使用标准化关键绩效指标(kpi)对医院临床药学实践进行标杆管理。

IF 3.3 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2024-12-16 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1080/20523211.2024.2431181
Amelia R Cossart, Martin L Canning, Faith R Yong, Christopher R Freeman
{"title":"使用标准化关键绩效指标(kpi)对医院临床药学实践进行标杆管理。","authors":"Amelia R Cossart, Martin L Canning, Faith R Yong, Christopher R Freeman","doi":"10.1080/20523211.2024.2431181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Hospital pharmacy services support quality use of medicines and medication safety through clinical pharmacy activities such as medication reviews and patient education. These activities can be measured and monitored using evidence-based and standardised key performance indicators (KPIs), which highlight the value of pharmacy services. Standardisation of KPIs supports long-term benchmarking and inter- and intra-site comparisons to target key areas for improvement in clinical pharmacy services. <b>Aim:</b> To describe the type and frequency of clinical pharmacy activity across five hospitals within one metropolitan hospital district. <b>Methods:</b> Key Performance Indicator data were collected by pharmacists from five hospital sites at one metropolitan hospital district, in Queensland Australia. Data were collected over one week for the following clinical settings: inpatient, discharge, outpatient clinic, and the dispensary. Data were collected using a manual, paper-based data collection tool previously developed using a co-design process. <b>Results:</b> Across 11,215 inpatient encounters, hospital pharmacy services provided: best possible medication history (BPMH) within 24 h of admission: 69.5%; daily medication chart review: 57.2%; discharge education: 82.7%, discharge reconciliation: 88.2%; and provision of discharge medication record: 82.4%. Across 1,092 outpatient encounters, pharmacists documented BPMH for 33.3% of patients. Pharmacists identified a total of 5,009 drug-related problems (DRPs) across the data collection period, with the rate of identification highest in the outpatient clinic setting (64.8 per 100 patient reviews) followed by discharge (52.6 per 100 patient reviews) and then inpatient (48.1 per 100 patient reviews). Almost 20% of DRPs identified (<i>n </i>= 975) were high risk. <b>Conclusion:</b> Reporting and benchmarking clinical pharmacy activity through standardised KPIs supports opportunities to identify service improvements. Future research should focus on larger scale studies using routinely recorded data to monitor clinical pharmacy KPIs across all care settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":16740,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","volume":"17 1","pages":"2431181"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11650437/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benchmarking hospital clinical pharmacy practice using standardised key performance indicators (KPIs).\",\"authors\":\"Amelia R Cossart, Martin L Canning, Faith R Yong, Christopher R Freeman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20523211.2024.2431181\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Hospital pharmacy services support quality use of medicines and medication safety through clinical pharmacy activities such as medication reviews and patient education. These activities can be measured and monitored using evidence-based and standardised key performance indicators (KPIs), which highlight the value of pharmacy services. Standardisation of KPIs supports long-term benchmarking and inter- and intra-site comparisons to target key areas for improvement in clinical pharmacy services. <b>Aim:</b> To describe the type and frequency of clinical pharmacy activity across five hospitals within one metropolitan hospital district. <b>Methods:</b> Key Performance Indicator data were collected by pharmacists from five hospital sites at one metropolitan hospital district, in Queensland Australia. Data were collected over one week for the following clinical settings: inpatient, discharge, outpatient clinic, and the dispensary. Data were collected using a manual, paper-based data collection tool previously developed using a co-design process. <b>Results:</b> Across 11,215 inpatient encounters, hospital pharmacy services provided: best possible medication history (BPMH) within 24 h of admission: 69.5%; daily medication chart review: 57.2%; discharge education: 82.7%, discharge reconciliation: 88.2%; and provision of discharge medication record: 82.4%. Across 1,092 outpatient encounters, pharmacists documented BPMH for 33.3% of patients. Pharmacists identified a total of 5,009 drug-related problems (DRPs) across the data collection period, with the rate of identification highest in the outpatient clinic setting (64.8 per 100 patient reviews) followed by discharge (52.6 per 100 patient reviews) and then inpatient (48.1 per 100 patient reviews). Almost 20% of DRPs identified (<i>n </i>= 975) were high risk. <b>Conclusion:</b> Reporting and benchmarking clinical pharmacy activity through standardised KPIs supports opportunities to identify service improvements. Future research should focus on larger scale studies using routinely recorded data to monitor clinical pharmacy KPIs across all care settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16740,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"2431181\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11650437/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20523211.2024.2431181\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20523211.2024.2431181","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

