Reduction des coûts et de la consommation médicamenteuse en soins prolongés par l'implication d'un pharmacien
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RESUME Dans un pavilion de soins prolonges, une etude pilote a ete menee pour evaluer l'impact clinique et administrative d'un pharmacien sur place s'occupant d'un groupe de 50 patients dont l'âge moyen etait de 79,8 ans. Des donnees rattachees ont ete recueilli durant une periode de 16 mois. Une charte d'evolution des profits medicaux de 70 patients fut evaluee, en ce qui concerne une diminution de la quantite de medicament et la dose prescrite quotidiennement. L'etude revele une diminution de 42,5% du nombre de medicaments prescrits regulierement (p < 0,005) et de 53,4% du nombre de medicaments prescrits au besoin (p < 0,005). En consequence, le nombre de doses administrees regulierement et au besoin ont diminue respectivement de 55,0% (p < 0,005) et de 58,4% (p < 0,025). De plus, on note une reduction de 20,4% du budget annuel rattache au cout des medicaments. Ce projet a permis la creation d'un poste de pharmacien a temps partiel (10,5 heures par semaine) dans ce pavilion de soins prolonges et l'implantation d'activites cliniques structurees. ABSTRACT A pilot study conducted in a long-term health care facility measured the clinical and administrative impact of an on-site pharmacist on a group of 50 patients whose average age was 79.8 years. The data pertaining to drug consumption were collected over a 16 month period. The information was then assessed to chart the evolution of the medical profiles of 70 patients regarding a decrease in both the quantity of drugs and in the prescribed daily doses. The study showed that the quantity of drugs prescribed on a regular basis (p < 0,005) had decreased by 42.5% and the quantity of drugs prescribed on a PRN basis (p < 0,005) had decreased by 53.4%. Consequently, the number of doses administered regularly and on PRN basis decreased respectively by 55.0% (p < 0.005) and by 58.4% (p < 0.025). In addition, the annual budget related to the cost of drugs had reduced by 20.4%. This project provided for the creation of a part-time pharmacist position (10.5 hours per week), and for the implementation of structured clinical activities at this long-term health care facility.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".