Financial impact of medication reviews by clinical pharmacists to reduce in-hospital adverse drug events: a return-on-investment analysis

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug events contribute to rising health care costs. Clinical pharmacists can reduce their risks by identifying and solving drug-related problems (DRPs) through medication review.

AIM

To develop an economic model to determine whether medication reviews performed by clinical pharmacists could lead to a reduction in health care costs associated with the prevention of potential adverse drug events.

METHOD

Two pharmacists performed medication reviews during ward rounds in an internal medicine setting over one year. Avoided costs were estimated by monetizing five categories of DRPs (improper drug selection, drug interactions, untreated indications, inadequate dosages, and drug use without an indication). An expert panel assessed potential adverse drug events and their probabilities of occurrence for 20 randomly selected DRPs in each category. The costs of adverse drug events were extracted from internal hospital financial data. A partial economic study from a hospital perspective then estimated the annual costs avoided by resolving DRPs identified by 3 part-time clinical pharmacists (0.9 full-time equivalent) from 2019 to 2020. The return on investment (ROI) of medication review was calculated.

RESULTS

The estimated annual avoided costs associated with the potential adverse drug events induced by 676 DRPs detected was € 304,170. The cost of a 0.9 full-time equivalent clinical pharmacist was € 112,408. Extrapolated to 1 full-time equivalent, the annual net savings was € 213,069 or an ROI of 1-1.71. Sensitivity analyses showed that the economic model was robust.

CONCLUSION

This economic model revealed the positive financial impact and favorable return on investment of a medication review intervention performed by clinical pharmacists. These findings should encourage the future deployment of a pharmacist-led adverse drug events prevention program.

Estimated Costs of Drug-Related Problems Prevented by Pharmacist Prescription Reviews Among Hospitalized Internal Medicine Patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Data are lacking on the estimated costs of pharmacist prescription reviews (PPRs) for hospitalized internal medicine patients. This study investigates the estimated costs of drug-related problems (DRPs) prevented by PPRs among hospitalized internal medicine patients.

METHODS

We reviewed all medication orders for patients at an academic teaching hospital in China for 2 years. DRPs were categorized using the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe classification. The severity of the potential harm of DRPs was assessed by the Harm Associated with Medication Error Classification (HAMEC) tool. The estimated cost of PPRs was calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 162426 medication orders for 4314 patients were reviewed, and 1338 DRPs were identified by pharmacists who spent 2230 hours performing PPRs. Among the 1080 DRPs that were prospectively intervened upon, 703 were resolved. The HAMEC tool showed that 47.1% of DRPs were assessed as level 2, 30.4% as level 3, 20.6% as level 1, and 0.6% carried a life-threatening risk. Pharmacist interventions contributed to the prevention of DRP errors and a reduction of $339 139.44. This resulted in a mean cost saving of $482.42 per patient at an input cost of $21 495.06 over the 2 years. The benefit-cost ratio was 15.8.

CONCLUSION

PPRs are beneficial for detecting potential DRPs and creating potential cost savings among hospitalized internal medicine patients.

Advanced-scope pharmacist roles in medical outpatient clinics: a cost-consequence analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a growing body of evidence that supports the clinical effectiveness of pharmacist roles in outpatient settings. However, limited studies have investigated the economic efficiency of advanced-scope outpatient pharmacist roles, particularly in the Australian setting. Assessing the overall costs and benefits of these outpatient pharmacist roles is needed to ensure service sustainability.

AIMS

To use a cost-consequence approach to evaluate the advanced-scope outpatient pharmacist roles across multiple clinic disciplines from the hospital perspective.

METHODS

A cost-consequence analysis was undertaken using data from a previous clinical-effectiveness study. All outpatient pharmacist consults conducted from 1 June 2019 to 31 May 2020 across 18 clinic disciplines were evaluated. Consequences from the pharmacist services included number of consults conducted, number of medication-related activities and number of resolved recommendations.

RESULTS

The overall cost to the hospital for the outpatient pharmacist service across all clinics was AU$1 991 122, with a potential remuneration of AU$3 895 247. There were 10 059 pharmacist consults undertaken for the 12-month period. Medication-related activities performed by pharmacists primarily included 6438 counselling and education activities and 4307 medication list activities. When the specialist pharmacist roles were added to the outpatient clinics, several health service benefits were also realised.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of pharmacist roles to outpatient clinics can increase the cost of services; however, they also can increase medication optimisation activities. Future research should examine a societal perspective that includes broader cost and effectiveness outcomes. This study could justify the implementation of advanced-scope outpatient pharmacist roles in other Australian hospitals.

