These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Drug related problems in Belgian community pharmacies].
    Author: Huysmans K, De Wulf I, Foulon V, De Loof H, Steurbaut S, Boussery K, De Vriese C, Lacour V, Van Hees T, De Meyer GR.
    Journal: J Pharm Belg; 2014 Mar; (1):4-15. PubMed ID: 24804389.
    Abstract:
    INTRODUCTION: The identification, the management and if possible the prevention of drug related problems (DRP), are the main responsibilities of pharmacists. AIM: The aims of the study were 1/to investigate the frequency and nature of drug related problems detected by community pharmacists, 2/to inventories the frequency and nature of the interventions by community pharmacists on prescribed medicines, and 3/to evaluate whether there is a difference between DRP detection at the moment of dispensing versus in a quiet setting (a posteriori detection). METHOD: All trainees of the participating universities of Belgian were asked to contribute to a observational study. Participating pharmacists quantified DRP's and their interventions on prescribed medicines for 5 days. Registrations were made by using a web tool based on an adapted version of the classification list of PCNE. The registration took place in two phases, at the time of delivery as well as in an a posteriori verification of the prescriptions with the pharmaceutical record file of the patients. RESULTS: The study was conducted from November 2012 to April 2013 in 534 community-pharmacies with internship. During this period 9.869 prescriptions (15%) with at least one DRP were detected on a total of 64.962 prescriptions treated by tutor pharmacists. Since there could be more than one problem on a prescription, 15.952 DRP's were registered. 2.597 of the DRP's were detected by a posteriori verification. 75% of all problems had a technical cause and 37% were clinical in nature. Under the technical causes an incomplete prescription was the most common. The most frequently registered clinical causes were a drug interaction, an inopportune time of intake, a too high or too low dose and an unsuitable drug. Participating pharmacists solved almost 3 of the 4 detected DRP's. In more than half of the DRP's, the patient was verbally and/or written informed. In 44% of the a posteriori discovered problems, the pharmacist intervened. CONCLUSION: Pharmacist detected one or more DRP's with 15% of the prescriptions. Analysis of a prescription prior to dispensing the medicines therefore appears necessary. The active intervention of the pharmacist in 83% of the problems indicates that he contributes to the optimization of drug therapy with a potential increase in the quality of life of the patient and a reduction in the cost of healthcare. The a posteriori discovered DRP's demonstrate the need for pharmacist lead meditation reviews possibly together with the physician and/or patient.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]