Implementación del Proceso Estandarizado de Evaluación Farmacoterapéutica en pacientes hospitalizados y ambulatorios / Implementation of the standardized process of Pharmacotherapeutic evaluation in inpatients and outpatients

Objetivos el seguimiento farmacoterapéutico (SFT) realizado por el farmacéutico clínico puede enmarcarse dentro de 3 actividades: la identificación, la resolución y la prevención de eventos adversos a medicamentos. Estas deben ajustarse a los requerimientos y los recursos de cada institución, generando la necesidad de desarrollar procedimientos que aumenten la eficiencia del SFT y garanticen la seguridad del paciente. Los farmacéuticos clínicos de la Red de Salud UC-CHRISTUS Chile desarrollamos un Proceso Estandarizado de Evaluación Farmacoterapéutica (PEEF). El objetivo principal del estudio fue evaluar el impacto de esta herramienta en términos del número de evaluaciones e intervenciones de los farmacéuticos clínicos y secundariamente determinar el ahorro de costos potenciales y directos asociados a las intervenciones en la Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos (UCI). Método estudio cuasi-experimental que evaluó la frecuencia y tipo de evaluaciones e intervenciones realizadas por los farmacéuticos clínicos en unidades de pacientes adultos de la Red UC-CHRISTUS, previo y posterior a la utilización del PEEF. La distribución de variables se evaluó mediante el test Shapiro–Wilk, la asociación entre el uso del PEEF y el número de evaluaciones e intervenciones fue realizada mediante el test Chi cuadrado. La evaluación de costos asociados a las intervenciones del farmacéutico clínico en UCI se realizó utilizando la metodología propuesta por Hammond et al.10. Resultados el total de pacientes evaluados pre- y pos-PEEF fue de 1.781 y 2.129, respectivamente. Las evaluaciones e intervenciones en el periodo pre-PEEF fueron 5.209 y 2.246, en el periodo pos-PEEF fueron 6.105 y 2.641, respectivamente. El aumento de las evaluaciones como de las intervenciones fue significativo solo en las unidades de mayor complejidad. La reducción potencial de costos estimados en el periodo pos-PEEF en UCI fue de 492.805 dólares americanos. ... (AU)

Objectives The Pharmacotherapeutic follow-up program (PFU) carried out by the clinical pharmacist can be categorized within 3 fundamental activities; identification, resolution and prevention of adverse drug events. These must be adjusted to the requirements and resources of each institution, developing procedures to increase PFU efficiency and to guarantee patient safety. The clinical pharmacists of UC-CHRISTUS Healthcare Network developed a Standardized Pharmacotherapeutic Evaluation Process (SPEP). The main goal of our study is to evaluate the impact of this tool through the pharmacist evaluation number and pharmacist interventions number. Secondarily to determine the potential and direct cost savings associated with the pharmacist interventions in an Intensive care unit (ICU). Methods A quasi-experimental study evaluated the frequency and type of pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions performed by clinical pharmacists in adult patients units of UC-CHRISTUS Healthcare Network, before and after the implementation of SPEP. The distribution of variables was evaluated using the Shapiro–Wilk test and the association between the use of SPEP and the pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions number was performed using the Chi-square test. The cost evaluation associated with pharmacist interventions in the ICU was carried out using methodology proposed by Hammond et al. Results A total number of 1,781 patients was evaluated before and 2,129 after the SPEP. The pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions number in the before-SPEP period were 5,209 and 2,246. In the after-SPEP period were 6,105 and 2,641, respectively. The increase in both the pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions number was significant only in critical care patients. The potential cost saving in after-SPEP period in the ICU was USD 492,805.... (AU)

[Translated article] Implementation of the standardized process of drug therapy evaluation in inpatients and outpatients.

