Clinical impact and cost-saving analysis of a comprehensive pharmaceutical care intervention in older patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Hospital admission and discharge are at high risk of drug-related problems (DRPs) in older patients with cancer. This study aimed to assess the clinical and economic impact of a comprehensive pharmaceutical care intervention (RECAP) to optimize drug therapy in patients with cancer ≥75 years admitted to oncology or geriatric wards. METHOD: RECAP intervention was defined as follows: at admission and discharge, hospital pharmacists conducted comprehensive medication reconciliation and review, identified relevant DRPs and provided optimization recommendations to prescribers; at discharge, pharmacists also provided patient education and shared information with primary care providers. The impact of the intervention was assessed by the rate of implementation of recommendations by the prescribers and the evolution of polypharmacy rate; a peer review of the clinical significance of DRPs was performed by an expert panel of geriatric oncologists and pharmacists. A cost saving analysis compared cost avoided through resolution of DRPs to cost of pharmacist's time. RESULTS: From January 2019 and August 2020, 201 patients were included (median age 80 [75-97] years), 68.7% with solid tumors. DRPs requiring optimization were identified in 70.9% of patients at admission (mean 1.7 DRP/patient) and 47.7% at discharge (0.9 DRP/patient). Most pharmacist recommendations (70.8%) were followed by prescribers, allowing the correction of 1.2 DRP/patient at admission and 0.7 DRP/patient at discharge. Half of resolved DRPs were rated as clinically significant. However, polypharmacy rate was not reduced at discharge. Cost comparison showed $7.2 avoided for $1 invested, with an estimated total net benefit of $354,822 (mean $1766 per patient). CONCLUSIONS: The RECAP model significantly reduces DRPs in hospitalized older patients with cancer. The model was cost saving, confirming the value of implementing it in routine practice.

Impact of pharmaceutical care interventions on multidisciplinary care of older patients with cancer: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Optimizing medication use is a major issue in older patients with cancer and pharmacists are increasingly involved in their multidisciplinary care. The implementation of pharmaceutical care interventions must be supported by impact evaluations to enable their development and funding. This systematic review aims to synthesize evidence on the impact of pharmaceutical care interventions in older patients with cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed in the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases, for articles reporting evaluations of pharmaceutical care interventions for patients with cancer aged 65 years or older. RESULTS: Eleven studies met the selection criteria. Most pharmacists were part of multidisciplinary geriatric oncology teams. Whether in outpatient or inpatient settings, interventions had common components, including patient interview, medication reconciliation, and comprehensive medication review to assess drug-related problems (DRPs). DRPs were identified in 95% of patients with 1.7 to 3 DRPs on average. Pharmacist recommendations resulted in a 20-40% reduction in the total number of DRPs and a 20-25% decrease in the prevalence of DRP. Prevalence of potentially inappropriate or omitted medications and their subsequent deprescribing or addition varied greatly between studies, notably depending on detection tools used. Clinical impact was insufficiently evaluated. Only one study reported a reduction of anticancer treatment toxicities following a joint pharmaceutical and geriatric assessment. A single economic evaluation calculated a potential net benefit of $3,864.23 per patient resulting from the intervention. DISCUSSION: These encouraging results must be confirmed by more robust evaluations to support the involvement of pharmacists in multidisciplinary care of older patients with cancer.

Implementation assessment of a patient personalized clinical pharmacy programme (5P project) into orthogeriatric care pathway.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: The orthogeriatric path (hip-fractured elderly patients) is composed of several transition points (emergency surgery, orthopaedic, geriatric and rehabilitation units). The intervention of clinical pharmacists can ensure the continuity of patients' drug management during their hospital stay. The aim of the study was to assess the implementation of clinical pharmacy activities in an orthogeriatric pathway, regarding its impact on medication error prevention, the healthcare professionals' and patients' satisfaction, and the estimated associated pharmaceutical workload. METHODS: Participants were aged 75 or older and managed for proximal femoral fracture. Their admission prescription was reviewed. If they were evaluated at high risk of adverse event (AE), medication reconciliation (MedRec) and pharmaceutical interviews (admission, discharge, and targeted on oral anticoagulant) were added at different steps of their care pathway. The achievement and duration of each clinical pharmacy activity were recorded. The number of pharmaceutical interventions (PI) made during prescription review, and unintentional discrepancies (UID) identified during MedRec were collected. A satisfaction questionnaire was sent to patients and healthcare professionals. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Among 455 included patients, 284 patients were considered at high risk of AE. Clinical pharmacy activity achievement rates varied between 12% and 98%. A total of 622 PI and 333 UID were identified. The overall patients' and healthcare professionals' satisfaction was rated from 63% to 100%. The total workload was estimated at 376 h: on average 16 min per prescription review, 43 min per admission MedRec, 26 min per discharge MedRec and 17 to 25 minutes per interview. CONCLUSION: The implementation of the programme showed a high potential of drug management securing. To sustain it, additional pharmaceutical human resources and high-performance computing tools are needed.

Economic impact of clinical pharmaceutical activities in hospital wards: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The positive impact of clinical pharmacy services (CPS) in improving clinical outcomes such as reduction of drug related problems is well demonstrated. Despite these results, the deployment of these activities is not systematically observed in the hospital setting. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review first aimed to describe existing evidence regarding economic evaluation of ward-based CPS focusing on the entire treatment of a patient in a hospital setting. Secondly, the quality of economic evaluations of existing evidence was assessed. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed/Medline, Science Direct and the NHS Economic Evaluation databases from January 2000 to March 2019. English or French language articles describing an economic evaluation of ward-based CPS on inpatients in hospital settings were included. Articles not describing a single study, dealing with a CPS not considering the entire medication regimen of the patient or presenting both inpatient and outpatient CPS were excluded. Selected articles were analyzed according to Drummond's check-list for assessing economic evaluations. RESULTS: Forty-one studies were included. About one third were American publications. CPS implemented in ICU represented about half of the selected articles. Pharmacist-to-bed ratios varied according to countries and care unit type with the most favorable ratios in ICU and in American studies. Cost-avoidance was mostly used to express economic impact and ranged from €1579 to €3,089 328. Studies yielding the greater economic impact were conducted in the USA with implementation of full-time equivalents pharmacists or establishing of collaborative practice agreements. Only 6 articles dealt correctly with at least 7 of the 10 Drummond's checklist assessment criteria. CONCLUSION: This review suggests that the existing evidence is not sufficient to conclude to a positive economic impact of CPS conducted according to clinical pharmacy guidelines. Funding resources, remuneration of clinical pharmacy activities and provision of standardized national clinical and economic databases appear to be essential evolutions to improve CPS development.