Dataset Information

Implementation of a Pharmacist-Led Culture and Susceptibility Review System in Urgent Care and Outpatient Settings.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Increasing prevalence of antibiotic resistance is an urgent public health threat. The purpose of this project is to implement a pharmacist-managed culture review service to decrease and prevent inappropriate use of antibiotics. This service will intervene in cases of mismatched antibiotic-bacteria combinations to decrease health care provider (HCP) and nursing interruptions, improve patient outcomes, and enhance prescribing practices to reduce occurrence of antibiotic resistance.

Observations

Patients requiring changes in antibiotic therapy after culture and susceptibility results were identified through the electronic health record. After results were returned, pharmacists assessed the antibiotic for appropriateness. If the isolated organism was not susceptible to the empiric antibiotic, the pharmacist adjusted the regimen, counseled the patient, documented the intervention electronically, and notified the HCP via an electronic note. Follow-up phone calls assessed for adverse effects and answered patient questions. Pharmacists could change antibiotic therapy without contacting HCPs because of an antimicrobial stewardship care coordination agreement between HCPs and pharmacists. Previously, HCPs were responsible for evaluating culture and susceptibility results as well as adjusting antimicrobial regimens. After implementing this project, 10 interventions were made out of 320 patients from August 2019 to February 2020.

Conclusions

Appropriateness of antibiotic therapy through antimicrobial stewardship could help combat the significant public health issue of antibiotic resistance.

SUBMITTER: Pierce KN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8562898 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementation of a Pharmacist-Led Culture and Susceptibility Review System in Urgent Care and Outpatient Settings.

Pierce Kristen N KN Clarke Kim K Swanson Marci M MM Hobbs Deborah D

Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS 20210912 9

<h4>Background</h4>Increasing prevalence of antibiotic resistance is an urgent public health threat. The purpose of this project is to implement a pharmacist-managed culture review service to decrease and prevent inappropriate use of antibiotics. This service will intervene in cases of mismatched antibiotic-bacteria combinations to decrease health care provider (HCP) and nursing interruptions, improve patient outcomes, and enhance prescribing practices to reduce occurrence of antibiotic resistan ...[more]

PMID: 34737540

Similar Datasets

Project description:Few studies have analyzed community hospital-based parenteral anti-infective therapy (CohPAT). We aimed to assess the clinical impact of a pharmacist-led implementation of a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for CohPAT, and to determine the pharmacist's role in CohPAT medication management. The prospective-period patients (post-implementation group) were compared with the historical control-period patients (pre-implementation group) for receiving a continuous antimicrobial parenteral injection. A CPG was used for laboratory testing for efficacy and safety, the monitoring of adverse drug events during admission, microbiology results coordination, and dosage adjustment. For any antimicrobial drug-related problems, the pharmacist consulted with the clinicians. Over 14 months, 50 participants were included in each group. In the pre-implementation period, 7 (14%) and 4 (8%) out of 50 patients received an inappropriate dosage and nonlaboratory monitoring for dose adjustment, respectively. The patients received the proper dosage of antimicrobial agents, which increased significantly from 78% pre- to 100% post-implementation (p = 0.000). The pharmacist's interventions during the prospective-period were completely accepted by the clinicians, and significantly greater laboratory monitoring complying with CPG was given to the postimplementation group than the pre-implementation group (100% vs. 60%; p = 0.000). Significantly less patients with unfavorable outcomes (failure or in-hospital mortality) were observed in the post-implementation than in the pre-implementation (6% vs. 26%; p = 0.006) group. For the logistic regression analysis, lower respiratory infection (adjusted OR, aOR 3.68; 95%CI 1.13-12.06) and the post-implementation period (aOR 0.21; 95%CI 0.06-0.83) were significant risk factors that were associated with unfavorable outcomes. Given the better clinical outcomes and the improved quality of septic patient care observed after implementation, pharmacist-led implementation should be adopted in healthcare settings.

