Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34402022›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2022

Clinical pharmacists' interventions across German hospitals: results from a repetitive cross-sectional study.

Claudia Langebrake, Carina Hohmann, Susanne Lezius, Michael Lueb, Gesine Picksak, Wencke Walter, Sandra Kaden, Heike Hilgarth, Angela Ihbe-Heffinger, Katja Leichenberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. [Ward-based clinical pharmacists in intensive care medicine: an economic evaluation].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Claudia LangebrakeHospital Pharmacy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. c.langebrake@uke.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1249-4223
Carina HohmannDepartment of Pharmacy, Klinikum Fulda gAG, Fulda, Germany.
Susanne LeziusInstitute of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4832-4333
Michael LuebDepartment of Pharmacy, Klinikum Bielefeld Gem. GmbH, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7240-1004
Gesine PicksakPharmacy, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Wencke WalterDepartment of Pharmacy, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Sandra KadenDepartment of Pharmacy, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Heike HilgarthHospital Pharmacy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4126-4251
Angela Ihbe-HeffingerHospital Pharmacy, Klinikum Starnberg GmbH, Academic Teaching Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians University, Starnberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2439-0117
Katja LeichenbergDepartment of Pharmacy, University Hospital Jena, Jena, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Pharmacists' interventions (PI) are suitable to improve medication safety and optimise patient outcome. However, in Germany, clinical pharmacy services are not yet available nationwide. Aim To gain prospective data on the extent and the composition of routine PI with special focus on intervention rates among German hospital pharmacists during two intervention weeks. Methods Within a repetitive cross-sectional study, clinical pharmacists documented all PIs on five days during a one-month period (intervention week) in 2017 and 2019 using the validated online-database ADKA-DokuPIK. Additionally, data regarding the supply structure/level of medical care, the extent of clinical pharmacy services and their professional experience were collected. All data were anonymised before analysis. Results In total, 2,282 PI from 62 pharmacists (2017) and 2578 PI from 52 pharmacists (2019) were entered. Intervention rate increased from 27.5 PI/100 patient days in 2017 to 38.5 PI/100 patient days in 2019 (p = 0.0097). Frequency of clinical pharmacy services on a daily basis significantly increased from 60% (2017) to 83% (2019). Reasons for PIs from the categories "drugs" (e.g. indication, choice, documentation/transcription) and "dose" were most common in both intervention weeks. The vast majority of underlying medication errors in both intervention weeks were categorised as "error, no harm" (80.3 vs. 78.6%), while the proportion of errors which did not reach the patient, doubled to 39.8% in IW-2019. Conclusion Regular and daily clinical pharmacy services become more established in Germany and clinical pharmacists are increasingly involved in solving drug related problems proactively and early during the medication management process.

Indexed as

PharmacistsPharmacy Service, HospitalCross-Sectional StudiesHospitalsHumansProfessional RoleProspective StudiesDrug related problemMedication errorsMedication therapy managementPharmacists’ interventionsPharmacy service, hospital

Identifiers

PMID34402022
PMCPMC8866273

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.