4CPS-312 Pharmaceutical interventions in a non-oncohaematological daily hospital

J. D. Menendez, A. R. Amallo, C. Gallego, M Vara Urruchua, U Blazquez Urtizberea, S. V. Hidalgo, E Oñate Muzas, E. T. Orbegozo, A. Arredondo
{"title":"4CPS-312 Pharmaceutical interventions in a non-oncohaematological daily hospital","authors":"J. D. Menendez, A. R. Amallo, C. Gallego, M Vara Urruchua, U Blazquez Urtizberea, S. V. Hidalgo, E Oñate Muzas, E. T. Orbegozo, A. Arredondo","doi":"10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and importance The role of the pharmacist in the validation and dispensing of medications is already known. But the increasingly frequent use of high cost drugs makes that role essential for the sustainability of health systems. Aim and objectives To describe and analyse the pharmaceutical interventions carried out in a non-oncohaematological daily hospital (NOHDH) and to evaluate the economic impact of these interventions. Material and methods From April 2019 to March 2020, pharmacist interventions in the validation and dispensing of electronic prescriptions of intravenous treatments in the NOHDH were recorded. It should be noted that preparation of infusions is not centralised in the pharmacy but is carried out in the daily hospital units. Infusions prepared in the pharmacy, acute treatments and intravenous iron were excluded. To calculate the economic impact, only the dose administered and the average cost of drugs during the year of the study were considered. Results 30 interventions were carried out in 434 patients (6.9% patients) and 2240 dispensations (1.3% dispensations). 29 were accepted (97%). They were classified according to the type of intervention: 15 presentation changes (14 to a biosimilar), 10 dose adjustments (5 to commercial presentations), 4 request errors (1 of dose and 3 of administration date) and 1 change of medication. Intervention according to services: 10 rheumatology (9.6% of patients and 2.2% of dispensations), 5 nephrology (26.3% and 11.4%), 4 digestive (2% and 0.4%), 4 neurology (11.1% and 1.3%), 3 nursing unit (0.7% and 0.13%), 1 haematology (7.7% and 1.9%), 1 allergy (4.3% and 0, 61%), 1 paediatrics (10% and 2%) and other (9.1% and 3.6%). Intervention according to drug: 10 rituximab (23.3% and 11.5%), 7 infliximab (3.6% and 0.74%), 5 immunoglobulins (9.8% and 1.1%), 4 tocilizumab (16.7% and 3.3%), 3 vedolizumab (5.6% and 1.1%) and 1 reslizumab (4.3% and 0.7%). The total estimated savings from performing the interventions was 12 186.9€ (406.2€/intervention). Conclusion and relevance Approximately half of the interventions carried out consisted of exchange to the biosimilar drug, after consensus. Although the number of interventions was low, their economic impact is important. Despite not being able to prepare these medications centrally and individually, the validation of the prescription and monitoring of the dispensations by the pharmacist is essential. References and/or acknowledgements Conflict of interest No conflict of interest","PeriodicalId":11998,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.144","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 and importance The role of the pharmacist in the validation and dispensing of medications is already known. But the increasingly frequent use of high cost drugs makes that role essential for the sustainability of health systems. Aim and objectives To describe and analyse the pharmaceutical interventions carried out in a non-oncohaematological daily hospital (NOHDH) and to evaluate the economic impact of these interventions. Material and methods From April 2019 to March 2020, pharmacist interventions in the validation and dispensing of electronic prescriptions of intravenous treatments in the NOHDH were recorded. It should be noted that preparation of infusions is not centralised in the pharmacy but is carried out in the daily hospital units. Infusions prepared in the pharmacy, acute treatments and intravenous iron were excluded. To calculate the economic impact, only the dose administered and the average cost of drugs during the year of the study were considered. Results 30 interventions were carried out in 434 patients (6.9% patients) and 2240 dispensations (1.3% dispensations). 29 were accepted (97%). They were classified according to the type of intervention: 15 presentation changes (14 to a biosimilar), 10 dose adjustments (5 to commercial presentations), 4 request errors (1 of dose and 3 of administration date) and 1 change of medication. Intervention according to services: 10 rheumatology (9.6% of patients and 2.2% of dispensations), 5 nephrology (26.3% and 11.4%), 4 digestive (2% and 0.4%), 4 neurology (11.1% and 1.3%), 3 nursing unit (0.7% and 0.13%), 1 haematology (7.7% and 1.9%), 1 allergy (4.3% and 0, 61%), 1 paediatrics (10% and 2%) and other (9.1% and 3.6%). Intervention according to drug: 10 rituximab (23.3% and 11.5%), 7 infliximab (3.6% and 0.74%), 5 immunoglobulins (9.8% and 1.1%), 4 tocilizumab (16.7% and 3.3%), 3 vedolizumab (5.6% and 1.1%) and 1 reslizumab (4.3% and 0.7%). The total estimated savings from performing the interventions was 12 186.9€ (406.2€/intervention). Conclusion and relevance Approximately half of the interventions carried out consisted of exchange to the biosimilar drug, after consensus. Although the number of interventions was low, their economic impact is important. Despite not being able to prepare these medications centrally and individually, the validation of the prescription and monitoring of the dispensations by the pharmacist is essential. References and/or acknowledgements Conflict of interest No conflict of interest
4CPS-312非血液科日化医院的药物干预
背景和重要性药剂师在药物验证和配药中的作用已经为人所知。但是,越来越频繁地使用高成本药物使得这一作用对卫生系统的可持续性至关重要。目的和目的描述和分析在一家非血液病日化医院(NOHDH)实施的药物干预措施,并评估这些干预措施的经济影响。材料与方法记录2019年4月至2020年3月NOHDH静脉治疗电子处方验证与调剂过程中药师干预情况。应该指出的是,输液的配制不是集中在药房,而是在医院的日常单位进行。排除药房配制的输液、急性治疗和静脉注射铁。为了计算经济影响,只考虑了研究年度内的剂量和药物的平均成本。结果共对434例患者(6.9%)、2240个科室(1.3%)实施了30项干预措施。录用29人(97%)。根据干预类型进行分类:15次就诊改变(14次为生物仿制药),10次剂量调整(5次为商业就诊),4次请求错误(1次剂量错误,3次给药日期错误)和1次药物改变。按科室进行干预:风湿病科10家(占患者9.6%,占配药比例2.2%)、肾脏病科5家(占26.3%,占11.4%)、消化科4家(占2%,占0.4%)、神经内科4家(占11.1%,占1.3%)、护理科3家(占0.7%,占0.13%)、血液科1家(占7.7%,占1.9%)、过敏科1家(占4.3%,占0.61%)、儿科1家(占10%,占2%)、其他科(占9.1%,占3.6%)。药物干预:10种利妥昔单抗(23.3%和11.5%),7种英夫利昔单抗(3.6%和0.74%),5种免疫球蛋白(9.8%和1.1%),4种托珠单抗(16.7%和3.3%),3种维多单抗(5.6%和1.1%),1种瑞珠单抗(4.3%和0.7%)。实施干预措施估计节省的总费用为12186.9欧元(每项干预措施406.2欧元)。结论和相关性经协商一致后,约有一半的干预措施包括更换生物类似药。虽然干预的数量很少,但其经济影响是重要的。尽管不能集中和单独制备这些药物,但药剂师对处方的验证和对配药的监测是必不可少的。参考文献和/或致谢利益冲突无利益冲突
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