Project description:IntroductionClinical pharmacy services often involve multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions. However, current pharmacy practice models vary across different countries. Despite the documented benefits of clinical pharmacy services, the characteristics of pharmacist-led interventions in different countries have not yet been adequately explored and described. Therefore, this protocol outlines the methodology for a proposed scoping review aiming to investigate various types of multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions and the outcomes used to evaluate their effectiveness within secondary care settings. Additionally, the scoping review will map the current evidence surrounding the characteristics of interventions and outcomes reported across various countries of socioeconomic status.Methods and analysisThe scoping review will be conducted according to the JBI Methodology for Scoping Reviews and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews. We will systematically search the following electronic databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EbscoHost), Embase (embase.com), Scopus (scopus.com), Cochrane Library (cochranelibrary.com) and APA PsycInfo (Ovid). Additionally, the reference lists of identified reviews and included full texts will be searched for relevant papers. Grey literature sources, such as International Pharmaceutical Abstracts and the International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) website, will be searched. We will include primary studies published in the English language from January 2013 to December 2023, involving secondary care multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions. Two independent reviewers will screen studies against eligibility criteria and use a piloted data extraction form to extract relevant information. We will extract relevant data, complete a tabular summary from each included publication and analyse it.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required as we will be using data from publicly available literature sources. Findings will be disseminated in publications and presentations with relevant stakeholders. We aim to map available evidence across the breadth of studies that have reported multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions and their outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundUrgent and emergency care (UEC) settings provide an opportunity to prevent ill-health and promote healthy lifestyles with potential to screen and deliver interventions to under-served, at-risk populations. The aim of this study was to synthesise and summarise the evidence on the effectiveness and implementation of interventions for health promotion in UEC settings.MethodsPubMed and Embase (OVID) databases were used to search for studies published in English between January 2010 and January 2023. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that examined the effectiveness or implementation of face-to-face health promotion interventions for lifestyle behaviours delivered in UEC settings were eligible. Extracted data were synthesised and qualitatively summarised by lifestyle behaviour. Reviews were quality assessed using AMSTAR 2.ResultsEighteen reviews met the inclusion criteria; all included studies were conducted in emergency departments or trauma units. We identified 15 reviews on alcohol interventions (13 on effectiveness; 2 on implementation) and 3 on smoking interventions (effectiveness). There were no reviews of intervention studies targeting physical activity or diet and nutrition. There was heterogeneity across studies for study design, target populations, intervention design and content, comparator/control groups and outcomes assessed. The effectiveness of alcohol and smoking interventions in UEC settings varied but some reviews provided evidence of a significant decrease in alcohol consumption, alcohol-related outcomes and smoking in intervention groups, particularly in the short-term and in specific population groups. Research has focused on 'brief' interventions as part of screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) approaches. Interventions are delivered by a wide range of staff with substantial variation in design. Alcohol brief interventions appear to be acceptable to UEC patients but clinicians face barriers in delivering them.ConclusionsUEC settings have been under-researched and appear to be under-utilised for delivering health promotion activities, except for alcohol prevention. Review level evidence suggests alcohol and smoking interventions are warranted in some population groups. However, further research is needed to determine the optimal intervention design, content and delivery mode for lifestyle behaviours which are suitable for implementation in UEC settings and promote long-term intervention effectiveness. Changes in clinical practice may be needed, including increased training, integration into service delivery and supportive policy, to facilitate the implementation of SBIRT for lifestyle behaviours. Interventions may need to be delivered in the wider UEC system such as urgent care centres, minor injury units and walk-in centres, in addition to emergency departments and trauma units, to support and increase health promotion activities in UEC settings.

Project description:BackgroundA cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) performed from July 2018 to March 2019 demonstrated the clinical impact of a community pharmacist delivered minor ailment service (MAS) compared with usual pharmacist care (UC). MAS consisted of a technology-based face-to-face consultation delivered by trained community pharmacists. The consultation was guided by clinical pathways for assessment and management, and communication systems, collaboratively agreed with general practitioners. MAS pharmacists were trained and provided monthly practice support by a practice change facilitator. The objective of this study was to assess the cost utility of MAS, compared to UC.MethodsParticipants recruited were adult patients with symptoms suggestive of a minor ailment condition, from community pharmacies located in Western Sydney. Patients received MAS (intervention) or UC (control) and were followed-up by telephone 14-days following consultation with the pharmacist. A cost utility analysis was conducted alongside the cRCT. Transition probabilities and costs were directly derived from cRCT study data. Utility values were not available from the cRCT, hence we relied on utility values reported in the published literature which were used to calculate quality adjusted life years (QALYs), using the area under the curve method. A decision tree model was used to capture the decision problem, considering a societal perspective and a 14-day time horizon. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses assessed robustness and uncertainty of results, respectively.ResultsPatients (n = 894) were recruited from 30 pharmacies and 82% (n = 732) responded to follow-up. On average, MAS was more costly but also more effective (in terms of symptom resolution and QALY gains) compared to UC. MAS patients (n = 524) gained an additional 0.003 QALYs at an incremental cost of $7.14 (Australian dollars), compared to UC (n = 370) which resulted in an ICER of $2277 (95% CI $681.49-3811.22) per QALY.ConclusionEconomic findings suggest that implementation of MAS within the Australian context is cost effective.Trial registration Registered with Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) and allocated the ACTRN: ACTRN12618000286246. Registered on 23 February 2018.