A systematic review of economic evaluations of pharmacist services

BACKGROUND

Challenges to the provision of health care are occurring internationally and are expected to increase in the future, further increasing health spending. As pharmacist roles are evolving and expanding internationally to provide individualised pharmaceutical care it is important to assess the cost-effectiveness of these services.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically synthesise the international literature regarding published economic evaluations of pharmacy services to assess their cost-effectiveness and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of economic evaluations of pharmacy services was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, IPA and online journals with search functions likely to publish economic evaluations of pharmacy services. Data were extracted regarding the interventions, the time horizon, the outcomes and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Studies' quality of reporting was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standard (CHEERS) statement.

RESULTS

Seventy-five studies were included in the systematic review, including 67 cost-effectiveness analyses, 6 cost-benefit analyses and 2 cost-consequence analyses. Of these, 57 were either dominant or cost-effective using a willingness-to-pay threshold of NZ$46 645 per QALY. A further 11 studies' cost-effectiveness were unable to be evaluated. Interventions considered to be most cost-effective included pharmacist medication reviews, pharmacist adherence strategies and pharmacist management of type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension and warfarin/INR monitoring. The quality of reporting of studies differed with no studies reporting all 28 items of the CHEERS statement.

CONCLUSIONS

There is strong economic evidence to support investment in extended pharmacist services, particularly those focussed on long-term chronic health conditions.

Developing and piloting a cross-sectoral hospital pharmacist intervention for patients in transition between hospital and general practice

Background

Healthcare is challenged by a rapidly growing group of patients with multi-morbidity and polypharmacy. Increasing activity and specialization puts pressure on healthcare sectors. Medication errors in cross-sectoral transition of patients are often seen. The aim of the study was to explore drug-related problems (DRPs) in the transition of patients between sectors and to develop and pilot-test a cross-sectoral hospital pharmacist intervention to overcome some of these problems.

Methods

DRPs in cross-sectoral transitions were explored from four perspectives; the literature, the primary and secondary healthcare sector and the patients. An intervention was developed from the findings through co-creation between pharmacists, doctors and a nurse. The intervention was piloted and evaluated from data on the included patients and the activities performed.

Results

DRPs in transitions from general practice (GP) to hospital were caused by inadequate focus on updating the Shared Medication Record (SMR). For patients being discharged, DRPs were described with multiple facets; for example, missing information on medication changes, lacking patient involvement and problems with dose-dispensed medicine or electronic prescriptions. An intervention with a pharmacist in a shared employment between Hospital Pharmacy and GP was developed and piloted. The intervention included medication reconciliation and updating SMR for patients referred to hospital; and medication review, overview of medication changes and follow-up telephone calls for patients discharged from hospital. The intervention identified and solved several DRPs; in this way, medication errors were avoided. Access to health records in both sectors was important in the identification and resolution of DRPs.

Conclusion

DRPs in cross-sectoral transitions are multifaceted and the experiences depend on the point of view. The cross-sectoral hospital pharmacist intervention identified and solved several DRPs and medication errors were avoided. The intervention made sense to both healthcare sectors and patients. Shared employment and unique access to health records in both sectors showed to be of importance in the identification and resolution of DRPs.

Plain language summary

Development and pilot-test of a pharmacist intervention for patients in transition between hospital and general practice Background: Healthcare is challenged by a rapidly growing group of patients with multiple chronic diseases treated with several drugs at the same time. The aim of the study was to explore drug-related problems in the transition of patients between the hospital and patients' general practitioner and to develop and pilot-test a pharmacist intervention to overcome some of these problems.Methods: Drug-related problems in patient transitions were explored from the perspectives of the hospital, the general practitioner, the patients and the literature. An intervention was developed from the findings by pharmacists, doctors and a nurse. The intervention was pilot-tested and evaluated from the descriptions of the included patients and activities performed.Results: Drug-related problems in transitions from general practice to hospital were caused by inadequate focus on updating the Shared Medication Record.For patients being discharged, drug-related problems were related to for examplemissing information on medication changessparse involvement of the patient in their own treatmentproblems with medicine dispensed on a dose dispensing machine at the local pharmacy.An intervention with a pharmacist in a shared employment between Hospital Pharmacy and general practice was developed and piloted. The intervention includedtalking to the patient about their medication and updating the Shared Medication Record for patients referred to hospitalmedication review, overview of medication changes and follow-up telephone calls for patients discharged from hospital to general practice.The intervention identified and solved several drug-related problems. Access to health records in both the general practice and at the hospital was important in the identification of drug-related problems.Conclusions: Drug-related problems in cross-sectoral transitions are multifaceted. The pharmacist intervention identified and solved several drug-related problems. The intervention made sense to the general practitioner, hospital and patients. Shared employment and unique access to health records in both the general practice and at the hospital showed to be of importance in the identification of drug-related problems.

