ESCP Best Practice: Development, implementation and evaluation of a practical risk assessment process for the introduction of new medicines to clinical practice at an Acute Hospital.

IF 3.2 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Chloe Lewis, Dale Weerasooriya, Caroline Cheng, Melanie Dalby
{"title":"ESCP Best Practice: Development, implementation and evaluation of a practical risk assessment process for the introduction of new medicines to clinical practice at an Acute Hospital.","authors":"Chloe Lewis, Dale Weerasooriya, Caroline Cheng, Melanie Dalby","doi":"10.1007/s11096-025-02011-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Incorporating new medications into clinical practice can present potential risks to staff and patients. Risk assessment of new medicines procured into acute hospitals in the United Kingdom varies between organisations and national guidance is lacking. Existing processes required risk assessment of all new medicines, consuming considerable pharmacist resource.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To rationalise the risk assessment of new medicines at an acute hospital.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>A 1300 bed, multi-site tertiary-referral teaching hospital, London, United Kingdom.</p><p><strong>Development: </strong>A pharmacy working group, including formulary, governance, medication safety, and clinical leads, developed a rationalised risk assessment process. An initial triage was proposed to evaluate whether a risk assessment was required. Existing risk assessment tools were combined and adapted for use. A New Drug Panel (NDP) of pharmacy leaders was formed to review risk assessments.</p><p><strong>Implementation: </strong>The process was piloted for 6 months; minor modifications were made and it was fully introduced in May 2022. Implementation included governance sign off and training of members of the NDP on utilisation of the tools.</p><p><strong>Evaluation: </strong>Two years after introduction, 646 requests for new medicines were triaged and 196 (30%) required risk assessment. Fourteen requests were cancelled, so 182 risk assessments were reviewed by the NDP. The NDP recommended an additional 46 mitigations. Trends identified issues with unlicensed medicines, safe administration practices, communication and electronic prescribing.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A practical risk assessment process reduced risk assessments by 70%, releasing clinical pharmacist time. An expert NDP identified additional mitigations, reducing patient harm and ensuring safe incorporation of medicines into clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":13828,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-025-02011-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Incorporating new medications into clinical practice can present potential risks to staff and patients. Risk assessment of new medicines procured into acute hospitals in the United Kingdom varies between organisations and national guidance is lacking. Existing processes required risk assessment of all new medicines, consuming considerable pharmacist resource.

Aim: To rationalise the risk assessment of new medicines at an acute hospital.

Setting: A 1300 bed, multi-site tertiary-referral teaching hospital, London, United Kingdom.

Development: A pharmacy working group, including formulary, governance, medication safety, and clinical leads, developed a rationalised risk assessment process. An initial triage was proposed to evaluate whether a risk assessment was required. Existing risk assessment tools were combined and adapted for use. A New Drug Panel (NDP) of pharmacy leaders was formed to review risk assessments.

Implementation: The process was piloted for 6 months; minor modifications were made and it was fully introduced in May 2022. Implementation included governance sign off and training of members of the NDP on utilisation of the tools.

Evaluation: Two years after introduction, 646 requests for new medicines were triaged and 196 (30%) required risk assessment. Fourteen requests were cancelled, so 182 risk assessments were reviewed by the NDP. The NDP recommended an additional 46 mitigations. Trends identified issues with unlicensed medicines, safe administration practices, communication and electronic prescribing.

Conclusion: A practical risk assessment process reduced risk assessments by 70%, releasing clinical pharmacist time. An expert NDP identified additional mitigations, reducing patient harm and ensuring safe incorporation of medicines into clinical practice.

ESCP最佳做法:制定、实施和评估在急症医院临床实践中引入新药的实际风险评估程序。
将新药物纳入临床实践可能会给工作人员和患者带来潜在风险。在联合王国,各组织对急诊医院采购的新药的风险评估各不相同,而且缺乏国家指导。现有流程要求对所有新药进行风险评估,消耗了相当多的药剂师资源。目的:理顺急症医院新药的风险评估。环境:英国伦敦一所拥有1300张床位的三级转诊教学医院。发展:一个药学工作组,包括处方、治理、用药安全和临床线索,制定了一个合理化的风险评估过程。建议进行初步分类,以评估是否需要进行风险评估。对现有的风险评估工具进行了组合和调整以供使用。成立了一个由药店领导组成的新药小组(NDP)来审查风险评估。实施:该过程试点了6个月;进行了一些小修改,并于2022年5月全面投入使用。实施包括治理签署和培训国家发展计划成员如何利用这些工具。评价:引入两年后,646份新药申请进行了分类,196份(30%)需要进行风险评估。14个请求被取消,因此182个风险评估被NDP审查。新民主党建议采取额外的46项缓解措施。趋势确定了无证药品、安全管理做法、通信和电子处方等问题。结论:实用的风险评估流程可减少70%的风险评估,节省临床药师的时间。专家NDP确定了其他缓解措施,减少了对患者的伤害,并确保将药物安全纳入临床实践。
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
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
131
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy (IJCP) offers a platform for articles on research in Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Care and related practice-oriented subjects in the pharmaceutical sciences. IJCP is a bi-monthly, international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research data, new ideas and discussions on pharmacotherapy and outcome research, clinical pharmacy, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacoeconomics, the clinical use of medicines, medical devices and laboratory tests, information on medicines and medical devices information, pharmacy services research, medication management, other clinical aspects of pharmacy. IJCP publishes original Research articles, Review articles , Short research reports, Commentaries, book reviews, and Letters to the Editor. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy is affiliated with the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy (ESCP). ESCP promotes practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy, especially in Europe. The general aim of the society is to advance education, practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy . Until 2010 the journal was called Pharmacy World & Science.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信