药剂师参与出院后急诊科文化审查的影响

Andrea Richardson, Sheheryar Muhammad, Chelsea McSwain, Haijing Tran
{"title":"药剂师参与出院后急诊科文化审查的影响","authors":"Andrea Richardson, Sheheryar Muhammad, Chelsea McSwain, Haijing Tran","doi":"10.1177/00185787241238309","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Many infectious diseases are diagnosed in emergency departments (ED) and patients are prescribed antimicrobial therapy. Results from cultures typically take a few days to become finalized. Following up on these results is necessary when medication changes are indicated due to results that show bacteria are resistant to the prescribed antibiotics. Involving pharmacists in assessing the culture and sensitivity results, and making interventions when needed, is an innovative way to ensure that patients receive appropriate antimicrobial therapy based on the culture and sensitivity data. This study analyzed the impact of pharmacist involvement in the ED’s post-discharge positive culture review process on ED re-visits and hospitalizations. Methods: This single-center, pre- and post-implementation study examined the impact of pharmacist involvement in the post-ED visit culture review process on ED re-visits and hospitalizations. Positive microbiological results included documented growth from urine, skin and soft tissue, throat, blood, or stool cultures. Patients included in the study were of 18 years of age or older and had a positive culture result post ED-discharge. Patients were excluded from the study if they were admitted to the hospital or transferred to another facility. The primary outcomes included ED re-visits within 7 days and hospital readmissions within 30 days for the same condition. The secondary outcomes were percentage of pharmacist interventions accepted and types of pharmacist interventions implemented. Results: A total of 141 patients were included in the study, with 65 in the pre-implementation group and 76 in the post-implementation group. The primary outcome of ED re-visits within 7 days for the same condition occurred in 11 (17%) patients in the pre-implementation group and 5 (7%) patients in the post-implementation group ( P = .0454). The primary outcome of hospitalizations within 30 days for the same condition occurred in 5 (8%) patients in the pre-implementation group and 1 (1%) patient in the post-implementation group ( P = .0137). Seventeen (94%) out of the 18 pharmacist interventions were accepted and implemented. The intervention types implemented were to recommend to: change antibiotic (35%), not initiate antibiotic (24%), initiate antibiotic (24%), and continue antibiotic (18%). Conclusion: Pharmacist involvement in the ED post-discharge positive culture review process showed a decrease in ED re-visits and hospitalizations for the same condition.","PeriodicalId":507598,"journal":{"name":"Hospital Pharmacy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Pharmacist Involvement in Post-Discharge Emergency Department Culture Review\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Richardson, Sheheryar Muhammad, Chelsea McSwain, Haijing Tran\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00185787241238309\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Many infectious diseases are diagnosed in emergency departments (ED) and patients are prescribed antimicrobial therapy. Results from cultures typically take a few days to become finalized. Following up on these results is necessary when medication changes are indicated due to results that show bacteria are resistant to the prescribed antibiotics. Involving pharmacists in assessing the culture and sensitivity results, and making interventions when needed, is an innovative way to ensure that patients receive appropriate antimicrobial therapy based on the culture and sensitivity data. This study analyzed the impact of pharmacist involvement in the ED’s post-discharge positive culture review process on ED re-visits and hospitalizations. Methods: This single-center, pre- and post-implementation study examined the impact of pharmacist involvement in the post-ED visit culture review process on ED re-visits and hospitalizations. Positive microbiological results included documented growth from urine, skin and soft tissue, throat, blood, or stool cultures. Patients included in the study were of 18 years of age or older and had a positive culture result post ED-discharge. Patients were excluded from the study if they were admitted to the hospital or transferred to another facility. The primary outcomes included ED re-visits within 7 days and hospital readmissions within 30 days for the same condition. The secondary outcomes were percentage of pharmacist interventions accepted and types of pharmacist interventions implemented. Results: A total of 141 patients