Search

The American College of Clinical Pharmacy (ACCP) 2011 publication "Tenets for Developing Quality Measures for Ambulatory Clinical Pharmacy Services" describes comprehensive, accountable, feasible, scientifically sound, and usable quality metrics for ambulatory care (AC) practice. ACCP endorsed the definition of comprehensive medication management (CMM) in 2014 and has since advocated consistent implementation of CMM in patient‐centered, team‐based care. Given the decade of changes and advances in AC practice since the 2011 publication, the 2020 ACCP Publications Committee has developed the present white paper to update quality metrics and provide performance indicators with proposed guidance for CMM in AC practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Hospitalists provide inpatient care including coordinating with other providers and transitioning care to the community. Clinical pharmacists interact with hospitalists, usually on multidisciplinary teams. A statement by the American Society of Health‐System Pharmacists and the Society of Hospital Medicine promotes collaboration and encourages interdisciplinary optimization of patient care. However, literature detailing this collaboration is sparse. It is unclear how to utilize these joint working relationships most effectively. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to describe the environment of pharmacist and hospitalist collaborative relationships and activities of pharmacists practicing with hospitalists for foundational information. Methods: This was a cross‐sectional study. An Institutional Review Board‐approved survey was distributed to pharmacists and hospitalists via email. Questions considered the team and the environment, clinical pharmacist activities related to the pharmacists' patient care process, and perceived barriers to effective teamwork. Results were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Results: Seventy pharmacists and 25 hospitalists participated in the survey. Most were from the Midwest or Southeast United States and practicing up to 10 years in a large health care system. Pharmacists spent the most time on development of a therapeutic plan (1‐5 ranking scale [1 = most, 5 = least time spent]; median 2; range 1‐5.) There were variations in responses related to the institutional staffing model allowing for collaboration with hospitalists, whether technology enhanced collaboration and additional job responsibilities hindered collaboration, and whether absence of pharmacy participation on rounds was noticed. Most hospitalists (68%) initiated frequent communication with a pharmacist. Hospitalists (32%) would collaborate with a pharmacist more frequently if a specific individual was designated for the position. Conclusions: Clinical pharmacists and hospitalists collaborate in team‐based care environments within larger health care systems. This hypothesis‐generating survey attempts to assess the current environment. Further research can work toward establishing practice standards and improving collaborations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients moving between health care settings or providers are at increased risk of complications, including unplanned hospital readmissions and medication errors. Several actions must occur in concert with members of the health care team and across settings to ensure coordinated and continuous care for patients undergoing these transitions of care (TOC). Clinical pharmacists support patients during care transitions by providing interventions and services designed to improve medication outcomes. Clinical pharmacists and team members who support clinical pharmacist activities (eg, pharmacy students, technicians, and residents) are located throughout the care continuum, from acute care to care in the community, with each contributing to improved TOC outcomes. This article provides information on evidence of high‐impact clinical pharmacist TOC practices to serve as a practical guide for practitioners interested in starting or improving TOC activities. This article also addresses current and emerging best practices and offers suggestions for improving clinical pharmacist involvement in care transition activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Objective No clinical trials are currently available that demonstrate the effects of marijuana on patients with migraine headache; however, the potential effects of cannabinoids on serotonin in the central nervous system indicate that marijuana may be a therapeutic alternative. Thus, the objective of this study was to describe the effects of medical marijuana on the monthly frequency of migraine headache. Design Retrospective chart review. Setting Two medical marijuana specialty clinics in Colorado. Patients One hundred twenty-one adults with the primary diagnosis of migraine headache who were recommended migraine treatment or prophylaxis with medical marijuana by a physician, between January 2010 and September 2014, and had at least one follow-up visit. Measurements and Results The primary outcome was number of migraine headaches per month with medical marijuana use. Secondary outcomes were the type and dose of medical marijuana used, previous and adjunctive migraine therapies, and patient-reported effects. Migraine headache frequency decreased from 10.4 to 4.6 headaches per month (p<0.0001) with the use of medical marijuana. Most patients used more than one form of marijuana and used it daily for prevention of migraine headache. Positive effects were reported in 48 patients (39.7%), with the most common effects reported being prevention of migraine headache with decreased frequency of migraine headache (24 patients [19.8%]) and aborted migraine headache (14 patients [11.6%]). Inhaled forms of marijuana were commonly used for acute migraine treatment and were reported to abort migraine headache. Negative effects were reported in 14 patients (11.6%); the most common effects were somnolence (2 patients [1.7%]) and difficulty controlling the effects of marijuana related to timing and intensity of the dose (2 patients [1.7%]), which were experienced only in patients using edible marijuana. Edible marijuana was also reported to cause more negative effects compared with other forms. Conclusion The frequency of migraine headache was decreased with medical marijuana use. Prospective studies should be conducted to explore a cause-and-effect relationship and the use of different strains, formulations, and doses of marijuana to better understand the effects of medical marijuana on migraine headache treatment and prophylaxis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Board certification is a means of demonstrating expertise above the minimum licensing standards. For many health care professionals, this credential is a necessity. As pharmacists become involved in more advanced patient care services, board certification becomes an essential component to ensuring quality care. The prevalence of United States pharmacy practice faculty members who are board certified, however, is unknown. In addition, to our knowledge, factors that serve to motivate or discourage faculty from obtaining board certification have not been previously described; thus, 900 pharmacy practice faculty members listed in the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy ( AACP) online directory were invited to complete an online survey regarding motivators and barriers for board certification. In addition, a list of board-certified pharmacists, obtained from the Board of Pharmacy Specialties, was used to check the board certification status of all pharmacy practice faculty members listed in the AACP directory. In 2011, the prevalence of board certification among the 2867 pharmacy practice faculty members was 37% (1063 pharmacists), with the highest prevalence found among assistant professors (39.4%). A total of 322 faculty members (36% response rate) completed the survey; of these, 308 self-identified as pharmacy practice faculty, and their responses were included in the analysis. Current board certification in pharmacy specialties was reported by 163 respondents (52.9%); 14 (4.5%) were previously certified. Among the 308 respondents, the most common perceived reason why pharmacy practice faculty become board certified was the desire to be recognized as an expert in the field (71.5%). Those who were currently board certified indicated personal growth as the most important reason (60.1%). Those previously certified indicated no perceived benefit as the most common reason for not recertifying (71.4%). Among those never certified, no perceived need (52.0%) or benefit (44.8%) were the most common reasons for not becoming certified; however, a majority of those never certified (68%) stated that they would become board certified if there was no associated cost and they were confident they would pass. To increase the prevalence of board certification in pharmacy practice faculty at U.S. schools and colleges of pharmacy, the benefits of this credential must be addressed at each institution. Steps should be taken to assist and encourage board certification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]