Effectiveness of Pharmacist Intervention to Reduce Medication Errors and Health-Care Resources Utilization After Transitions of Care: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES

Medication errors are common during transitions of care. The main objective of the current investigation was to examine the effectiveness of pharmacist-based transition of care interventions on the reduction of medication errors after hospital discharge.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted to detect published reports of randomized trials using the National Library of Medicine's PubMed database, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Google Scholar inclusive to July 1, 2015. Search terms included pharmacist, medication, errors, readmission, transition, and discharge. A priori main outcomes included medication errors and health-care resources utilization (hospital readmission and/or emergency room visits). Quantitative analysis was performed using a random effect method.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized trials examining 3503 patients were included in the final analysis. The aggregate effect of the 10 studies evaluating the effect of pharmacists intervention on the incidence of medication errors during transitions of care favored pharmacist over control with an odds ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 0.44 (0.31-0.63). The overall effect of 4 studies evaluating the effect of a pharmacist intervention on the incidence of emergency room visits compared with control favored the pharmacist intervention, odds ratio (95% CI) of 0.42 (0.22-0.78), number needed to treat (95% CI) of 6.2 (3.4-31.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacist transition of care intervention is an effective strategy to reduce medication errors after hospital discharge. In addition, a pharmacist intervention also reduces subsequent emergency room visits. Hospitals should consider implementing this intervention to improve patient safety and quality during transitions of care.

Effect of pharmacists' interventions on health outcomes of children with asthma: A systematic review

METHODS

A literature search was performed in January 23, 2018 at the Embase, LILACS, OpenThesis, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases through January 23, 2018, using keywords related to "asthma," "pharmacist," and "children." This systematic review followed the methodologic standards recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We included intervention studies on the effect of pharmacists' interventions on pediatric patients with asthma, performed in hospital or ambulatory care settings, with presenting process and outcome indicators as a result of pharmacists' interventions. The methodologic quality of the included studies was assessed independently by 2 researchers. The Cohen kappa index was used to measure the degree of agreement between the 2 investigators.

RESULTS

The search yielded 3671 records, of which 5 were included in this review. Most of these studies were conducted in the United States (n = 2) and in outpatient clinics (n = 4). All studies described components of pharmacists' interventions. The most reported category concerning pharmacists' work process was the initial assessment of patients' conditions, with the assessment of outcomes (at baseline and follow-up) as the only category present in all studies. The most assessed outcomes at baseline were asthma control, emergency department visits, medication use and technique, and adherence to asthma therapy. At follow-up, emergency department visits were the most evaluated outcome (n = 2), and no study assessed economic outcomes. The average consultation time ranged from 20 to 45 minutes, and the number of encounters ranged from 2 to 3.

CONCLUSION

This study highlighted the limited number of studies, most with low quality, on the impact of the pharmacist on pediatric asthma. The most assessed outcome was the number of emergency department visits, with positive results after interventions. Heterogeneity regarding assessed outcomes and work processes was noted, which limited comparison of the results and interventions.

The medication discrepancy detection service: A cost-effective multidisciplinary clinical approach

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effectiveness of a Medication Discrepancy Detection Service (MDDS), a collaborative service between the community pharmacy and Primary Care.

DESIGN

Non-controlled before-and-after study.

SETTING

Bidasoa Integrated Healthcare Organisation, Gipuzkoa, Spain.

PARTICIPANTS

The service was provided by a multidisciplinary group of community pharmacists (CPs), general practitioners (GPs), and primary care pharmacists, to patients with discrepancies between their active medical charts and medicines that they were actually taking.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcomes were the number of medicines, the type of discrepancy, and GPs' decisions. Secondary outcomes were time spent by CPs, emergency department (ED) visits, hospital admissions, and costs.