were included in the study, with 65 in the pre-implementation group and 76 in the post-implementation group. The primary outcome of ED re-visits within 7 days for the same condition occurred in 11 (17%) patients in the pre-implementation group and 5 (7%) patients in the post-implementation group ( P = .0454). The primary outcome of hospitalizations within 30 days for the same condition occurred in 5 (8%) patients in the pre-implementation group and 1 (1%) patient in the post-implementation group ( P = .0137). Seventeen (94%) out of the 18 pharmacist interventions were accepted and implemented. The intervention types implemented were to recommend to: change antibiotic (35%), not initiate antibiotic (24%), initiate antibiotic (24%), and continue antibiotic (18%). Conclusion: Pharmacist involvement in the ED post-discharge positive culture review process showed a decrease in ED re-visits and hospitalizations for the same condition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":507598,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hospital Pharmacy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hospital Pharmacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00185787241238309\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00185787241238309","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:许多传染病都是在急诊科(ED)确诊的,并为患者开具抗菌治疗处方。培养结果通常需要几天时间才能最终确定。当结果显示细菌对处方抗生素产生耐药性而需要更换药物时,有必要对这些结果进行跟进。让药剂师参与评估培养和药敏结果,并在必要时采取干预措施,是确保患者根据培养和药敏数据接受适当抗菌治疗的一种创新方法。本研究分析了药剂师参与急诊室出院后培养阳性复查流程对急诊室复诊和住院的影响。方法:这项单中心、实施前和实施后的研究探讨了药剂师参与急诊室出院后培养复查流程对急诊室复诊率和住院率的影响。阳性微生物结果包括尿液、皮肤和软组织、咽喉、血液或粪便培养的生长记录。参与研究的患者必须年满 18 周岁,且出院后急诊室培养结果呈阳性。入院或转院的患者不在研究范围内。主要结果包括急诊室 7 天内再次就诊和 30 天内因相同病症再次入院。次要结果包括接受药剂师干预的百分比和实施药剂师干预的类型。结果:共有 141 名患者参与了研究,其中 65 人属于实施前组,76 人属于实施后组。实施前组和实施后组分别有 11 名(17%)和 5 名(7%)患者在 7 天内因相同病症再次到急诊室就诊(P = .0454)。实施前组有 5 名患者(8%)和实施后组有 1 名患者(1%)在 30 天内因相同病症住院(P = 0.0137)。在 18 项药剂师干预措施中,有 17 项(94%)被接受并实施。实施的干预类型包括:建议更换抗生素(35%)、不开始使用抗生素(24%)、开始使用抗生素(24%)和继续使用抗生素(18%)。结论药剂师参与急诊室出院后阳性培养复查流程,可减少急诊室再次就诊和因相同病情住院的人数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of Pharmacist Involvement in Post-Discharge Emergency Department Culture Review
Background: Many infectious diseases are diagnosed in emergency departments (ED) and patients are prescribed antimicrobial therapy. Results from cultures typically take a few days to become finalized. Following up on these results is necessary when medication changes are indicated due to results that show bacteria are resistant to the prescribed antibiotics. Involving pharmacists in assessing the culture and sensitivity results, and making interventions when needed, is an innovative way to ensure that patients receive appropriate antimicrobial therapy based on the culture and sensitivity data. This study analyzed the impact of pharmacist involvement in the ED’s post-discharge positive culture review process on ED re-visits and hospitalizations. Methods: This single-center, pre- and post-implementation study examined the impact of pharmacist involvement in the post-ED visit culture review process on ED re-visits and hospitalizations. Positive microbiological results included documented growth from urine, skin and soft tissue, throat, blood, or stool cultures. Patients included in the study were of 18 years of age or older and had a positive culture result post ED-discharge. Patients were excluded from the study if they were admitted to the hospital or transferred to another facility. The primary outcomes included ED re-visits within 7 days and hospital readmissions within 30 days for the same condition. The secondary outcomes were percentage of pharmacist interventions accepted and types of pharmacist interventions implemented. Results: A total of 141 patients were included in the study, with 65 in the pre-implementation group and 76 in the post-implementation group. The primary outcome of ED re-visits within 7 days for the same condition occurred in 11 (17%) patients in the pre-implementation group and 5 (7%) patients in the post-implementation group ( P = .0454). The primary outcome of hospitalizations within 30 days for the same condition occurred in 5 (8%) patients in the pre-implementation group and 1 (1%) patient in the post-implementation group ( P = .0137). Seventeen (94%) out of the 18 pharmacist interventions were accepted and implemented. The intervention types implemented were to recommend to: change antibiotic (35%), not initiate antibiotic (24%), initiate antibiotic (24%), and continue antibiotic (18%). Conclusion: Pharmacist involvement in the ED post-discharge positive culture review process showed a decrease in ED re-visits and hospitalizations for the same condition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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