Use of an Innovative Pharmaceutical Class Scoring Tool for Prioritized Annual Formulary Review.

Holly Sheldon, Audrey Kostrzewa, Shannon Werner, Terry Audley, Adam Biggs, Taylor Mancuso, Mary Frances Picone
{"title":"Use of an Innovative Pharmaceutical Class Scoring Tool for Prioritized Annual Formulary Review.","authors":"Holly Sheldon,&nbsp;Audrey Kostrzewa,&nbsp;Shannon Werner,&nbsp;Terry Audley,&nbsp;Adam Biggs,&nbsp;Taylor Mancuso,&nbsp;Mary Frances Picone","doi":"10.24926/iip.v13i2.4785","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Though The Joint Commission requires health systems perform annual formulary review, guidance for how to perform this review is lacking. Published methods include comprehensive review of all pharmaceutical classes; however, this approach may not be the most efficient or effective option for a health system with a large formulary. <b>Objective:</b> To create a prioritization system for annual formulary review through development of a pharmaceutical class scoring tool. <b>Methods:</b> Drug information pharmacists developed the scoring tool, which used external and internal data to score pharmaceutical classes in 4 categories: safety, efficacy, cost, and utilization. The primary outcome, number of formulary changes resulting from pharmaceutical class review, was compared between the highest-scoring and lowest-scoring class to assess the tool's ability to prioritize high-yield class reviews. <b>Results:</b> The tool calculated scores for 91 pharmaceutical classes, altogether containing 962 medications. After review of the highest-scoring class, corticosteroids, 2 formulary changes were made: one dosage form was removed from formulary, and one medication was restricted to outpatient use only. Zero formulary changes resulted from review of the lowest-scoring class, pharmaceutical adjuvants. <b>Conclusions:</b> The tool described in this study prioritized annual formulary review efforts by identifying a pharmaceutical class with meaningful formulary optimization opportunities as the highest-scoring class, while correctly identifying a class with no optimization opportunities as the lowest-scoring class.</p>","PeriodicalId":13646,"journal":{"name":"Innovations in Pharmacy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/08/f1/21550417-13-02-4785.PMC9836755.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovations in Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24926/iip.v13i2.4785","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Though The Joint Commission requires health systems perform annual formulary review, guidance for how to perform this review is lacking. Published methods include comprehensive review of all pharmaceutical classes; however, this approach may not be the most efficient or effective option for a health system with a large formulary. Objective: To create a prioritization system for annual formulary review through development of a pharmaceutical class scoring tool. Methods: Drug information pharmacists developed the scoring tool, which used external and internal data to score pharmaceutical classes in 4 categories: safety, efficacy, cost, and utilization. The primary outcome, number of formulary changes resulting from pharmaceutical class review, was compared between the highest-scoring and lowest-scoring class to assess the tool's ability to prioritize high-yield class reviews. Results: The tool calculated scores for 91 pharmaceutical classes, altogether containing 962 medications. After review of the highest-scoring class, corticosteroids, 2 formulary changes were made: one dosage form was removed from formulary, and one medication was restricted to outpatient use only. Zero formulary changes resulted from review of the lowest-scoring class, pharmaceutical adjuvants. Conclusions: The tool described in this study prioritized annual formulary review efforts by identifying a pharmaceutical class with meaningful formulary optimization opportunities as the highest-scoring class, while correctly identifying a class with no optimization opportunities as the lowest-scoring class.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

使用创新药物类别评分工具优先年度处方审查。
背景:虽然联合委员会要求卫生系统进行年度处方审查,但缺乏如何进行审查的指导。已发表的方法包括对所有药物类别的全面审查;然而,对于拥有大量处方的卫生系统来说,这种方法可能不是最有效的选择。目的:通过开发药品分类评分工具,建立年度处方审评的优先级体系。方法:药品信息药师自行开发评分工具,利用外部和内部数据对药品类别进行评分,分为安全性、有效性、成本、利用率4大类。主要结果是由药物类别评审引起的处方变更数量,在评分最高和评分最低的类别之间进行比较,以评估该工具优先考虑高收益类别评审的能力。结果:该工具计算了91个药物类别的评分,共包含962种药物。在对评分最高的类别皮质类固醇进行审查后,对处方进行了2项更改:一种剂型从处方中删除,一种药物仅限门诊使用。对评分最低的一类药物佐剂的审查没有导致处方变化。结论:本研究中描述的工具通过将有意义的处方优化机会的药物类别识别为得分最高的类别,而将没有优化机会的药物类别正确识别为得分最低的类别,从而优先考虑年度处方审查工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信