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.
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.
DESIGN: We introduced the shared learning experience in clinical pharmacy and pharmacotherapeutic practice experiences involving 87 third-year and 51 fourth-year students. Both student groups undertook the practice experiences together, with third-year students working in smaller groups mentored by fourth-year students.
ASSESSMENT: A majority of the students (> 75%) believed that they learned to work as a team during their practice experiences and that the shared learning approach provided an opportunity to practice their communication skills. Similarly, most respondents (> 70%) agreed that the new approach would help them become effective members of the healthcare team and would facilitate their professional relationships in future practice. Almost two-thirds of the students believed that the shared learning enhanced their ability to understand clinical problems. However, about 31% of the pharmacy students felt that they could have learned clinical problem-solving skills equally well working only with peers from their own student group.
CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacy students in the current study generally believed that the shared-learning approach enhanced their ability to understand clinical problems and improved their communication and teamwork skills. Both groups of students were positive that they had acquired some skills through the shared-learning approach.
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 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: 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.
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.
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.