loading page

Trends in hospital pharmacist interventions documentation and classification: A scoping review
  • Sara Machado,
  • Fátima Falcão,
  • Afonso Cavaco
Sara Machado
iMedULisboa

Corresponding Author:[email protected]

Author Profile
Fátima Falcão
Centro Hospitalar de Lisboa Ocidental EPE
Author Profile
Afonso Cavaco
Universidade de Lisboa Faculdade de Farmácia
Author Profile

Abstract

The practice of documenting pharmacists’ interventions (PIs) has been endorsed by many hospital pharmacists’ societies and organizations worldwide. Current systems for recording PIs have been developed to generate data on better patient and healthcare outcomes, but harmonization and transferability are apparently minimal. The present work aims to provide a descriptive and comprehensive overview of the currently utilized PIs documentation and classification (D/C) tools contributing to increased evidence systematization. A systematic literature search was conducted in PUBMED, Scopus, Web of Science and CINAHL. Studies from 2008, after the release of the Basel Statements, were included if interventions were made by the hospital or clinical pharmacists in a global hospital setting. Publications quality assessment was accomplished using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). A total of 26 studies were included. Three studies did not refer to the D/C method, 10 used an in-house developed D/C method, seven used externally developed D/C tools and six studies described method validation or translation. Evidence confirmed that most of the D/C systems are designed in-house, but external development and validation of PI systems to be used in hospital practice is gradually increasing. Reports on validated PIs D/C tools that are being used in hospital clinical practice are limited, including countries with advanced hospital pharmacy practice. Unmet needs and gaps in practice were identified. Further research should be conducted to understand why using validated D/C methods is not a disseminated practice, knowing patients’ and organizational advantages.
13 Feb 2023Submitted to British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
27 Mar 2023Submission Checks Completed
27 Mar 2023Assigned to Editor
27 Mar 2023Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
30 Mar 2023Reviewer(s) Assigned
16 May 2023Editorial Decision: Revise Major
15 Jun 20231st Revision Received
05 Jul 2023Submission Checks Completed
05 Jul 2023Assigned to Editor
05 Jul 2023Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
10 Jul 2023Reviewer(s) Assigned
14 Aug 2023Editorial Decision: Revise Minor
05 Sep 20232nd Revision Received
15 Sep 2023Submission Checks Completed
15 Sep 2023Assigned to Editor
15 Sep 2023Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
16 Sep 2023Editorial Decision: Accept