The pharmacists' interventions after a Drug and Therapeutics Committee (DTC) establishment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

IF 3.3 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2024-07-12 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1080/20523211.2024.2372040
Amira B Kassem, Ahmad Z Al Meslamani, Dina H Elmaghraby, Yosr Magdy, Mohamed AbdElrahman, Ahmed M E Hamdan, Hebatallah Ahmed Mohamed Moustafa
{"title":"The pharmacists' interventions after a Drug and Therapeutics Committee (DTC) establishment during the COVID-19 pandemic.","authors":"Amira B Kassem, Ahmad Z Al Meslamani, Dina H Elmaghraby, Yosr Magdy, Mohamed AbdElrahman, Ahmed M E Hamdan, Hebatallah Ahmed Mohamed Moustafa","doi":"10.1080/20523211.2024.2372040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Healthcare systems in developing countries faced significant challenges during COVID-19, grappling with limited resources and staffing shortages. Assessment of the impact of pharmaceutical care expertise, particularly in critical care units during the pandemics, in developing countries remains poorly explored. The principal aim of our study was to assess the impact of the Drug and Therapeutics Committee (DTC), comprising clinical pharmacists, on the incidence, types, and severity of medication errors and associated costs in using COVID-19 medications, especially antibiotics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An interventional pre-post study was carried out at a public isolation hospital in Egypt over 6 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 499 medication orders, 238 (47.7%) had medication errors, averaging 2.38 errors per patient. The most frequent were prescribing errors (44.9%), specifically incorrect drug choice (57.9%), excessive dosage (29.9%), treatment duplication (4.5%), inadequate dosage (4.5%), and overlooked indications (3.6%). Linezolid and Remdesivir were the most common medications associated with prescribing errors. Pharmacists intervened 315 times, primarily discontinuing medications, reducing doses, introducing new medications, and increasing doses. These actions led to statistically significant cost reductions (<i>p</i> < 0.05) and better clinical outcomes; improved oxygen saturation, decreased fever, stabilised respiratory rates, and normalised white blood cell counts. So, clinical pharmacist interventions made a notable clinical and economic difference (66.34% reduction of the expenses) in antibiotics usage specifically and other medications used in COVID-19 management during the pandemic.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Crucially, educational initiatives targeting clinical pharmacists can foster judicious prescribing habits.</p>","PeriodicalId":16740,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11249153/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20523211.2024.2372040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Healthcare systems in developing countries faced significant challenges during COVID-19, grappling with limited resources and staffing shortages. Assessment of the impact of pharmaceutical care expertise, particularly in critical care units during the pandemics, in developing countries remains poorly explored. The principal aim of our study was to assess the impact of the Drug and Therapeutics Committee (DTC), comprising clinical pharmacists, on the incidence, types, and severity of medication errors and associated costs in using COVID-19 medications, especially antibiotics.

Methods: An interventional pre-post study was carried out at a public isolation hospital in Egypt over 6 months.

Results: Out of 499 medication orders, 238 (47.7%) had medication errors, averaging 2.38 errors per patient. The most frequent were prescribing errors (44.9%), specifically incorrect drug choice (57.9%), excessive dosage (29.9%), treatment duplication (4.5%), inadequate dosage (4.5%), and overlooked indications (3.6%). Linezolid and Remdesivir were the most common medications associated with prescribing errors. Pharmacists intervened 315 times, primarily discontinuing medications, reducing doses, introducing new medications, and increasing doses. These actions led to statistically significant cost reductions (p < 0.05) and better clinical outcomes; improved oxygen saturation, decreased fever, stabilised respiratory rates, and normalised white blood cell counts. So, clinical pharmacist interventions made a notable clinical and economic difference (66.34% reduction of the expenses) in antibiotics usage specifically and other medications used in COVID-19 management during the pandemic.

Conclusion: Crucially, educational initiatives targeting clinical pharmacists can foster judicious prescribing habits.

在 COVID-19 大流行期间,药剂师在药物和治疗委员会(DTC)成立后采取的干预措施。
导言:在 COVID-19 期间,发展中国家的医疗保健系统面临着巨大的挑战,要努力应对有限的资源和人员短缺问题。对发展中国家药品护理专业技术的影响,尤其是在大流行期间对重症监护病房的影响的评估仍然很少。我们研究的主要目的是评估由临床药剂师组成的药物与治疗委员会(DTC)对 COVID-19 药物(尤其是抗生素)使用中用药错误的发生率、类型和严重程度以及相关成本的影响:方法:在埃及一家公立隔离医院开展了一项为期 6 个月的干预性前后期研究:在 499 份用药单中,238 份(47.7%)存在用药错误,平均每位患者 2.38 次。最常见的是处方错误(44.9%),特别是药物选择错误(57.9%)、剂量过大(29.9%)、治疗重复(4.5%)、剂量不足(4.5%)和忽略适应症(3.6%)。利奈唑胺和雷米地韦是最常见的处方错误药物。药剂师进行了 315 次干预,主要是停药、减少剂量、引入新药和增加剂量。这些措施在统计学上显著降低了成本(P 结语):至关重要的是,针对临床药剂师的教育活动可以培养明智的处方习惯。
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
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice Health Professions-Pharmacy
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
9.50%
发文量
81
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
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