Holly Sheldon, Audrey Kostrzewa, Shannon Werner, Terry Audley, Adam Biggs, Taylor Mancuso, Mary Frances Picone
{"title":"使用创新药物类别评分工具优先年度处方审查。","authors":"Holly Sheldon, Audrey Kostrzewa, Shannon Werner, Terry Audley, Adam Biggs, Taylor Mancuso, Mary Frances Picone","doi":"10.24926/iip.v13i2.4785","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Though The Joint Commission requires health systems perform annual formulary review, guidance for how to perform this review is lacking. Published methods include comprehensive review of all pharmaceutical classes; however, this approach may not be the most efficient or effective option for a health system with a large formulary. <b>Objective:</b> To create a prioritization system for annual formulary review through development of a pharmaceutical class scoring tool. <b>Methods:</b> Drug information pharmacists developed the scoring tool, which used external and internal data to score pharmaceutical classes in 4 categories: safety, efficacy, cost, and utilization. The primary outcome, number of formulary changes resulting from pharmaceutical class review, was compared between the highest-scoring and lowest-scoring class to assess the tool's ability to prioritize high-yield class reviews. <b>Results:</b> The tool calculated scores for 91 pharmaceutical classes, altogether containing 962 medications. After review of the highest-scoring class, corticosteroids, 2 formulary changes were made: one dosage form was removed from formulary, and one medication was restricted to outpatient use only. Zero formulary changes resulted from review of the lowest-scoring class, pharmaceutical adjuvants. <b>Conclusions:</b> The tool described in this study prioritized annual formulary review efforts by identifying a pharmaceutical class with meaningful formulary optimization opportunities as the highest-scoring class, while correctly identifying a class with no optimization opportunities as the lowest-scoring class.</p>","PeriodicalId":13646,"journal":{"name":"Innovations in Pharmacy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/08/f1/21550417-13-02-4785.PMC9836755.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of an Innovative Pharmaceutical Class Scoring Tool for Prioritized Annual Formulary Review.\",\"authors\":\"Holly Sheldon, Audrey Kostrzewa, Shannon Werner, Terry Audley, Adam Biggs, Taylor Mancuso, Mary Frances Picone\",\"doi\":\"10.24926/iip.v13i2.4785\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Though The Joint Commission requires health systems perform annual formulary review, guidance for how to perform this review is lacking. Published methods include comprehensive review of all pharmaceutical classes; however, this approach may not be the most efficient or effective option for a health system with a large formulary. <b>Objective:</b> To create a prioritization system for annual formulary review through development of a pharmaceutical class scoring tool. <b>Methods:</b> Drug information pharmacists developed the scoring tool, which used external and internal data to score pharmaceutical classes in 4 categories: safety, efficacy, cost, and utilization. The primary outcome, number of formulary changes resulting from pharmaceutical class review, was compared between the highest-scoring and lowest-scoring class to assess the tool's ability to prioritize high-yield class reviews. <b>Results:</b> The tool calculated scores for 91 pharmaceutical classes, altogether containing 962 medications. After review of the highest-scoring class, corticosteroids, 2 formulary changes were made: one dosage form was removed from formulary, and one medication was restricted to outpatient use only. Zero formulary changes resulted from review of the lowest-scoring class, pharmaceutical adjuvants. <b>Conclusions:</b> The tool described in this study prioritized annual formulary review efforts by identifying a pharmaceutical class with meaningful formulary optimization opportunities as the highest-scoring class, while correctly identifying a class with no optimization opportunities as the lowest-scoring class.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13646,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Innovations in Pharmacy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/08/f1/21550417-13-02-4785.PMC9836755.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Innovations in Pharmacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24926/iip.v13i2.4785\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovations in Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24926/iip.v13i2.4785","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Use of an Innovative Pharmaceutical Class Scoring Tool for Prioritized Annual Formulary Review.
Background: Though The Joint Commission requires health systems perform annual formulary review, guidance for how to perform this review is lacking. Published methods include comprehensive review of all pharmaceutical classes; however, this approach may not be the most efficient or effective option for a health system with a large formulary. Objective: To create a prioritization system for annual formulary review through development of a pharmaceutical class scoring tool. Methods: Drug information pharmacists developed the scoring tool, which used external and internal data to score pharmaceutical classes in 4 categories: safety, efficacy, cost, and utilization. The primary outcome, number of formulary changes resulting from pharmaceutical class review, was compared between the highest-scoring and lowest-scoring class to assess the tool's ability to prioritize high-yield class reviews. Results: The tool calculated scores for 91 pharmaceutical classes, altogether containing 962 medications. After review of the highest-scoring class, corticosteroids, 2 formulary changes were made: one dosage form was removed from formulary, and one medication was restricted to outpatient use only. Zero formulary changes resulted from review of the lowest-scoring class, pharmaceutical adjuvants. Conclusions: The tool described in this study prioritized annual formulary review efforts by identifying a pharmaceutical class with meaningful formulary optimization opportunities as the highest-scoring class, while correctly identifying a class with no optimization opportunities as the lowest-scoring class.