RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of including community pharmacists in strategies to alter excessive prescribing of antiulcer medications (AUMs) in a statewide drug utilization review (DUR) program. Mailing educational materials to physicians is a common intervention strategy of retrospective DUR programs. However, pharmacists are typically left out of this process, ignoring a possibly influential healthcare provider. METHODOLOGY: Patients without gastroesophageal reflux disease who received > or = 1.0 normalized therapeutic equivalents (e.g., 1.0 NTE = ranitidine 300 mg/d or omeprazole 20 mg/d) for five of six prior months were included. The pharmacists and physicians of these patients were divided into one of three geographically distinct groups: group 1 physicians received mailed materials only (pharmacists were not contacted); group 2 physicians and pharmacists received mailed materials only; and group 3 physicians and pharmacists received mailed materials, and the pharmacists were contacted by phone. Mean NTE and AUM costs were analyzed six months before and six months following the intervention. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-eight, 329, and 248 patients were included in G1, G2, and G3, respectively. There was a 12.4%, 8.0%, and 14.0% reduction in NTE for G1, G2, and G3, respectively. G1 AUM cost decreased 7.7% ($7710); G2 decreased 6.8% ($14 037); G3 decreased 20.5% ($26722). The total decrease in AUM cost for the entire cohort from before to after the intervention was $48469 (p < 0.05) in the six months following the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A follow-up phone call to pharmacists in a statewide DUR intervention enhances the effectiveness of DUR interventions under the conditions studied. Enlisting the support of community pharmacists may improve the cost savings of these interventions.
