ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2025
A multi-site evaluation of clinical pharmacist time, motion, interventions and interruptions.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Learning, adopting, and sustaining the pharmacist-clinician role in clinical practice: a qualitative study among early adopters in the Netherlands.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Workload and personnel allocation in pharmacy departments of public hospitals in China: a current state study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Integrated pharmaceutical care model by unit-based clinical pharmacists: Implementation and clinical impact.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient centred clinical pharmacy activities have demonstrated improvements in patient outcomes. There are limited published data on workflow practices of pharmacists to assist with clinical pharmacy service delivery improvement.
aimTo determine the amount of time clinical pharmacists spend each day performing their work tasks, interventions and interruptions. To determine the proportion of time performing clinical tasks and tasks face-to-face with patients.
methodTrained pharmacy students observed clinical pharmacists and recorded clinical activities using the timer app Clockify™ on a smart device (phone or tablet) at four hospitals over 9 days between 29th July and 8th August 2024. Pharmacy students recorded the number and types of patients seen, interventions and interruption patterns.
resultsA total of 678.3 h of pharmacist activity were recorded. The mean time spent per day per patient type was 25.9 min (discharge patient), 23.5 min (new patient) and 10.3 min (review patient). Pharmacists spent the largest proportion of time (21.9%) on discharge patients followed by review patients (21.6%). Over 80% of pharmacist time was spent performing clinical activities, of which almost 12% was spent face-to-face with patients. Pharmacists were interrupted 34 times per day and performed 67 interventions per 100 patients.
conclusionPharmacists spend over 80% of their work time performing clinical activities for patients, of which almost 12% is spent face-to-face with patients. The largest proportion of time is spent with discharge patients followed by review patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40257690What 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.