Agreement Between Pharmacists for Problem Identification: An Initial Quality Measurement of Cognitive Services

Author:

LaFleur Joanne1,Larson Bryan S2,Gunning Karen M3,Stoddard Gregory J4,Madden CarrieAnn5,Oderda Lynda3,Steinvoort Carin5,Oderda Gary M3

Affiliation:

1. Drug Regimen Review Center, Department of Pharmacotherapy, College of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Veterans Health Administration Informatics Decision Enhancement and Surveillance Center and Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, Salt Lake City

2. Drug Regimen Review Center, Department of Pharmacotherapy, College of Pharmacy, University of Utah

3. Department of Pharmacotherapy, College of Pharmacy, University of Utah

4. Biostatistician, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Pharmacy, University of Utah

5. Clinical Pharmacist, Drug Regimen Review Center, Department of Pharmacotherapy, College of Pharmacy, University of Utah

Abstract

Background: Recent changes in national reimbursement policies expand the ability of pharmacists to seek reimbursement for cognitive services. The quality of pharmacist-provided cognitive services has, until now, remained unassessed. Pharmacists should demonstrate the quality and value of their work to ensure the continued and expanded acceptance of reimbursement for their services. A preliminary step in assessing quality is to compare agreement between pharmacists for basic problem identification. Objective: To quantify agreement between pharmacist reviewers for problem identification among Utah Medicaid recipients. Methods: Five pharmacists retrospectively reviewed drug regimens, patient characteristics, diagnosis codes, and procedures for 80 Medicaid patients in September 2008 and identified drug-related problems (DRPs) in 15 predetermined categories. Data for each patient were reviewed twice, and each combination of 2 pharmacists reviewed the same 8 patients' information. We calculated a reliability coefficient to compare the number of DRPs identified and used prevalence and bias adjusted κ (PABAK) to determine interrater reliability for the presence of a specific DRP. Results: Of the 15 DRPs categorized by pharmacist reviewers, 1 (untreated indications) had a PABAK coefficient of 0.20, indicating a relatively low level of agreement between reviewers. All other DRP categories had good to excellent agreement, with PABAK coefficients ranging between 0.43 and 0.98. Conclusions: Pharmacist reviewers exhibited less variability in DRP identification or categorization than had been expected for most categories. This work supports the conclusion that pharmacists in our center provide a basic and necessary level of quality for problem assessment. Future work is needed to document the impact of this quality on patient outcomes.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Pharmacology (medical)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3