MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162945955 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v68i3.1452

Clinical Pharmacy Services in Canadian Emergency Departments: A National Survey

2015· article· en· W2162945955 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Richard Wanbon, Catherine Lyder, Éric Villeneuve, Stephen Shalansky, Leslie Manuel, Melanie Harding

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesMoncton HospitalProvidence Health CareCanadian Pharmacists AssociationRoyal Jubilee HospitalMcGill University Health CentreHorizon Health NetworkIsland Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacyClinical pharmacyMedicinePharmacistFamily medicineHospital pharmacyPharmacy practicePharmaconomistMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Providing clinical pharmacy services in emergency departments (EDs) is important because adverse drug events commonly occur before, during, and after ED encounters. Survey studies in the United States have indicated a relatively low presence of clinical pharmacy services in the ED setting, but a descriptive survey specific to Canada has not yet been performed.Objectives: To describe the current status of pharmacy services in Canadian EDs and potential barriers to implementing pharmacy services in this setting.Methods: All Canadian hospitals with an ED and at least 50 acute care beds were contacted to identify the presence of dedicated ED pharmacy services (defined as at least 0.5 full-time equivalent [FTE] position). Three different electronic surveys were then distributed by e-mail to ED pharmacy team members (if available), pharmacy managers (at hospitals without an ED pharmacy team), and ED managers (all hospitals). The surveys were completed between July and September 2013.Results: Of the 243 hospitals identified, 95 (39%) had at least 0.5 FTE clinical pharmacy services in the ED (based on initial telephone screening). Of the 60 ED pharmacy teams that responded to the survey, 56 had pharmacists (27 of which also had ED pharmacy technicians) and 4 had pharmacy technicians (without pharmacists). Forty-four (79%) of the 56 ED pharmacist services had been established within the preceding 10 years. Order clarification, troubleshooting, medication reconciliation, and assessment of renal dosing were the services most commonly provided. The large majority of pharmacy managers and ED managers identified the need for ED pharmacy services where such services do not yet exist. Inadequate funding, competing priorities, and lack of training were the most commonly reported barriers to providing this service.Conclusions: Although the establishment of ward-based pharmacy services in Canadian EDs has increased over the past 10 years, lack of funding and a lack of ED training for pharmacists were reported as significant barriers to the expansion of this role in most hospitals.RÉSUMÉContexte : Offrir des services de pharmacie clinique dans les services des urgences est important, car des événements indésirables liés aux médicaments se produisent fréquemment avant, pendant et après y avoir séjourné. Des études par sondage réalisées aux États-Unis font état d’une présence relativement faible des services de pharmacie clinique dans les services des urgences. Malheureusement, aucune enquête descriptive n’a été menée au Canada à ce jour.Objectifs : Dresser le portrait actuel des services de pharmacie au sein des services des urgences du Canada et présenter les obstacles potentiels à l’établissement de services de pharmacie dans ce milieu.Méthodes : On a communiqué avec l’ensemble des hôpitaux canadiens disposant d’un service des urgences et d’au moins 50 lits de soins de courte durée afin de savoir s’ils profitaient de services de pharmacie consacrés au service des urgences (soit au moins 0,5 d’un poste équivalent temps plein). Trois différents sondages électroniques ont ensuite été envoyés par courriel : un aux membres du personnel de pharmacie affectés aux services des urgences (le cas échéant); un aux gestionnaires de pharmacie (des hôpitaux sans équipe de pharmacie au service des urgences); et un aux gestionnaires des services des urgences (de tous les hôpitaux). Les sondages ont été remplis entre juillet et septembre 2013.Résultats : Des 243 hôpitaux recensés, 95 (39 %) avaient au moins 0,5 d’un poste équivalent temps plein pour la prestation de services de pharmacie clinique au service des urgences (résultat établi au moyen d’une présélection téléphonique). Parmi les 60 équipes de pharmacie affectées au service des urgences ayant répondu au sondage, 56 disposaient de pharmaciens (et parmi celles-ci, 27 comptaient aussi sur des techniciens en pharmacie) et 4 étaient composées exclusivement de techniciens en pharmacie. Quarante-quatre (79 %) des 56 équipes comprenant des pharmaciens avaient été mises en place au cours des dix dernières années. La clarification des ordonnances, le dépannage, l’établissement de bilans comparatifs des médicaments et l’évaluation de l’ajustement posologique chez les insuffisants rénaux représentaient les services les plus souvent offerts. La vaste majorité des gestionnaires de pharmacie et des gestionnaires des services des urgences ont souligné la nécessité d’avoir des services de pharmacie au service des urgences dans les établissements où il n’y en avait pas encore. Le manque de financement, le nombre foisonnant de priorités et l’insuffisance de formation représentaient les éléments faisant le plus souvent obstacle à l’instauration de ce service selon les répondants.Conclusions : Bien que la mise en place de services de pharmacie clinique consacrés aux services des urgences ait augmenté au Canada durant les dix dernières années, le manque de financement et l’insuffisance de formation des pharmaciens pour le travail au service des urgences ont été présentés comme étant d’importants obstacles à l’accroissement de ce rôle dans la plupart des hôpitaux.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.277
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207