RESULTS

The MDDS was provided to 143 patients, and GPs resolved discrepancies for 126 patients. CPs identified 259 discrepancies, among which the main one was patients not taking medicines listed on their active medical charts (66.7%, n=152). The main GPs' decision was to withdraw the treatment (54.8%, n=125), which meant that the number of medicines per patient was reduced by 0.92 (9.12±3.82 vs. 8.20±3.81; p<.0001). The number of ED visits and hospital admissions per patient were reduced by 0.10 (0.61±.13 vs 0.52±0.91; p=.405 and 0.17 (0.33±0.66 vs. 0.16±0.42; p=.007), respectively. The cost per patient was reduced by €444.9 (€1003.3±2165.3 vs. €558.4±1273.0; p=.018).

CONCLUSION

The MDDS resulted in a reduction in the number of medicines per patients and number of hospital admissions, and the service was associated with affordable, cost-effective ratios.

Impact of Pharmacist-led Discharge Counseling on Hospital Readmission and Emergency Department Visits: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transitions of care can contribute to medication errors and other adverse drug events.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of pharmacist-led discharge counseling on hospital readmission and emergency department visits through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

EDATA SOURCES

Lectronic searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, and DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals), along with a manual search (July 2017). PROSPERO registration no. CRD42017068444.

STUDY SELECTION

Two independent reviewers performed all the steps of the systematic review process (screening of titles and abstracts, full-text appraisal, data extraction, and quality assessment), with contributions from a third researcher. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting data on pharmacist-led discharge counseling.

DATA EXTRACTION

Primary extracted outcomes were emergency department visits and hospital readmission rates.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Meta-analyses of intervention versus usual care for hospital readmission and emergency department visit rates were performed using the inverse variance method. Results are reported as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Prediction intervals (PIs) were also calculated. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed. A total of 21 RCTs were included in the qualitative synthesis and 18 in the meta-analyses (n = 7,244 patients). The original meta-analysis revealed a significant difference in the impact between pharmacist-led discharge counseling and usual care on overall hospital readmission (RR = 0.864 [95% CI 0.763-0.997], P = .020) and emergency department (RR = 0.697 [95% CI 0.535-0.907], P = .007) visits. However, the small number of included studies, the high heterogeneity among trials (I2 between 40% and 60%), and the wide PIs (hospital readmission: PI 0.542-1.186; emergency department visits: PI 0.027-1.367) prevented drawing further conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Insufficient evidence exists regarding the effect of pharmacist-led discharge counseling on hospital readmission and emergency department visits. Further well-designed clinical trials with defined core outcome sets are needed.

The effectiveness of pharmacist- led discharge medication counselling in the emergency department (ExPLAIN): A pilot quasi-experimental study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of pharmacist-led discharge medication counselling using a structured, multimodal educational strategy with teach-back (intervention) against standard care.

METHODS

This was a quasi-experimental study in a public, metropolitan ED. Participants discharged home with new medications were allocated to receive the intervention or standard care using convenience sampling. Participant characteristics (i.e. age, sex, socio-economic status, medications) and health literacy were collected. The outcomes measured were satisfaction with information, ED re-presentation and length of stay.

RESULTS

There were 51 participants: 14 received intervention, 37 had standard care. Overall, 12% had inadequate health literacy. Group characteristics and health literacy were similar. Participants who received the intervention were significantly reported higher satisfaction with information about their new medications compared to standard care (p = 0.009). Specifically, the intervention was associated with a 98% increase in satisfaction with information relating to side-effects. There were no differences in re-presentation and length of stay.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacist-led discharge medication counselling incorporating a structured, multimodal educational strategy and teach-back was effective in improving patient satisfaction with medication information in the ED.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

A similar intervention could be trialled in other EDs, but outcomes other beyond satisfaction should be considered.

[Medication safety in hospitals : Integration of clinical pharmacists to reduce drug-related problems in the inpatient setting]

Drug-related problems (DRPs) are a significant and often preventable cause for morbidity and mortality. Hospitalization is associated with a high risk for DRPs, especially due to a lack of information transfer at transitions of care. At the same time, interventions during inpatient treatment usually require a change in drug therapy and additionally increase the risk of DRPs. Thereby, DRPs can occur at all levels of the medication process and can be caused by different groups of professionals. One way to improve medication safety in hospitals is to integrate clinical pharmacists into the medication process.According to available data, the integration of a clinical pharmacist in multi-professional teams during admission, hospitalization and discharge can significantly reduce DRPs, costs and increases efficacy of drug therapy. In addition, drug supply with unit-dose systems in combination with digitalization of the medication process can achieve an improvement in medication safety. Improvement in continuity of medical care through a structured medication review and seamless transmission of medically relevant information upon discharge contribute to a significant reduction of hospital readmissions and emergency admissions due to ABPs, as well as health costs. With a university education, the hospital pharmacist specialized in clinical pharmacy is the only professional group that can comprehensively support the physician in the field of drug therapy.