OBJECTIVES: The Pharmacotherapeutic follow-up program (PFU) carried out by the clinical pharmacist can be categorized within 3 fundamental activities; identification, resolution and prevention of adverse drug events. These must be adjusted to the requirements and resources of each institution, developing procedures to increase PFU efficiency and to guarantee patient safety. The clinical pharmacists of UC-CHRISTUS Healthcare Network developed a Standardized Pharmacotherapeutic Evaluation Process (SPEP). The main goal of our study is to evaluate the impact of this tool through the pharmacist evaluation number and pharmacist interventions number. Secondarily to determine the potential and direct cost savings associated with the pharmacist interventions in an Intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: A quasi-experimental study evaluated the frequency and type of pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions performed by clinical pharmacists in adult patients units of UC-CHRISTUS Healthcare Network, before and after the implementation of SPEP. The distribution of variables was evaluated using the Shapiro-Wilk test and the association between the use of SPEP and the pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions number was performed using the Chi-square test. The cost evaluation associated with pharmacist interventions in the ICU was carried out using methodology proposed by Hammond et al. RESULTS: A total number of 1781 patients was evaluated before and 2129 after the SPEP. The pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions number in the before-SPEP period were 5209 and 2246. In the after-SPEP period were 6105 and 2641, respectively. The increase in both the pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions number was significant only in critical care patients. The potential cost saving in after-SPEP period in the ICU was USD 492,805. Major adverse drug events prevention was the intervention that generated the most savings with a reduction of 60.2%. The total direct savings for sequential therapy was USD 8072 in the study period. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a clinical pharmacist developed tool called SPEP that increased the pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions number in multiple clinical scenarios. These were significant only in critical care patients. Future investigations should make effort to evaluate the quality and clinical impact of these interventions.

Atención farmacéutica y asma: protocolo de una revisión de revisiones sistemáticas / Pharmaceutical care and asthma: Protocol of an umbrella review of systematic reviews

Introducción las revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis recientes sugieren que las intervenciones por parte de farmacéuticos en pacientes asmáticos tienen un impacto positivo en resultados en salud. Sin embargo, la asociación no está bien establecida y el papel de los farmacéuticos clínicos está pobremente representado, así como el de los pacientes con asma grave. El objetivo de esta revisión de revisiones es identificar revisiones sistemáticas publicadas que evalúen el impacto de las intervenciones farmacéuticas en resultados en salud medidos en pacientes asmáticos, así como describir los componentes clave de las intervenciones, los resultados medidos y cualquier asociación entre las intervenciones farmacéuticas y los resultados en salud medidos. Métodos se hará una busqueda en PubMed, Embase, Scopus y la Cochrane Library desde el primer registro hasta diciembre de 2022. Se considerará la inclusión de revisiones sistemáticas de todo tipo de estudios primarios, severidad del asma o nivel asistencial que midan resultados en salud. La calidad metodológica se medirá usando A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2. Dos investigadores independientes realizarán la selección de los estudios, la evaluación de la calidad y la extracción de datos. Cualquier discrepancia será solventada por un tercer investigador. Ambos resultados, narrativos y metaanálisis, de los estudios primarios incluidos en las revisiones sistemáticas serán sintetizados. Si los datos son apropiados para un análisis cuantitativo, las medidas de asociación se expresarán como cociente de riesgos y diferencia de medias. Discusión los primeros resultados del establecimiento de una red multidisciplinar para el manejo de los pacientes asmáticos mostraron beneficios en integrar los diferentes niveles asistenciales en el control de la enfermedad y la reducción de la morbilidad...(AU)

Introduction Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses suggest that pharmacists' interventions in asthma patients have a positive impact on health-related outcomes. Nevertheless, the association is not well established and the role of clinical pharmacists is poorly represented, as well as severe asthma patients. The aim of this overview of systematic reviews is to identify published systematic reviews assessing the impact of pharmacists' interventions on health-related outcomes measured in asthma patients, as well as to describe key components of the interventions, the outcomes assessed and any associations between pharmacists' interventions and health-related outcomes. Methods PubMed, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Library will be searched from inception to December 2022. Systematic reviews of all study designs, severity of asthma and level of care that measured health-related outcomes will be considered. Methodological quality will be assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2. Two independent investigators will perform the study selection, quality assessment and data collection, any discrepancy will be solved by a third investigator. Both narrative findings and meta-analysis of primary study data included in the systematic reviews will be synthesized. If data are appropriate for quantitative synthesis, the measures of association will be expressed as the risk ratio and difference in means. Discussion The first results on the establishment of a multidisciplinary network for the management of asthmatic patients have shown the benefits of integrating different levels of care in disease control and morbidity reduction. Further studies showed benefits in hospital admissions, patients' basal oral corticosteroid dose, exacerbations and quality of life of asthma patients...(AU)

Pharmaceutical care and asthma: Protocol of an umbrella review of systematic reviews. / [Artículo traducido] Atención farmacéutica y asma: protocolo de una revisión de revisiones sistemáticas.

