METHOD: This is a 6-month, single-center, prospective, randomized, two-arm, and parallel-group controlled trial. The trial recruits patients attending the otorhinolaryngology clinics of a tertiary referral hospital. Participants are randomized into control or intervention groups in a 1:1 ratio using permuted block randomization. The total number of participants estimated is 154, with each group requiring 77 participants. The control group receives standard pharmaceutical care, while the intervention group receives pharmacist-led education according to the AR-PRISE model. Both groups are assessed for middle turbinate endoscopy findings, disease severity, knowledge level, symptom control, medication adherence, and QoL at baseline and the end-of-study follow-up (day 180 ± 7). Depending on feasibility, intermediate follow-ups are conducted on days 60 ± 7 and 120 ± 7, either virtually or face-to-face. During intermediate follow-ups, participants are assessed for symptom control, medication adherence, and QoL. The intention-to-treat analysis includes all participants assigned to each group. An independent T-test compares the mean difference in knowledge level between the two groups. A two-way repeated measures ANOVA analysis is employed to determine between-group differences for scores of symptom control, adherence rate, and QoL. A P-value
METHODS: This was an observational, cross-sectional survey using a convenience sampling method conducted at the University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC) In-Patient Pharmacy. A validated online questionnaire assessed user satisfaction and task duration.
RESULTS: A total of 21 pharmacists and 18 pharmacy assistants participated in the survey. Most pharmacists (n = 17/21) were confident in the system, and both pharmacists and pharmacy assistants perceived it to be beneficial for patients (n = 33/39) and for reducing medication errors (n = 32/39). Pharmacy assistants spent approximately 5.34 hours on traditional work including filling medication orders (1.44 hours) after automated tablet dispensing and packaging system (ATDPS) implementation. Pharmacists spent 1.19 hours filling medication orders and 1.71 hours checking/verifying them, in contrast.
CONCLUSION: Pharmacists focused mainly on clinical duties with healthcare colleagues, while pharmacy assistants handled various medication orders. Nevertheless, ATDPS reduced pharmacy staff workload in medication handling, achieving user satisfaction.
METHODS: Eighteen students with prior experience in traditional PDPBL processes participated in the study, divided into three groups to perform PDPBL sessions with various triggers from pharmaceutical chemistry, pharmaceutics, and clinical pharmacy fields, while utilizing chat AI provided by ChatGPT to assist with data searching and problem-solving. Questionnaires were used to collect data on the impact of ChatGPT on students' satisfaction, engagement, participation, and learning experience during the PBL sessions.
RESULTS: The survey revealed that ChatGPT improved group collaboration and engagement during PDPBL, while increasing motivation and encouraging more questions. Nevertheless, some students encountered difficulties understanding ChatGPT's information and questioned its reliability and credibility. Despite these challenges, most students saw ChatGPT's potential to eventually replace traditional information-seeking methods.
CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that ChatGPT has the potential to enhance PDPBL in pharmacy education. However, further research is needed to examine the validity and reliability of the information provided by ChatGPT, and its impact on a larger sample size.
METHODS: This qualitative interview study was conducted among final year pharmacy students. Participants were recruited using convenience sampling until data saturation (i.e., when additional interviews didn't lead to any new themes). All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and evaluated by thematic analysis.
KEY FINDINGS: Twenty-two final year pharmacy students were interviewed. Fifteen of them preferred the government sector as their choice training, three chose the community sector, two preferred private hospitals and another two preferred the pharmaceutical industry. The majority of the students gave positive feedback towards the liberalization of PRP training sites. Most of them chose clinical pharmacy as their preferred training site despite knowing of the saturation issue in government hospitals. This was mainly due to the opportunity to gain clinical experience and knowledge from the government sector. A small number of students preferred the pharmaceutical industry based on their personal interests and opportunities for career advancement.
CONCLUSION: Pharmacy students generally chose their PRP training site based on personal interest, future career advancement and working environment. A better understanding of career pathways and opportunities in the pharmaceutical industry by the students is required.
METHOD: This is a non-interventional, retrospective analysis of documented CPI in a 100-bed, acute-care private hospital in Amman, Jordan. Study consisted of 542 patients, 574 admissions, and 1694 CPI. Team collected demographic and clinical data using a standardized tool. Input consisted of 54 variables with some taking merely repetitive values for each CPI in each patient whereas others varying with every CPI. Therefore, CPI was consolidated to one rejected and/or one accepted per patient per admission. Groups of accepted and rejected CPI were compared in terms of matched and unmatched variables. ANN were, subsequently, trained and internally as well as cross validated for outcomes of interest. Outcomes were length of hospital and intensive care stay after the index CPI (LOSTA & LOSICUA, respectively), readmissions, mortality, and cost of hospitalization. Best models were finally used to compare the two scenarios of approving 80% versus 100% of CPI. Variable impacts (VI) automatically generated by the ANN were compared to evaluate the effect of rejecting CPI. Main outcome measure was Lengths of hospital stay after the index CPI (LOSTA).
RESULTS: ANN configurations converged within 18 s and 300 trials. All models showed a significant reduction in LOSTA with 100% versus 80% accepted CPI of about 0.4 days (2.6 ± 3.4, median (range) of 2 (0-28) versus 3.0 ± 3.8, 2 (0-30), P-value = 0.022). Average savings with acceptance of those rejected CPI was 55 JD (~ 78 US dollars) and could help hire about 1.3 extra clinical pharmacist full-time equivalents.
CONCLUSIONS: Maximizing acceptance of CPI reduced the length of hospital stay in this model. Practicing Clinical Pharmacists may qualify for further privileges including promotion to a fully independent prescriber status.
