gms | German Medical Science

13. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Arzneimittelforschung und Arzneimittelepidemiologie

Gesellschaft für Arzneimittelforschung und Arzneimittelepidemiologie

02.11. bis 03.11.2006, Berlin

Survey of Drug-related Problems Identified by Community Pharmacies during one Week of Documentation

Meeting Abstract

Suche in Medline nach

  • corresponding author N. Griese - Center for Drug Information and Pharmacy Practice (ZAPP), ABDA - Federal Union of German Associations of Pharmacists, Berlin, Germany
  • A. Hämmerlein - Center for Drug Information and Pharmacy Practice (ZAPP), ABDA - Federal Union of German Associations of Pharmacists, Berlin, Germany
  • M. Schulz - Center for Drug Information and Pharmacy Practice (ZAPP), ABDA - Federal Union of German Associations of Pharmacists, Berlin, Germany

Gesellschaft für Arzneimittelanwendungsforschung und Arzneimittelepidemiologie e.V. (GAA). 13. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Arzneimittelforschung und Arzneimittelepidemiologie. Berlin, 02.-03.11.2006. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2006. Doc06gaa05

Die elektronische Version dieses Artikels ist vollständig und ist verfügbar unter: http://www.egms.de/de/meetings/gaa2006/06gaa05.shtml

Veröffentlicht: 30. Oktober 2006

© 2006 Griese et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open Access-Artikel und steht unter den Creative Commons Lizenzbedingungen (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/deed.de). Er darf vervielfältigt, verbreitet und öffentlich zugänglich gemacht werden, vorausgesetzt dass Autor und Quelle genannt werden.


Gliederung

Text

Context: A drug-related problem (DRP) is defined as an event or circumstance involving drug therapy that actually or potentially interferes with desired health outcomes. DRP can lead to an ineffective pharmacotherapy and may cause drug-related morbidity and mortality [1]. Most DRP are avoidable and community pharmacies (CP) are assuming an active role in preventing and solving DRP.

Aim: The primary objectives of this study were to demonstrate the pharmacists’ performed counselling services concerning the prevention and solution of DRP as well as the spectrum of DRP towards the politicians and the public.

Method: During February and May 2005, a nationwide survey was conducted in CP to record all identified DRP. Participating pharmacies had the freedom to choose one week of documentation. Each pharmacy was requested to record basic data concerning pharmacy structure e.g., number of customers, prescriptions and delivered drugs per week. All identified DRP were documented separately on a standardized documentation sheet. Besides patient-specific data like age and gender, drug-related data Rx or OTC, first-time or repeated prescription, problem description and solution were recorded. For evaluation, DRP were categorised using an modified PI-Doc® classification system [2].

Results: 1,146 CP participated and documented in total 10,427 DRP (9.1 DRP per pharmacy and week). A broad spectrum of DRP was detected with nine out of ten DRP pertaining to prescribed medicines. Three levels could be differentiated where DRP can arise: the prescription-, the patient- and the delivery level. Overall, drug-drug interactions were the most frequently reported DRP (8.6 %). More than 80 % of identified DRP could be solved completely. Thereby, the prescribing physician was contacted in 60.5 % of all cases. Median time for solving a DRP was 5 minutes.

Conclusion: Pharmacists play an important role in the identification, assessment and prevention of DRP and provide a valuable contribution for an effective pharmacotherapy and improved drug safety [3].


References

1.
Johnson JA, Bootman JL. Drug-related morbidity and mortality and the economic impact of pharmaceutical care. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 1997; 54: 554-6.
2.
Schaefer M. Discussing basic principles for a coding system of drug-related problems: the case of Pi-Doc. Pharm World Sci. 2002; 24: 120-7.
3.
Griese N, Hämmerlein A, Schulz M. Ergebnisse der Aktionswoche Arzneimittelbezogene Probleme. Pharm Ztg. 2006; 151(25): 2374-84.