INTRODUCTION: Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses suggest that pharmacists' interventions in asthma patients have a positive impact on health-related outcomes. Nevertheless, the association is not well established and the role of clinical pharmacists is poorly represented, as well as severe asthma patients. The aim of this overview of systematic reviews is to identify published systematic reviews assessing the impact of pharmacists' interventions on health-related outcomes measured in asthma patients, as well as to describe key components of the interventions, the outcomes assessed and any associations between pharmacists' interventions and health-related outcomes. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Library will be searched from inception to December 2022. Systematic reviews of all study designs, severity of asthma and level of care that measured health-related outcomes will be considered. Methodological quality will be assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2. Two independent investigators will perform the study selection, quality assessment and data collection, any discrepancy will be solved by a third investigator. Both narrative findings and meta-analysis of primary study data included in the systematic reviews will be synthesized. If data are appropriate for quantitative synthesis, the measures of association will be expressed as the risk ratio and difference in means. DISCUSSION: The first results on the establishment of a multidisciplinary network for the management of asthmatic patients have shown the benefits of integrating different levels of care in disease control and morbidity reduction. Further studies showed benefits in hospital admissions, patients' basal oral corticosteroid dose, exacerbations and quality of life of asthma patients. A systematic review is the most appropriate design in order to summarize the literature and identify the evidence of the benefits of interventions performed by clinical pharmacists in asthma patients, especially those with severe uncontrolled asthma, and encourage future studies to stablish the role of clinical pharmacists in asthma units. REGISTRATION DETAILS: Systematic review registration number: CRD42022372100.

Implementation of the standardized process of Pharmacotherapeutic evaluation in inpatients and outpatients. / Implementación del Proceso Estandarizado de Evaluación Farmacoterapéutica en pacientes hospitalizados y ambulatorios.

OBJECTIVES: The Pharmacotherapeutic follow-up program (PFU) carried out by the clinical pharmacist can be categorized within 3 fundamental activities; identification, resolution and prevention of adverse drug events. These must be adjusted to the requirements and resources of each institution, developing procedures to increase PFU efficiency and to guarantee patient safety. The clinical pharmacists of UC-CHRISTUS Healthcare Network developed a Standardized Pharmacotherapeutic Evaluation Process (SPEP). The main goal of our study is to evaluate the impact of this tool through the pharmacist evaluation number and pharmacist interventions number. Secondarily to determine the potential and direct cost savings associated with the pharmacist interventions in an Intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: A quasi-experimental study evaluated the frequency and type of pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions performed by clinical pharmacists in adult patients units of UC-CHRISTUS Healthcare Network, before and after the implementation of SPEP. The distribution of variables was evaluated using the Shapiro-Wilk test and the association between the use of SPEP and the pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions number was performed using the Chi-square test. The cost evaluation associated with pharmacist interventions in the ICU was carried out using methodology proposed by Hammond et al. RESULTS: A total number of 1,781 patients was evaluated before and 2,129 after the SPEP. The pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions number in the before-SPEP period were 5,209 and 2,246. In the after-SPEP period were 6,105 and 2,641, respectively. The increase in both the pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions number was significant only in critical care patients. The potential cost saving in after-SPEP period in the ICU was USD 492,805. Major adverse drug events prevention was the intervention that generated the most savings with a reduction of 60.2%. The total direct savings for sequential therapy was USD 8,072 in the study period. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a clinical pharmacist developed tool called SPEP that increased the pharmacist evaluation and pharmacist interventions number in multiple clinical scenarios. These were significant only in critical care patients. Future investigations should make effort to evaluate the quality and clinical impact of these interventions.

Pharmaceutical care and asthma: Protocol of an umbrella review of systematic reviews.

INTRODUCTION: Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses suggest that pharmacists' interventions in asthma patients have a positive impact on health-related outcomes. Nevertheless, the association is not well established and the role of clinical pharmacists is poorly represented, as well as severe asthma patients. The aim of this overview of systematic reviews is to identify published systematic reviews assessing the impact of pharmacists' interventions on health-related outcomes measured in asthma patients, as well as to describe key components of the interventions, the outcomes assessed and any associations between pharmacists' interventions and health-related outcomes. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Library will be searched from inception to December 2022. Systematic reviews of all study designs, severity of asthma and level of care that measured health-related outcomes will be considered. Methodological quality will be assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2. Two independent investigators will perform the study selection, quality assessment and data collection, any discrepancy will be solved by a third investigator. Both narrative findings and meta-analysis of primary study data included in the systematic reviews will be synthesised. If data are appropriate for quantitative synthesis, the measures of association will be expressed as the risk ratio and difference in means. DISCUSSION: The first results on the establishment of a multidisciplinary network for the management of asthmatic patients have shown the benefits of integrating different levels of care in disease control and morbidity reduction. Further studies showed benefits in hospital admissions, patients' basal oral corticosteroid dose, exacerbations and quality of life of asthma patients. A systematic review is the most appropriate design in order to summarise the literature and identify the evidence of the benefits of interventions performed by clinical pharmacists in asthma patients, especially those with severe uncontrolled asthma, and encourage future studies to stablish the role of clinical pharmacists in asthma units. REGISTRATION DETAILS: Systematic review registration number: CRD42022372100.