Cost-effectiveness of a transitional pharmaceutical care program for patients discharged from the hospital

Background

To improve continuity of care at hospital admission and discharge and to decrease medication errors pharmaceutical care programs are developed. This study aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of the COACH program in comparison with usual care from a societal perspective.

Methods

A controlled clinical trial was performed at the Internal Medicine department of a general teaching hospital. All admitted patients using at least one prescription drug were included. The COACH program consisted of medication reconciliation, patient counselling at discharge, and communication to healthcare providers in primary care. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with an unplanned rehospitalisation within three months after discharge. Also, the number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) was assessed. Cost data were collected using cost diaries. Uncertainty surrounding cost differences and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios between the groups was estimated by bootstrapping.

Results

In the COACH program, 168 patients were included and in usual care 151 patients. There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with unplanned rehospitalisations (mean difference 0.17%, 95% CI -8.85;8.51), and in QALYs (mean difference -0.0085, 95% CI -0.0170;0.0001). Total costs for the COACH program were non-significantly lower than usual care (-€1160, 95% CI -3168;847). Cost-effectiveness planes showed that the program was not cost-effective compared with usual care for unplanned rehospitalisations and QALYs gained.

Conclusion

The COACH program was not cost-effective in comparison with usual care. Future studies should focus on high risk patients and include other outcomes (e.g. adverse drug events) as this may increase the chances of a cost-effective intervention.

Dutch trial register NTR1519

Role of the pharmacist in reducing healthcare costs: current insights

Global healthcare expenditure is escalating at an unsustainable rate. Money spent on medicines and managing medication-related problems continues to grow. The high prevalence of medication errors and inappropriate prescribing is a major issue within healthcare systems, and can often contribute to adverse drug events, many of which are preventable. As a result, there is a huge opportunity for pharmacists to have a significant impact on reducing healthcare costs, as they have the expertise to detect, resolve, and prevent medication errors and medication-related problems. The development of clinical pharmacy practice in recent decades has resulted in an increased number of pharmacists working in clinically advanced roles worldwide. Pharmacist-provided services and clinical interventions have been shown to reduce the risk of potential adverse drug events and improve patient outcomes, and the majority of published studies show that these pharmacist activities are cost-effective or have a good cost:benefit ratio. This review demonstrates that pharmacists can contribute to substantial healthcare savings across a variety of settings. However, there is a paucity of evidence in the literature highlighting the specific aspects of pharmacists' work which are the most effective and cost-effective. Future high-quality economic evaluations with robust methodologies and study design are required to investigate what pharmacist services have significant clinical benefits to patients and substantiate the greatest cost savings for healthcare budgets.

Advancing the pharmacy practice model in a community teaching hospital by expanding student rotations

PURPOSE

The implementation, benefits, and outcomes of a layered learner model (LLM) using pharmacy students as pharmacist extenders are described.

SUMMARY

In 2011, Cleveland Clinic Florida (CCF) implemented a pharmacy practice model change with the goal of providing all inpatients quality pharmaceutical care while still providing key specialty clinical pharmacy services. An LLM was initiated in which pharmacists supervise pharmacy residents and students in a team format in which students are used as pharmacist extenders. CCF partnered with local and regional colleges of pharmacy to increase the number of advanced pharmacy practice experience student rotations at CCF. Students are given accountability for a specific number of patient beds based on their rotation. They are required to perform medication histories, education on drug indication and adverse effects, discharge counseling, targeted disease counseling, and profile review for drug-related problems for their patients. After the implementation of this model, improvements were observed in Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) scores (58% versus 70%, respectively), pharmacy interventions per patient per day (0.9 versus 1.4, respectively), and bedside medication delivery capture rate (48% versus 65%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The implementation of an LLM and partnering with local colleges of pharmacy have improved pharmacy practice at CCF by allowing pharmacy students to work as pharmacist extenders in providing comprehensive pharmacy services to many patients who would not otherwise be reached. This approach has improved HCAHPS scores within the "communication of medication" domain, increased overall patient interventions, and allowed expansion of CCF's discharge prescription program.