Project description:Background: Little research addressed deprescribing-focused medication optimization interventions while utilizing implementation science. This study aimed to develop a pharmacist-led medication review service with a deprescribing focus in a care facility serving patients of low income receiving medications for free in Lebanon followed by an assessment of the recommendations' acceptance by prescribing physicians. As a secondary aim, the study evaluates the impact of this intervention on satisfaction compared to satisfaction associated with receiving routine care. Methods: The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to address implementation barriers and facilitators by mapping its constructs to the intervention implementation determinants at the study site. After filling medications and receiving routine pharmacy service at the facility, patients 65 years or older and taking 5 or more medications, were assigned into two groups. Both groups of patients received the intervention. Patient satisfaction was assessed right after receiving the intervention (intervention group) or just before the intervention (control group). The intervention consisted of an assessment of patient medication profiles before addressing recommendations with attending physicians at the facility. Patient satisfaction with the service was assessed using a validated translated version of the Medication Management Patient Satisfaction Survey (MMPSS). Descriptive statistics provided data on drug-related problems, the nature and the number of recommendations as well as physicians' responses to recommendations. Independent sample t-tests were used to assess the intervention's impact on patient satisfaction. Results: Of 157 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, 143 patients were enrolled: 72 in the control group and 71 in the experimental group. Of 143 patients, 83% presented drug-related problems (DRPs). Further, 66% of the screened DRPs met the STOPP/START criteria (77%, and 23% respectively). The intervention pharmacist provided 221 recommendations to physicians, of which 52% were to discontinue one or more medications. Patients in the intervention group showed significantly higher satisfaction compared to the ones in the control group (p < 0.001, effect size = 1.75). Of those recommendations, 30% were accepted by the physicians. Conclusion: Patients showed significantly higher satisfaction with the intervention they received compared to routine care. Future work should assess how specific CFIR constructs contribute to the outcomes of deprescribing-focused interventions.

Project description:IntroductionConsidering the impact of non-medical factors (personal and social) on patients with multiple chronic conditions, the term 'medical complexity' is gaining traction as it encompasses both medical and non-medical aspects of patients' medical needs. When primary care is not able to provide timely care for chronic challenges or acute concerns, complex patients require care in emergency or urgent care settings. The concept of medical complexity is continually evolving, although without a universally accepted or standardised definition that determines if an adult patient is considered complex. Therefore, this scoping review aims to understand how medical complexity is defined, identify its defining attributes and examine its use in clinical care research. We also aim to consolidate and evaluate the evidence to suggest a more comprehensive and standardised definition of medical complexity and/or highlight key components required to define medical complexity in urgent care and emergency department settings.Methods and analysisThis protocol is developed according to the approach described by Arksey and O'Malley (2005) and expanded by Levac and colleagues. We will use Walker and Avant's method of concept analysis (2005) to gain a comprehensive understanding of the concept of medical complexity. We will systematically search MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, APA PsycINFO and Cochrane Library. A grey literature search will be conducted in Google and Google Scholar to identify additional information. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts for inclusion, followed by a screening of the full text of potentially relevant articles. Relevant data will be extracted from these studies. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist will be used to report the selection of studies at different stages.Ethics and disseminationScoping review methodology uses and reviews publicly available studies and data, so ethics approval is not required. We will disseminate the results of this scoping review through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at academic conferences and scientific meetings. We will also share these results with key stakeholders, including healthcare providers, community organisations and healthcare system leaders.

Dataset Information

Implementation of a Pharmacist-Led Culture and Susceptibility Review System in Urgent Care and Outpatient Settings.

Background

Observations

Conclusions

Publications

Implementation of a Pharmacist-Led Culture and Susceptibility Review System in Urgent Care and Outpatient Settings.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets