Saturday, March 23, 2013

Clinical Pharmacy

My plan was to update everyone on my progress with my research project, but as anyone who has ever done research will know, it is going slower than expected. To keep you updated, I will write here about the evolution of clinical pharmacists and their role in the clinical setting today.




                Traditionally, pharmacist in a hospital setting have only been in charge of purchasing and dispensing drugs to nurses or practitioners, and it has been the role of the prescriber to monitor therapy. A few decades ago, this began to change. The pharmacists began reviewing patient records for the appropriateness of medical orders, and began monitoring the patients’ therapy. Pharmacists became part of the prescribing system. “The revolutionary feature of these developments was the presents of the pharmacist on the ward.” (Calvert) Pharmacists were no longer secluded to the pharmacy, but engaged in patient interaction by participating in rounds. This idea of clinical pharmacy has evolved rapidly throughout the years, but there have been plenty of setbacks along the way.
                In 1982, D. H.  Lawson and R. M. E. Richards wrote a book about clinical pharmacy in the hospital. The authors are doctors who were very supportive of the pharmacist taking on a more involved part of the patient care team. These positive thoughts, however, were not shared by all. C. F. George, a postgraduate medical student, wrote a review of the book in the Postgraduate Medical Journal.

“Chapter 7 on monitoring for efficacy and toxicity was less than convincing. Many pharmacists will not wish or feel competent to undertake the tasks described therein which, in my view, are or should be an essential part of the training of doctors. I found myself unconvinced by the arguments advanced in favor of staff pharmacists tagging along on ward rounds. Obviously, there are situations where this may be appropriate, but it is hard to believe that it would be sufficiently cost-effective to be applied universally.” (George)
This statement encompasses the entire reason why pharmacists needed to make themselves more apparent. In Europe, several studies were conducted to see if a pharmacist added to the team would be cost effective, and every study showed that it would. “Patients who were treated by teams that included a pharmacist had significantly shorter length of stay, lower drug cost per admission, but no difference in mortality.” (Calvert) A few decades after the review mentioned above was published, it was clear that pharmacists had changed the minds of the doctors with which they worked. Pharmacists began to show their own style of participation, and changed their direction from process-oriented to outcomes-oriented. They became part of the patient care team. In 1999, it was published in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology that “Clinical pharmacists are ideally placed to influence prescribing by hospital doctors because they have the appropriate knowledge about therapeutics and are in regular contact with prescribers.” (Calvert)
                Besides pharmacist actively becoming more involved with patient care during the time between the review and the publication in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, pharmacy world was changing to accommodate this new view of pharmaceutical care. In this time, pharmacy degrees went from a bachelor in science to a doctor of pharmacy. This provided pharmacists with more in-class education on therapeutic monitoring and clinical application. Along with that, more experiences were available to pharmacist during their school curriculum. The presence of residencies for pharmacy appeared, and became popular very rapidly. These changes were happening simultaneously in an effort to allow pharmacy expansion while providing the education needed to do so.
                Today, there are several examples of clinical pharmacy. Some of the most profound are anticoagulation therapy, diabetic education, and antibiotic monitoring for inpatient treatment. In anticoagulation therapy, patients that are on warfarin need to have their INR tested routinely to monitor for efficacy and toxicity. Instead of meeting with a doctor, they have a short meeting with a pharmacist, who is authorized to change the patient’s dosage regimen as needed. The patients don’t have to pay a physician copay, and have easier access and shorter wait times to meet with the pharmacist. This also frees up the doctor to deal with more pertinent issues, while the pharmacist can deal with routine monitoring. In diabetic education, a pharmacist can meet with patients to discuss their monthly blood sugar logs and adjust their insulin accordingly. This offers the same benefits as anticoagulation clinic. Since the pharmacist is the one dispensing the patient’s insulin as well, the pharmacist can monitor adherence based on the number and timing of refills the patient is picking up. In antibiotic monitoring, the doctor orders the drug needed and checks the level of the drug in the patient’s blood. The doctor then reports this back to the pharmacist and asks for their recommendation on dosage adjustment. The pharmacist can assess the levels and choose a new regimen for the patient that is more appropriate, or recommend continuation on the dosage already ordered.
                Now that pharmacy school has changed to a more therapeutic focus, and has lengthened in education required, pharmacists have more class time reviewing pharmacokinetics and pharmacology of drugs than doctors. This puts them in a better position to provide these services, and makes them a pertinent part of the medical team. Pharmacists are now actively involved in the patients’ drug therapy.
                This conversion of pharmacists to part of the care team has given pharmacists a more autonomic position. In cases such as diabetic education and anticoagulation clinic listed above, pharmacists have the ability to change drug therapy. When working on rounds in a hospital, they are encouraged to make recommendations, and they serve as the drug information source for the prescribing doctors. Because of this increase in responsibility, more management responsibility has been assigned to the pharmacist. They need to perform routine self-audits and peer review to make sure that they have all of the information and education they need to make informed decisions. Most clinical pharmacists in hospitals still have to report to an overhead in the hospital who attempts to standardize patient care throughout all of the clinical pharmacists in the hospital.
                The world of pharmacy has been evolving rapidly with the idea that pharmacists should have a more active role in patient care. Throughout the last few decades, pharmacists have met with opposition to their changes from the medical team. However, over time, pharmacists’ medicinal peers have learned how valuable a pharmacist can be. Pharmacy schooling has expanded to include more therapeutic-focused classes and more clinical experience for the student pharmacist. Postgraduate opportunities have also been created to aid the pharmacist in transitioning into the active role that they now practice. With more change in the pharmacy world, pharmacists will become more autonomic and respected throughout the medical field, while claiming more responsibility for patient care.
Alexis Ireland, PharmD Candidate 2014

References
Calvert, R. T. Clinical Pharmacy – a hospital perspective. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1999; 47, 231-238.

George, C. F. University of Southampton. Review of Clinical Pharmacy and Hospital Drug Management. Postgraduate Medical Journal 1982; 58, 803-804.