Intervenções farmacêuticas em Unidade de Pronto Atendimento: uma análise farmacoterapêutica e farmacoeconômica / Pharmaceutical interventions in Emergency Care Unit: a pharmacotherapeutic and pharmacoeconomic analysis

Objetivo: Esclarecer o impacto farmacoterapêutico e farmacoeconômico das intervenções farmacêuticas em serviços de urgência e emergência. Métodos: Estudo de intervenção conduzido em uma Unidade de Pronto Atendimento. Os pacientes admitidos na pesquisa receberam acompanhamento farmacoterapêutico por meio de avaliação e intervenção na farmacoterapia. Resultados: Participaram do estudo 197 pacientes majoritariamente feminino, comórbidos, com média de idade de 43 anos ± 13. Foram realizadas intervenções em 130 destes, com aceitação de 83% por parte da equipe de assistência. As intervenções também repercutiram na farmacoeconomia, proporcionando uma redução de custos de 35% em comparação ao semestre anterior. Conclusão: Nossos resultados expressaram que a presença do farmacêutico clínico é essencial para farmacoterapias otimizadas e redução de custos hospitalares.

Objective: To clarify pharmaceutical interventions' pharmacotherapeutic and pharmacoeconomic impact on urgent and emergency services. Methods: Intervention study conducted in an Emergency Care Unit. Patients enrolled in the research received pharmacotherapeutic follow-up through evaluation and intervention in pharmacotherapy. Results: One hundred and ninety seven patients, mostly female, with comorbid conditions, with a mean age of 43 years ± 13, participated in the study. Interventions were performed in 130 of them, with an acceptance of 83% by the care team. The interventions also impacted pharmacoeconomics, providing a cost reduction of 35% compared to the previous semester. Conclusion: Our results expressed that the presence of the clinical pharmacist is essential for optimized pharmacotherapies and hospital cost reduction.

Evaluación de un programa de atención farmacéutica en Telemedicina para la coordinación de la transición del paciente, entre atención hospitalaria – primaria, mediante Telefarmacia / Evaluation of a Telemedicine pharmaceutical care program for coordination patient’s transfer between hospital and primary care, using Telepharmacy

Objetivo: Analizar estrategias de Telemedicina y colaboración entreatención primaria y atención hospitalaria: programa de Telefarmacia deCoordinación entre los Equipos Asistenciales de Farmacia Hospitalariay Atención Primaria y la plataforma e-interconsulta. Describir la implantación del programa Telefarmacia de Coordinación entre los EquiposAsistenciales de Farmacia Hospitalaria y Atención Primaria y evaluar losresultados sobre adherencia terapéutica, calidad percibida y satisfaccióny económicos, así como las e-interconsultas realizadas entre atenciónhospitalaria y atención primaria.Método: A) Telefarmacia de Coordinación entre los Equipos Asistenciales de Farmacia Hospitalaria y Atención Primaria: fases de implantación: 1) creación del grupo de trabajo; 2) establecimiento de criteriosde inclusión de pacientes; 3) selección de medicamentos; 4) integración dela documentación de la atención farmacéutica; 5) acondicionamiento. de la consulta de atención primaria; 6) diseño logístico; 7) creación delsistema de Telemedicina; 8) formación a farmacéuticos de atención primaria; 9) protocolización de la atención farmacéutica; 10) información alpaciente y consentimiento informado. La adherencia se evaluó por registro de dispensaciones. Evaluación de los resultados mediante cuestionariode calidad percibida. Evaluación por farmacéuticos mediante encuestade satisfacción. Análisis del impacto económico según costes directosestimados de los desplazamientos evitados desde el domicilio hasta elhospital durante un año. B) Plataforma e-interconsulta: explotación delos datos de la plataforma web de agosto de 2018 a junio de 2019. (AU)

