Skip to main content
Log in

Literature review on the structure and operation of Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committees

  • Review Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim of the review To review the literature on the structure and operation of hospital Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committees from an international point of view and examine the factors that influence decision-making of these committees. Method We performed a literature search in the Medline and Embase databases from 1997 to January 2009 with the search terms: formulary system decision making, pharmacy and therapeutics committee, formularies hospital, drug formulary, survey, drug selection and outcome assessment health care. Inclusion criteria were the following: studies analyzing Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committees published in English or Spanish from 1997 to January 2009. Exclusion criteria were: publications which were editorials or opinion pieces, studies relating to one hospital, and studies where full text could not be attained. The analysis was divided into structural/organizational data and data on factors affecting the decision-making process. Results Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committees and formularies were present in more than 90% of the hospitals in four of the five countries examined. Therapeutic interchange programs existed only in two of these countries. The mean number of committee members ranged between six and eight. More than 89% of the committees included a pharmacist. Standard operating procedures were implemented by 89% of the committees. The most influential factors in the decision-making were clinical trial results or drug costs rather than pharmacoeconomic studies. Other local organization-dependent factors were also important. Conclusions The structure and operating procedures of Hospital Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committees are similar in select Western countries. Information from clinical trials is the most influential factor in the decision-making process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Apolone G, Joppi R, Bértele V, Garattini S. Ten years of marketing approvals of anticancer drugs in Europe: regulatory policy and guidance documents need to find a balance between different pressures. Br J Cancer. 2005;93:504–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Joppi R, Bertelé V, Garattini S. Disappointing biotech. BMJ. 2005;331:895–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. American Society of Hospital Pharmacists, American Hospital Association. Statement of guiding principles on the operation of hospital formularies. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1960;17:609–10.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Anonymous. ASHP guidelines on the pharmacy and therapeutics committee and the formulary system. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2008;65:1272–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cooke J, Mason AR, Drummond MF, Towse AK. Medication management in English National Health Service hospitals. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2005;62:189–95.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Willems L, Raymakers A, Sermeus W, Vleugels A, Laekeman G. Survey of hospital pharmacy practice in Flemish-speaking Belgium. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2005;62:321–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pedersen CA, Schneider PJ, Scheckelhoff DJ. ASHP national survey of pharmacy practice in hospital settings: prescribing and transcribing–2004. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2005;62:378–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pedersen CA, Schneider PJ, Santell JP. ASHP national survey of pharmacy practice in hospital settings: prescribing and transcribing–2001. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2001;58:2251–66.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Mannebach MA, Ascione FJ, Gaither CA, Bagozzi RP, Cohen IA, Ryan ML. Activities, functions, and structure of pharmacy and therapeutics committees in large teaching hospitals. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 1999;56:622–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Shalansky SJ, Virk R, Ackman M, Jackevicius C, Kertland H, Tsuyuki R, et al. Access to new cardiovascular therapies in Canadian hospitals: a national survey of the formulary process. Can J Cardiol. 2003;19:173–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fijn R, Brouwers JR, Knaap RJ, De Jong-Van Den Berg LT. Drug and Therapeutics (D & T) committees in Dutch hospitals: a nation-wide survey of structure, activities, and drug selection procedures. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1999;48:239–46.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Fijn R, den Berg LT, Brouwers JR. Rational pharmacotherapy in The Netherlands: formulary management in Dutch hospitals. Pharm World Sci. 1999;21:74–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Thürmann PA, Harder S, Steioff A. Structure and activities of hospital drug committees in Germany. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1997;52:429–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Björkman IK, Schmidt IK, Holmstrom I, Bernsten CB. Developing the role of the drug and therapeutics committees: perceptions of chairs. Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2007;20:161–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Anell A, Svarvar P. Pharmacoeconomics and clinical practice guidelines. A survey of attitudes in Swedish formulary committees. Pharmacoeconomics. 2000;17:175–85.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Tan EL, Day RO, Brien JA. Prioritising drug and therapeutics committee (DTC) decisions: a national survey. Pharm World Sci. 2007;29:90–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hasle-Pham E, Arnould B, Spath HM, Follet A, Duru G, Marquis P, et al. Role of clinical, patient-reported outcome and medico-economic studies in the public hospital drug formulary decision-making process: results of a European survey. Health Policy. 2005;71:205–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Späth HM, Charavel M, Morelle M, Carrere MO. A qualitative approach to the use of economic data in the selection of medicines for hospital formularies: a French survey. Pharm World Sci. 2003;25:269–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jenkings KN, Barber N. What constitutes evidence in hospital new drug decision making? Soc Sci Med. 2004;58:1757–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Schumock GT, Walton SM, Park HY, Nutescu EA, Blackburn JC, Finley JM, et al. Factors that influence prescribing decisions. Ann Pharmacother. 2004;38:557–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Odedina FT, Sullivan J, Nash R, Clemmons CD. Use of pharmacoeconomic data in making hospital formulary decisions. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2002;59:1441–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pedersen CA, Schneider PJ, Scheckelhoff DJ. ASHP national survey of pharmacy practice in hospital settings: prescribing and transcribing–2007. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2008;65:827–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Devenport C. Pharmacy and therapeutics committee ‘virtual’ meetings. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 1999;56:1132. Letter.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Sears EL. Development and maintenance of an online formulary for a large health system. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2008;65:510–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Verhagen CC, Niezink AG, Engels YY, Hekster YY, Doornebal JJ, Vissers KC. Off-label use of drugs in pain medicine and palliative care: an algorithm for the assessment of its safe and legal prescription. Pain Pract. 2008;8:157–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lehmann DF, Guharoy R, Page N, Hirschman K, Ploutz-Snyder R, Medicis J. Formulary management as a tool to improve medication use and gain physician support. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2007;64:464–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Schachtner JM, Guharoy R, Medicis JJ, Newman N. Speizer R. Prevalence and cost savings of therapeutic interchange among U.S. hospitals. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2002;59:529–33.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Mittmann N, Knowles S. A survey of Pharmacy and Therapeutic committees across Canada: scope and responsibilities. Can J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;16:e171–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gafni A, Birch S. Inclusion of drugs in provincial drug benefit programs: Should “reasonable decisions” lead to uncontrolled growth in expenditures? CMAJ. 2003;168:849–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Tordoff JM, Murphy JE, Norris PT, Reith DM. Use of centrally developed pharmacoeconomic assessments for local formulary decisions. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2006;63:1613–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Research Group for Innovation Assessment, Standardisation and Research in the Selection of Drugs (GENESIS) of the Spanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy (SEFH), in particular T Requena-Caturla (Servicio Madrileño de Salud, Madrid), JP Ordovás-Baines (Hospital General Universitario de Alicante), MA Porta-Sánchez (Complejo Hospitalario Juan Canalejo, Coruña), and JM Recalde-Manrique (Andalusian Centre for Pharmaceutical Documentation and Information, Granada) for their contribution to the initial planning and development of this review. We also thank E Corpas-Nogales, L García-Mochón and M Moya-Garrido from the Research and Methodology Support Unit of the Andalusian School of Public Health (EASP) in Granada for their contribution to the literature search.

Funding

This review was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Health and Social Policy following the Ministry’s 2006 open call for proposals. Health Research Fund, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Project PI061546.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Esther Durán-García.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Durán-García, E., Santos-Ramos, B., Puigventos-Latorre, F. et al. Literature review on the structure and operation of Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committees. Int J Clin Pharm 33, 475–483 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-011-9501-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-011-9501-6

Keywords

Navigation