Premium
Using Personal Digital Assistants for a Pharmacist Intervention Monitoring Database: Cost Analysis
Author(s) -
To Timothy HM,
Spurling Lisa K,
Mangoni Arduino A,
Eaton Vaughn S
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
journal of pharmacy practice and research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.222
H-Index - 22
eISSN - 2055-2335
pISSN - 1445-937X
DOI - 10.1002/j.2055-2335.2007.tb00654.x
Subject(s) - medicine , psychological intervention , pharmacist , pharmacy , clinical pharmacy , intervention (counseling) , usability , harm , medical emergency , emergency medicine , family medicine , nursing , human–computer interaction , computer science , political science , law
Background Clinical pharmacists play an important role in inpatient care; however, their contribution and resultant cost savings are often difficult to define and quantify. Aim To evaluate the use of the pharmacist intervention monitoring (PIM) tool on personnel digital assistants (PDAs) in documenting pharmacy interventions, quantify pharmacy interventions in cost savings, and demonstrate their contribution to inpatient care. Method The study was undertaken on 3 hospital wards over 4 weeks. 2 clinical pharmacists prospectively recorded all interventions, defined as any action that directly resulted in a change to patient management, monitoring or therapy. The interventions likely to affect length‐of‐stay were reviewed by a panel who estimated the likely change in length‐of‐stay, and thus savings in bed‐days and potential cost. Results 179 interventions were documented from a review of 204 drug charts. 22 interventions (12%) prevented major harm, 86 (49%) moderate harm, 65 (36%) minor harm and 6 (3%) were of no clinical significance. 63 interventions were likely to have affected length‐of‐stay, with an estimated 40.3 bed‐days saved, and calculated savings of $13 685. Conclusion This pilot demonstrated the usability of the PIM tool to document clinical interventions by pharmacists on PDA, and provided evidence of the cost‐effectiveness of a clinical pharmacy service.