摘要

背景:医院药学服务通过临床药学活动(如药物评价和患者教育)支持药品的高质量使用和用药安全。这些活动可以使用基于证据的标准化关键绩效指标(kpi)来衡量和监测,这些指标突出了药房服务的价值。关键绩效指标的标准化支持长期基准和站点间和站点内的比较,以改善临床药学服务的关键领域。目的:描述某大都市医院区内5家医院临床药学活动的类型和频率。方法:主要绩效指标数据由澳大利亚昆士兰州一个城市医院区的五家医院的药师收集。在一周内收集以下临床设置的数据:住院、出院、门诊和药房。数据收集使用手动,基于纸张的数据收集工具,以前使用共同设计过程开发。结果:在11,215例住院患者就诊中,医院药房提供的服务:入院24小时内最佳用药史(BPMH): 69.5%;每日用药图回顾:57.2%;出院教育:82.7%,出院调解:88.2%;提供出院用药记录:82.4%。在1092次门诊就诊中,药剂师记录了33.3%的患者的BPMH。在整个数据收集期间,药剂师共发现了5,009个药物相关问题(DRPs),其中门诊的识别率最高(每100例患者评论64.8个),其次是出院(每100例患者评论52.6个),然后是住院(每100例患者评论48.1个)。几乎20%的drp (n = 975)是高风险的。结论:通过标准化的关键绩效指标对临床药学活动进行报告和基准测试,为确定服务改进提供了机会。未来的研究应侧重于更大规模的研究,使用常规记录的数据来监测所有护理环境中的临床药学kpi。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Benchmarking hospital clinical pharmacy practice using standardised key performance indicators (KPIs).

Background: Hospital pharmacy services support quality use of medicines and medication safety through clinical pharmacy activities such as medication reviews and patient education. These activities can be measured and monitored using evidence-based and standardised key performance indicators (KPIs), which highlight the value of pharmacy services. Standardisation of KPIs supports long-term benchmarking and inter- and intra-site comparisons to target key areas for improvement in clinical pharmacy services. Aim: To describe the type and frequency of clinical pharmacy activity across five hospitals within one metropolitan hospital district. Methods: Key Performance Indicator data were collected by pharmacists from five hospital sites at one metropolitan hospital district, in Queensland Australia. Data were collected over one week for the following clinical settings: inpatient, discharge, outpatient clinic, and the dispensary. Data were collected using a manual, paper-based data collection tool previously developed using a co-design process. Results: Across 11,215 inpatient encounters, hospital pharmacy services provided: best possible medication history (BPMH) within 24 h of admission: 69.5%; daily medication chart review: 57.2%; discharge education: 82.7%, discharge reconciliation: 88.2%; and provision of discharge medication record: 82.4%. Across 1,092 outpatient encounters, pharmacists documented BPMH for 33.3% of patients. Pharmacists identified a total of 5,009 drug-related problems (DRPs) across the data collection period, with the rate of identification highest in the outpatient clinic setting (64.8 per 100 patient reviews) followed by discharge (52.6 per 100 patient reviews) and then inpatient (48.1 per 100 patient reviews). Almost 20% of DRPs identified (n = 975) were high risk. Conclusion: Reporting and benchmarking clinical pharmacy activity through standardised KPIs supports opportunities to identify service improvements. Future research should focus on larger scale studies using routinely recorded data to monitor clinical pharmacy KPIs across all care settings.

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
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