Objective: To report our experience with Telemedicine projects: aTelepharmacy Hospital Pharmacy/Primary Care Pharmacy CoordinationProgram and a Hospital Pharmacy/Primary Care Pharmacy ElectronicCross-consultation Program. Results are reported in terms of medicationadherence, perceived quality and satisfaction, and economic impact.Method: A) Telepharmacy Hospital Pharmacy/Primary Care PharmacyCoordination Program: Phases of development: 1) Creation of a workgroup; 2) definition of patient inclusion criteria; 3) selection of medicines;4) integration of hospital and primary care pharmaceutical care; 5) setting up of facilities in primary care; 6) logistics design; 7) creation of theTelemedicine system; 8) provision of training to primary care pharmacists;9) establishment of a pharmaceutical care protocol; 10) obtaining patientinformed consent. Medication adherence was evaluated using dispensingrecords. Results were assessed based on a quality questionnaire. Pharmacist evaluation was performed using a satisfaction questionnaire. Theeconomic impact of the programs was assessed from patient’s perspectivefrom the estimated 1-year avoided direct costs of traveling from home tothe hospital. B) Webbased cross-consultation system: mining was performed of web data from August 2018-June 2019. Analyzed items: hospitalpharmacoterapeutic area, reasons, and results of consultation in primaryand hospital care.Results: A) Telepharmacy Hospital Pharmacy / Primary Care Pharmacy Coordination Program: sample: 51 patients, 58% male. Meanage 62.8 ± 18.0 years. 83.0% were pensioners; 69% were involved inan enteral nutrition program. Baseline and post-intervention medicationadherence, 95.82 ± 8.03 vs 85.23 ± 23.02 (p = 0.007). Patients took3.3 ± 1.4 hours to travel to the hospital; all patients assumed travelingcosts. Average avoided cost per patient per year, €76.08 ± 38.77. Average score on the satisfaction questionnaire, 9.4 ± 1.3 over 10. (AU)

Posicionamiento de la Sociedad Española de Farmacia Clínica, Familiar y Comunitaria sobre telefarmacia: teleatención farmacéutica (TAF) / Position of the Spanish Society of Clinical, Family and Community Pharmacy on telepharmacy: telepharmaceutical telecare (TAF)

Las nuevas tecnologías de la información y comunicación (TIC) están desarrollándose desde hace bastantes años, pero la pandemia de COVID-19 ha acelerado la transformación digital de la sociedad. En el campo de la salud han surgido nuevas actividades y de esta forma términos como telemedicina, teleasistencia o teleconsulta empiezan a ser habituales. Indudablemente suponen un avance, pero tienen el riesgo de deshumanizar el contacto de sanitarios y pacientes.En el campo de la farmacia ha surgido la telefarma cia con unas innegables connotaciones logísticas y comerciales. Desde la Sociedad Española de Farmacia Clínica, Familiar y Comunitaria se prefiere utilizar el término teleatención farmacéutica (TAF), definiéndolo como la práctica farmacéutica asistencial a distancia que utiliza las TIC para complementar la atención farmacéutica presencial que precise el paciente. La TAF incluye la prestación a distancia de algunos servicios profesionales farmacéuticos asistenciales (SPFA). La TAF debe ayudar al farmacéutico comunitario a prestar algunos SPFA, mejorando así la practica farmacéutica clínica sin caer en la deshumanización que la aplicación indiscriminada de las TIC puede producir. (AU)

[Impact of a quality improvement plan on the validation of drug prescriptions on the safety of the hospitalised patient]. / Impacto de un plan de mejora de calidad en la validación de la prescripción de fármacos sobre la seguridad de los pacientes hospitalizados.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Medication errors are the most common adverse events in healthcare. Pharmaceutical validation (PV) seeks to reduce them. The aims of this study were to assess the impact of the introduction of an automated tool for the validation (VPAT) of the high clinical relevance drugs prescription (HCRD) over time of pharmaceutical intervention (PI), and to quantify the number of medication errors detected before and after its implementation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A two phase retrospective-observational single centre study was designed. A pre-intervention phase (Pre-P): PV of beds with Unit Dose Dispensing (October 2015 - February 2016), was followed by a post-intervention phase (Post-P): PV using a VPAT of HCRD in hospital patients (October 2016 - February 2017). HCRD were selected from the list of high-risk drugs of Institute for Safe Medication Practices. The data was obtained from the PI record (Access®) and the computerised prescription. The variables collected were: age and gender of the patients included, data of drugs prescription, and time to PI. RESULTS: A total of 477 PI were analysed in 404 patients, with a mean age of 65.9±19.5 years (53.22% women). The mean time up to PI was 25.6±24.72h in the Pre-P, and 18.87±20.44h in the Post-P (P=0.01). In Pre-P, 106 PI were performed (35.85% prevention of adverse reactions) compared to 371 PI (39.62% medication reconciliation) in Post-P. CONCLUSIONS: The VPAT enabled a greater number of medication errors to be detected and intervened in hospitalised patients, with a significantly reduced time to PI.