Objective: This study aimed to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital-based clinical pharmacists working in Malaysia and the implications on how clinical pharmacy is perceived as a health care service.
Methods: A qualitative study was designed to meet the research objectives. Nineteen hospital-based clinical pharmacists consented and participated in one-on-one, semi-structured interviews. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using an iterative thematic analysis approach.
Results: The experiences and views of the participants were reported. Three main themes were developed: 'Reassignment and other changes in clinical pharmacist roles', 'Adapting clinical pharmacy services to COVID-19', and 'The need for clinical pharmacists in the ward'. The findings indicate that in many cases, clinical pharmacy services were fully or partially withdrawn from the ward to reduce the risk of infection and to conserve the usage of personal protective equipment. Despite this, clinical pharmacists continued to support patient care in hospitals through the use of technology. The withdrawal of clinical pharmacy services, however, raises concern that the role of clinical pharmacists is still poorly recognized.
Conclusion: Clinical pharmacists in hospitals continue to support patient care despite the disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Greater support and recognition of their role is required in order to empower and enhance their ability to deliver pharmaceutical care.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This study aimed to determine the most efficient and effective management of stagnant and shortage drugs by comparing three pharmacy logistic methods; the economic order quantity (EOQ), minimum-maximum stock level (MMSL), and the traditional consumption of drug inventory, at RA Basoeni Hospital, Mojokerto. Drug inventory was analyzed to calculate the opportunity loss, opportunity cost, and proportions of both stagnant and shortage drugs.
RESULTS: We found that EOQ and MMSL performed best for control of stagnant drugs and shortage drugs, respectively. Both methods had proved as effective pharmacy logistic planning. In addition, EOQ produced the lowest opportunity cost for stagnant drugs besides the lowest opportunity loss for shortage drugs.
CONCLUSION: The study concluded that EOQ is the most effective and efficient method to manage stagnant and shortage drugs at hospital pharmacy.
Methods: A cross-sectional study, using a validated 23-item self-administered questionnaire, was conducted among pharmacists from 11 public hospitals in the State of Selangor, Malaysia, from December 2016 to January 2017. All public hospital pharmacists (n=432) were invited to participate in the survey. A 5-point Likert scale was employed in the questionnaire; the perception section was scored from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) while the practice section was scored from 1 (never) to 5 (always). Both descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were used to analyse data.
Results: Of the 432 pharmacists surveyed, 199 responded, giving a response rate of 46.0%. The majority of the respondents agreed (n=190, 95.5%) that the AMS programme improves patient care at their hospitals (median=5; IQR=1). Slightly less than half of the respondents indicated that a local antibiotic guideline was established in their hospitals (median=3, IQR=2.5), and had taken part in antimicrobial awareness campaigns to promote optimal use of antimicrobials in hospitals (median=3, IQR=1).
Conclusions: Overall, the perception and practices of the surveyed hospital pharmacists towards AMS programme were positive. National antibiotic guidelines, which take into consideration local antimicrobial resistance patterns, should be used fully to improve antimicrobial usage and to reduce practice variation. Collaboration among healthcare professionals should be strengthened to minimise the unfavourable consequences of unintended use of antimicrobial agents while optimising clinical outcomes.
Method: In this cross-sectional observational study in Punjab, an instrument of the measure was developed based on health care facility characteristics and ASPs after an extensive literature review. The questionnaire was circulated by mail or through drop off surveys to medical superintendents or directors/heads of pharmacy departments of hospitals.
Results: Out of 254, a total of 137 hospitals fully completed the questionnaire - 11 primary, 65 secondary, 46 tertiary and 15 specialized hospitals. The use of antimicrobial prescribing guidelines (68.7%), provision of infectious diseases consultation services (66.4%), clinical pharmacy service (65.7%), use of drug and therapeutics committees to approve antimicrobial prescribing (65.5%), regular audit by doctors on antimicrobial prescribing (54.1%) and use of a restricted formulary for antimicrobial (50.4%) were the most common ASPs. However, most of these activities were only somewhat or moderately successful. Whereas, electronic antimicrobial prescribing approval systems (15.3%), using a sticker to notify prescribers regarding the need to obtain approval for the antimicrobial prescribed (16.1%) and participation in the national antimicrobial utilization surveillance program (19.7%) were only seen in a few hospitals.
Conclusion: Study inferred that there are inadequate ASPs in the hospitals of Pakistan. A multidisciplinary approach, clinical leadership and availability of motivated and trained individuals are essential elements for the success of future ASPs.
Methods: The modified Delphi method was used to obtain the consensus. The initial indicators, based on a literature review, were evaluated and assessed by members of the expert panel through three rounds of repetition until the consensus was reached. The expert panel members were selected based on their knowledge of or expertise in pharmacy service performance and geographical considerations. Analysis of the expert panel consensus level was determined by calculating the mean and interquartile range.
Results: Fifteen expert panel members started the first round (93.7% of the 16 targets) with 12 of them (75%) completing the third round of the modified Delphi method. Three expert panel members were representatives of the Regency Health Office, and the others were pharmacist practitioners at primary health centres from three different regencies. The consensus results were 26 indicators of drug management, 19 indicators of clinical pharmacy services, and two indicators of overall pharmacy performance.
Conclusion: The consensus indicators for measuring drug management, clinical pharmacy services, and overall pharmacy performance can be used as a reference and standard to measure the quality of pharmacy services at primary health centres. Therefore, the measurement results are more relevant if compared between one and other studies.