Cost-effectiveness of comprehensive medication reviews versus noncomprehensive medication review interventions and subsequent successful medication changes in a Medicare Part D population

BACKGROUND

An estimated 1.5 million preventable medication-related adverse events occur annually, with some resulting in serious injury and even death. To help address this issue, the Centers for Medicare Medicaid Services (CMS) now require medication therapy management (MTM) programs to offer comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) to all Medicare Part D beneficiaries at least once a year. During a CMR, patients receive an extensive amount of medication and educational information. In contrast, noncomprehensive medication reviews (non-CMRs) are more targeted and focus on resolving a particular medication-related problem (MRP) via short patient consultations, patient letters, and direct provider interventions.  

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing CMRs with non-CMR interventions on successful medication regimen changes and reductions in adverse drug events (ADEs).

METHODS

This decision analytic model compared the cost-effectiveness of CMRs with other intervention methods (non-CMRs) from a payer's perspective. For this model, a successful outcome was defined as a beneficiary case devoid of an ADE due to MRPs. The model was extensively tested and subjected to a thorough one-way sensitivity analysis and a second-order probabilistic sensitivity analysis with 10,000 iterations from the variable distributions. 

RESULTS

Non-CMR interventions were less costly and more effective than CMRs. The point estimate for direct medical costs was $193 for CMRs and $157 for non-CMRs, and the estimated probability of avoiding an ADE was 0.93 and 0.94 for CMRs and non-CMRs, respectively. The 10,000 iteration-Monte Carlo simulation scatterplot and cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) revealed a dominance by non-CMRs in preventing harmful ADEs from cost and effectiveness perspectives; however, there was an overlap in the 95% CIs for both cost and ADEs prevented. Despite this, a non-CMR intervention saved estimated $5,377.08 per ADE prevented. One-way sensitivity analysis indicated the results were sensitive to the cost of treating a preventable ADE. In 100% of cases, the CEAC demonstrated that non-CMRs were likely the most cost-effective intervention regardless of the health plan's willingness to pay. 

CONCLUSIONS

The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve suggests that non-CMR interventions were less costly and more effective than CMRs; however, there was overlap in the 95% CIs for costs and ADEs prevented. In all cases, the CEAC demonstrated that non-CMRs were the most economical intervention with regard to time and cost. Non-CMRs show promise as a viable method to address MRPs, reduce ADEs, and improve patient-related health outcomes.

The economics of medicines optimization: policy developments, remaining challenges and research priorities

BACKGROUND

This review scopes the evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions to improve suboptimal use of medicines in order to determine the evidence gaps and help inform research priorities.

SOURCES OF DATA

Systematic searches of the National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluation Database, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

The majority of the studies evaluated interventions to improve adherence, inappropriate prescribing and prescribing errors.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

Interventions tend to be specific to a particular stage of the pathway and/or to a particular disease and have mostly been evaluated for their effect on intermediate or process outcomes.

GROWING POINTS

Medicines optimization offers an opportunity to improve health outcomes and efficiency of healthcare.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

The available evidence is insufficient to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions to address suboptimal medicine use in the UK NHS. Decision modelling, evidence synthesis and elicitation have the potential to address the evidence gaps and help prioritize research.

Evaluation of a pharmacy-driven inpatient discharge counseling service: impact on 30-day readmission rates

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of a pharmacy-driven inpatient discharge counseling service on 30-day readmission rates.

DESIGN

A retrospective electronic chart review was performed comparing internal medicine patients who received pharmacy discharge counseling with those who received the standard discharge process between May 1, 2011, and March 28, 2012.

SETTING

A community teaching hospital's internal medicine service.

PATIENTS

A total of 1,536 patients discharged from the internal medicine service were eligible for study inclusion. A total of 228 of these patients received pharmacy discharge counseling.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were screened for readmission risk. For those patients who scored as high risk, an attempt was made to provide pharmacy counseling and a discharge medication list.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

The primary endpoint was to evaluate whether pharmacy discharge counseling had an impact on readmission rates. An additional outcome was to measure the quantity of pharmacy interventions.

RESULTS

Out of the 228 patients who received pharmacy discharge counseling, 18.9% were readmitted within 30 days of hospital discharge, which was similar to the readmission rate for high- and moderate-risk patients who did not receive counseling (18.8% and 18.9%, respectively). But, after stratification based on readmission risk, the moderate-risk, pharmacy-counseled group had a significantly lower readmission rate than the moderate-risk control group (3.8% vs. 18.9%; P=0.033). Overall, 915 pharmacist interventions were made, averaging 4 interventions per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacy discharge counseling was associated with reduced 30-day readmission rates in those patients at moderate risk for readmission.