Documenting pharmacist's clinical interventions in New Zealand hospitals.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the perceived value and the recording, storage and use of pharmacists' clinical intervention data in New Zealand hospitals.


METHODS
A questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey of all pharmacy managers in public and privately funded hospitals employing one or more pharmacists.


METHODS
The number of hospitals collecting information, the collection and storage systems used, and use of the data.


RESULTS
Twenty-nine hospitals responded (94%). All rated data collection as very important (17) or important (12) but five hospitals, of all sizes, did not record interventions. Of those collecting data, 21 hospitals made daily recordings and three periodic. Pre-printed forms were the most popular initial collection method (18 hospitals), with notebooks used by three hospitals. Almost all the hospitals using a paper-based collection system (15, 83%) transcribed data into an electronic database, but there were unfavourable comments regarding transcription and analysis time. Three hospitals stated they used direct intranet data entry but one also used a backup paper form when ward computer access was limited. Of information frequently recorded, variability in categorising interventions and grading severity, were identified as concerns. The impact on cost savings was not commonly recorded. The most popular uses for intervention data was to provide management activity reports (15), identify pharmacists' impact on patient care (15) and to identify prescribing problems (14); less than half reported use for educational purposes. Five hospitals reported data were underutilised and 15 considered their systems required modification.


CONCLUSIONS
The majority of New Zealand hospitals collect pharmacist intervention data on a daily basis. While a high value is placed on intervention data by pharmacy managers, some hospitals did not meet national data collection requirements. Favouring paper-based systems over direct electronic entry may reflect difficulties in computer access in ward areas. The development of a national system is suggested to aid access to data collection for all hospitals, provided issues of categorising and grading can be resolved. Furthermore we recommend that direct-entry technologies be critically evaluated for reliability, efficiency and cost, and that data be used more frequently for hospital staff education.
Millar
Toni
T
Unichem Morrinsville Pharmacy, Morrinsville, New Zealand.
Sandilya
Radhika
R
Tordoff
June
J
Ferguson
Ruth
R
D004282:Documentation; D004358:Drug Therapy; D016304:Hospitals, Private; D006779:Hospitals, Public; D006801:Humans; D009520:New Zealand; D005791:Patient Care; D010595:Pharmacists; D010607:Pharmacy Service, Hospital / Q000458:organization & administration*; D024382:Professional Role; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1997 Aug 1;54(15):1722-7
9262744
N Z Med J. 2005 Jan 28;118(1208):U1259
15682211
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1997 Jul 15;54(14):1596-603
9248602
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1996 Mar 15;53(6):651-4
8800970
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2001 Aug 15;58(16):1520-2
11515349
Am J Hosp Pharm. 1994 Sep 1;51(17):2131-8
7985688
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2003 Sep 1;60(17):1772-4
14503114
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004 Apr;57(4):513-21
15025751
Pharmacotherapy. 1995 Mar-Apr;15(2):220-7
7624270
BMJ. 1990 Apr 14;300(6730):986-90
2344509
Am J Hosp Pharm. 1994 Feb 1;51(3):387-8
8160695
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2005 Sep 1;62(17):1782-7
16120737
Am J Hosp Pharm. 1993 Jul;50(7):1426-8
8362879