An interventional study on intensive care unit drug therapy assessment in a rural district hospital in India.

Priyanka Tejashwani Pichala, Bharani Mukkillapati Kumar, Seeba Zachariah, Dixon Thomas, Laura Saunchez, Alvarez-Uria Gerardo
{"title":"An interventional study on intensive care unit drug therapy assessment in a rural district hospital in India.","authors":"Priyanka Tejashwani Pichala,&nbsp;Bharani Mukkillapati Kumar,&nbsp;Seeba Zachariah,&nbsp;Dixon Thomas,&nbsp;Laura Saunchez,&nbsp;Alvarez-Uria Gerardo","doi":"10.4103/0976-0105.118801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Intensive care unit is a potential area for drug-related problems. As many of the patients treated are complex patients, clinical pharmacy intervention could find drug therapy problems.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Drug information liaisons daily attended ward rounds with intensivists and screened the patient for drug therapy assessment using the American Society for Health-System Pharmacists clinical skills competition DTA format. This was a prospective study done for 6 months from August 2012 to January 2013. Simple statistics were used to tabulate the drug-related problems assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 72 patients were screened for drug therapy problems, for which 947 drug doses were prescribed in the study period. The total number of prescriptions was 148. The average number of drugs per prescription was 6.39 and the average number of drugs per patient was 13.15. A total of 243 problems were identified; on an average, 1.67 problems were present per prescription. The total number of drug interactions identified was N = 192 (78.2%); majority of them (61.4%) were of type C (not serious). So, 55.73% of them were monitored and not stopped or substituted. The second type of problem was a correlation between drug therapy and medical problem (7.4%). Appropriate drug selection and drug regimen was the third problem, and the adverse drug reactions and therapeutic duplications accounted for approximately 2% of the drug-related problems identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Drug interactions constituted the major problem of ICUs, but not many were serious or significant. Consensus in assessment of drug-related problems and convincing intensivists with good quality evidences are required for better acceptance of interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":15046,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Basic and Clinical Pharmacy","volume":"4 3","pages":"64-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4103/0976-0105.118801","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Basic and Clinical Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-0105.118801","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

Background: Intensive care unit is a potential area for drug-related problems. As many of the patients treated are complex patients, clinical pharmacy intervention could find drug therapy problems.

Materials and methods: Drug information liaisons daily attended ward rounds with intensivists and screened the patient for drug therapy assessment using the American Society for Health-System Pharmacists clinical skills competition DTA format. This was a prospective study done for 6 months from August 2012 to January 2013. Simple statistics were used to tabulate the drug-related problems assessed.

Results: A total of 72 patients were screened for drug therapy problems, for which 947 drug doses were prescribed in the study period. The total number of prescriptions was 148. The average number of drugs per prescription was 6.39 and the average number of drugs per patient was 13.15. A total of 243 problems were identified; on an average, 1.67 problems were present per prescription. The total number of drug interactions identified was N = 192 (78.2%); majority of them (61.4%) were of type C (not serious). So, 55.73% of them were monitored and not stopped or substituted. The second type of problem was a correlation between drug therapy and medical problem (7.4%). Appropriate drug selection and drug regimen was the third problem, and the adverse drug reactions and therapeutic duplications accounted for approximately 2% of the drug-related problems identified.

Conclusion: Drug interactions constituted the major problem of ICUs, but not many were serious or significant. Consensus in assessment of drug-related problems and convincing intensivists with good quality evidences are required for better acceptance of interventions.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
印度农村地区医院重症监护病房药物治疗评估的介入研究
背景:重症监护病房是药物相关问题的潜在领域。由于治疗的患者多为复杂患者,临床药学干预可发现药物治疗问题。材料和方法:药物信息联络员每天与重症监护医师一起参加查房,并使用美国卫生系统药剂师临床技能竞赛DTA格式筛选患者进行药物治疗评估。这是一项为期6个月的前瞻性研究,从2012年8月到2013年1月。使用简单的统计数据将评估的药物相关问题制成表格。结果:共筛查出72例患者的药物治疗问题,研究期间共开具了947剂药物处方。处方总数为148张。每张处方平均药品数量为6.39种,每位患者平均药品数量为13.15种。共发现243个问题;平均来看,每份处方中存在1.67个问题。鉴定出的药物相互作用总数为N = 192 (78.2%);绝大多数(61.4%)为C型(不严重)。因此,55.73%的人被监控,没有停止或替换。第二类问题是药物治疗与医疗问题之间的相关性(7.4%)。适当的药物选择和药物方案是第三个问题,药物不良反应和治疗重复约占确定的药物相关问题的2%。结论:药物相互作用是icu的主要问题,但严重和显著的并不多。为了更好地接受干预措施,需要在评估药物相关问题方面达成共识,并以高质量的证据说服重症监护医生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial Note on Flavonoids Evaluation of Controlled Porosity Osmotic Pump for Oral Delivery of Ketorolac Prescribing Pattern and Potency of Anti-Diabetic Drugs in Diabetic Patients for Maintaining Optimal Glycemic Levels Community Pharmacy Practice Towards Cancer Health and the Need for Continuous Cancer Education: Ghana Situation Unusual Case of an Alcoholic with Liver Injury from Sulfasalazine Use
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1