Advertisement

Characteristics of drug-related problems discussed by hospital pharmacists in multidisciplinary teams

  • Hege Salvesen BlixEmail author
  • Kirsten K. Viktil
  • Tron Anders Moger
  • Åsmund Reikvam
Original Paper

Abstract

Objective

To investigate pharmacist contribution in the therapeutic hospital team by studying drug-related problems (DRPs), pharmacist therapy advice and consequences of the advice.

Methods

From May to December 2002, 827 patients in five Norwegian hospitals were included in the study. Demographic data, drugs used, relevant medical history, laboratory data and clinical/pharmacological risk factors were recorded prospectively at the wards.

Main outcome measure

DRPs, patients characteristics, pharmacist advice to physicians, nurses or patients, response to the pharmacist advice, and reasons (stated by the pharmacist) for not discussing an identified DRP, were reported. An independent quality assessment team retrospectively assessed the DRPs for a randomly selected number of the study population.

Results

On average 2.6 DRPs per patient were found. A total of 2128 DRPs were registered and of these 1583 (74%) DRPs were brought up for discussion. Physician immediate acceptance rates varied from 80% (for extremely important clinically signififcant DRPs) to 50% (for DRPs of minor clinical significance). High age, use of many drugs at admission, existence of many DRPs and many clinical/pharmacological risk factors for DRPs were associated with low immediate acceptance rate. Type of DRP influenced how the DRP was discussed; adverse drug reaction (ADR) and unnecessary drug were discussed with physicians while e.g. medical chart error and need for patient education were discussed with nurses/patients. Reasons for not discussing DRPs in the team were: not given priority (37%), no longer relevant (31%) and others (31%). DRPs of minor clinical significance were most often excluded from discussion (37%) as opposed to 14% and 22% of those of moderate and major clinical significance.

Conclusions

The majority of patients had one or more DRPs. The problems identified as DRPs by the pharmacists were accepted as such by the physicians and to a high degree acted upon. Both clinical significance of the DRP and patient characteristics influenced physician immediate acceptance rate. Some DRPs could be solved by direct contact with nurses or the patients. Awareness of DRPs increases through participation of pharmacists in the multidisciplinary therapeutic hospital team.

Keywords

Acceptance rate Clinical pharmacy DRPs Drug-related problem Hospital pharmacy service Multidisciplinary team Norway Patient characteristics Pharmacist advice 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Elspeth K. Walseth, Bodil Jahren Hjemaas, Piia Pretsch, Tine Flindt Vraalsen and Frank Jørgensen, clinical pharmacists who provided data, and our colleagues in the multidisciplinary teams of the different participating departments.

Funding: This study was supported by two grants: The Norwegian Community Pharmacy Foundation and The Norwegian Pharmacy Associations’ Foundation, both independent foundations for pharmacy research and development.

References

  1. 1.
    Blix HS, Viktil KK, Reikvam A, Moger TA, Hjemaas BJ, Pretsch P, et al. The majority of hospitalised patients have drug-related problems: results from a prospective study in general hospitals. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2004;60:651-.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Viktil KK, Blix HS, Reikvam A, Moger TA, Hjemaas BJ, Walseth EK, et al. Comparison of drug-related problems in different patient groups. Ann Pharmacother 2004;38:942–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lipton HL, Bird JA. The impact of clinical pharmacists’ consultations, on geriatric patients’ compliance and medical care use: a randomized controlled trial. Gerontologist 1994;34:307–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carmichael JM, O’Connell MB, Devine B, Kelly HW, Ereshefsky L, Linn WD, et al. Collaborative drug therapy management by pharmacists. American College of Clinical Pharmacy. Pharmacotherapy 1997;17:1050–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hanlon JT, Weinberger M, Samsa GP, Schmader KE, Uttech KM, Lewis IK, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of a clinical pharmacist intervention to improve inappropriate prescribing in elderly outpatients with polypharmacy. Am J Med 1996;100:428–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bogden PE, Abbott RD, Williamson P, Onopa JK, Koontz LM. Comparing standard care with a physician and pharmacist team approach for uncontrolled hypertension. J Gen Intern Med 1998;13:740–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kucukarslan SN, Peters M, Mlynarek M, Nafziger DA. Pharmacists on rounding teams reduce preventable adverse drug events in hospital general medicine units. Arch Int Med 2003;163:2014–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zermansky AG, Petty DR, Raynor DK, Freemantle N, Vail A, Lowe CJ. Randomised controlled trial of clinical medication review by a pharmacist of elderly patients receiving repeat prescriptions in general practice. BMJ 2001;323:1340–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Leape LL, Cullen DJ, Clapp MD, Burdick E, Demonaco HJ, Erickson JI, et al. Pharmacist participation on physician rounds and adverse drug events in the intensive care unit. JAMA 1999;282:267–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kohn LT. The Institute of Medicine report on medical error: overview and implications for pharmacy. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2001;58:63–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cipolle RJ, Strand LM, Morley PC. Pharmaceutical care practice. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998:1 ISBN 0-07-012046-3.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe. DRP-classification V3.01. 2002.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Strand LM, Morley PC, Cipolle RJ, Ramsey R, Lamsam GD. Drug-related problems: their structure and function. DICP 1990;24:1093–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Briceland LL, Lomaestro BM, Griswold MW, Lesar TS. Interventions in antimicrobial therapy made by infectious diseases clinical pharmacy specialists. J Infect Dis Pharmacother 1999;3(4):19–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yee DK, Veal JH, Trinh B, Bauer S, Freeman CH. Involvement of HMO-based pharmacists in clinical rounds at contract hospitals. Am J Health Syst Pharm 1997;54:670–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chisholm MA, Mulloy LL, Jagadeesan M, DiPiro JT. Impact of clinical pharmacy services on renal transplant patients’ ?compliance with immunosuppressive medications. Clin Transplant 2001;15:330–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Smythe MA, Shah PP, Spiteri TL, Lucarotti RL, Begle RL. Pharmaceutical care in medical progressive care patients. Ann Pharmacother 1998;32:294–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Barber ND, Batty R, Ridout DA. Predicting the rate of physician-accepted interventions by hospital pharmacists in the United Kingdom. Am J Health Syst Pharm 1997;54:397–405.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cerulli J, Malone M. Assessment of drug-related problems in clinical nutrition patients. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1999;23:218–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fick DM, Cooper JW, Wade WE, Waller JL, Maclean JR, Beers MH. Updating the beers criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults — Results of a US consensus panel of experts. Arch Int Med 2003;163:2716–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lucas C, Glare PA, Sykes JV. Contribution of a liaison clinical pharmacist to an inpatient palliative care unit. Palliat Med 1997;11:209–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Needham DS, Wong IC, Campion PD. Evaluation of the effectiveness of UK community pharmacists’ interventions in community palliative care. Palliat Med 2002;16:219–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hege Salvesen Blix
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kirsten K. Viktil
    • 2
  • Tron Anders Moger
    • 3
  • Åsmund Reikvam
    • 4
  1. 1.Norwegian Institute of Public HealthOsloNorway
  2. 2.Diakonhjemmet Hospital PharmacyOsloNorway
  3. 3.Section of Medical Statistics, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of OsloOsloNorway
  4. 4.Department of Pharmacotherapeutics, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations