: HAMST-R is a valid, objective, and easy to use method that institutions may implement to evaluate a medication's potential safety risk.

Enactment of mandatory pharmacy technician certification in Kansas.

PURPOSE: The successful enactment of mandatory pharmacy technician certification in Kansas is described. METHODS: In 2004, Kansas began requiring registration of all pharmacy technicians with the state board of pharmacy. Registration identified individuals working as pharmacy technicians but did not require any specific education or certification. In September 2012, the Kansas Board of Pharmacy created a task force of key stakeholders including pharmacists from multiple areas of practice, the University of Kansas School of Pharmacy, organizational leaders from the Kansas Council of Health-System Pharmacists (KCHP) and Kansas Pharmacists Association, and professional lobbyists. The goals of this task force were to research practices of technician certification in other states and to make recommendations to the state board of pharmacy on how Kansas could accomplish mandatory technician certification. RESULTS: The task force outlined the steps needed to achieve legislation that could be supported by the members. These topics included the creation of a technician trainee category, grandfathering certain technicians who had been practicing for a designated period of time, state board-approved exemptions, training requirements, age and education requirements, continuing-education requirements, and pharmacist:technician ratio. The recommendations were finalized at the August 2013 Kansas Pharmacy Summit, and the proposed legislation was introduced and passed during the 2014 legislative session. KCHP members learned many valuable lessons about advocacy and the legislative process with this initiative, including building relationships, working with legislators, and working with other professional organizations. CONCLUSION: The formation of a task force led to the successful passage of a bill granting the Kansas Board of Pharmacy the authority to issue regulations regarding mandatory pharmacy technician certification.

Building a business case for an outpatient pharmacy.

To be successful, an outpatient prescription pharmacy service built and operated by a hospital should be run as a competitive business, not in the manner of an inpatient operation. The outpatient pharmacy should not be a siloed entity that operates separately from the inpatient pharmacy. A hospital may miss a significant margin opportunity if it runs the pharmacy strictly as a safety net for uninsured or underinsured patients.