Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

A pilot study of process and outcome assessment in antibiotic therapy.

Authors: A L, Ilersich; J P, Rovers; T R, Einarson;

A pilot study of process and outcome assessment in antibiotic therapy.

Abstract

A quality assurance survey of cefazolin therapy was conducted by pharmacists using process-related and outcome-related assessments. The purpose of this survey was to study the possibility of having pharmacists review and categorize the appropriateness and success of antibiotic therapy. During a three week period, 168 orders for cefazolin were identified and 67 prophylactic and medical therapies were selected and submitted for possible pharmacist review. Thirty-seven therapies were reviewed by staff pharmacists who scored each therapy for the acceptability of risk of adverse drug effect, the cost-effectiveness, and the overall appropriateness. An evaluation form was used, but explicit utilization criteria were not provided. The average scores (+/- SD) on a 10 centimeter visual analog scale were 9.1 (+/- 0.71), 8.7 (+/- 1.21), and 8.8. +/- 0.79) respectively. Twenty-six (70%) of these therapies were monitored to resolution, and 24 (65%) were successful in achieving the therapeutic goal. No adverse effects were noted. The average estimated times to complete the initial review and follow-up review were 10.1 (+/- 5.60) and 3.5 (+/- 2.29) minutes respectively, less than the 19.5 minutes estimated using the Canadian Hospital Pharmacy Workload Measurement System. This survey demonstrated that pharmacists can provide both process-related and outcome-related QA data.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Dosage Forms, Ontario, Cost Control, Data Collection, Hospital Bed Capacity, 300 to 499, Pilot Projects, Pharmacists, Drug Utilization, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Cefazolin, Humans, Pharmacy Service, Hospital

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Related to Research communities
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!