ArticleRevista de saude publica2020
Cost-benefit analysis of pharmacist interventions over 36 months in a university hospital.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic impact of clinical pharmacist interventions in a general tertiary hospital in Qatar.PloS one · 2023Article
- The participation of clinical pharmacists in the treatment of patients with central nervous system infection can improve the effectiveness and appropriateness of anti-infective treatments: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo perform a cost-benefits analysis of a clinical pharmacy (CP) service implemented in a Neurology ward of a tertiary teaching hospital.
methodsThis is a cost-benefit analysis of a single arm, prospective cohort study performed at the adult Neurology Unit over 36 months, which has evaluated the results of a CP service from a hospital and Public Health System (PHS) perspective. The interventions were classified into 14 categories and the costs identified as direct medical costs. The results were analyzed by the total and marginal cost, the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) and the net benefit (NB).
resultsThe total 334 patients were followed-up and the highest occurrence in 506 interventions was drug introduction (29.0%). The marginal cost for the hospital and avoided cost for PHS was US$182±32 and US$25,536±4,923 per year; and US$0.55 and US$76.4 per patient/year. The BCR and NB were 0.0, -US$26,105 (95%CI -31,850 - -10,610), -US$27,112 (95%CI -33,160-11,720) for the hospital and; 3.0 (95%CI 1.97-4.94), US$51,048 (95%CI 27,645-75,716) and, 4.6 (95%CI 2.24-10.05), US$91,496 (95%CI 34,700-168,050; p < 0.001) for the PHS, both considering adhered and total interventions, respectively.
conclusionsThe CP service was not directly cost-benefit at the hospital perspective, but it presented savings for forecast cost related to the occurrence of preventable morbidities, measuring a good cost-benefit for the PHS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.