Advertisement

Pharmacy World and Science

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 111–115 | Cite as

Development of patient‐centred performance indicators to guide the delivery of pharmaceutical care in a district general hospital

  • A. Radley
  • B. Millar
  • J. Hamley
Article

Abstract

The aim of this study was to audit clinical pharmacy practice in an acute hospital setting against the individual patient care guidelines set out in the CRAG "Framework for Practice" document, and then to develop practical, patient‐centred performance indicators that could be used locally to monitor the delivery of pharmaceutical care. A series of four audits were undertaken to establish key elements in the process of providing pharmaceutical care to patients. Four standard statements describing the performance of the pharmacy service in providing patient care were developed through peer discussion and formulation of ideas based around these data. The four standard statements were then used as performance indicators to evaluate service performance at PRI and tested by means of a further audit cycle. The use of this methodology facilitated operation of a structured service appraisal system and provided a forum that allowed problems with practice to be discussed and resolved.

Clinical Pharmacy Peer Review Performance Indicators Quality Assurance 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hepler CD, Strand LM. Opportunities and responsibilities in pharmaceutical care. Am.J.Hosp.Pharm 1990;47:533-43Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    The Scottish Office Department of Health. Acute Services Review Report. May 1998Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anon. Hoechst Marion Roussell Lecture: Building a practice in pharmaceutical care. Pharmaceutical Journal 1998;260:874-6Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clinical pharmacy in the hospital pharmaceutical service: A Framework for Practice. Clinical Resource and Audit Group, Edinburgh 1996. (Chairman Cromarty JA). HMSO Scotland 8456760Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Statement of principles and standards of good practice for hospital pharmacy. Medicines, Ethics and Practice – A guide for Pharmacists. Number 24. Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. London July 2000Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Radley AS, Pirie K, Elliot C, Hamley J. Transfer of information between care environments. UKCPA Autumn Conference November 1995Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Generalisability of the structured approach to care planning. Cruickshank GM, Lannigan N, Radley AS, Banks JC, King ED, Lamont GE et al. BPC, Scarborough September 1997 Pharm.J 1997;259(6968):R25Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tait L, Hamley JG. The application of process control to the provision of medicines to patients on hospital discharge. UKCPA Autumn Conference November 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wall AH, Lamont GE, Radley AS. Audit of patient waiting times at discharge. CRAG National Audit Symposium, Edinburgh December 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Semple JS, Morgan JE, Garner ST, Sutherland K, Milligan M. The effect of self-administration and reuse of patients' own drugs on a hospital pharmacy. Pharmaceutical Journal 1995;255:124-6.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gitlow HS, Melby MJ. Framework for continuous quality improvement in the provision of pharmaceutical care. Am.J.Hosp.Pharm. 1991;48:1917-25Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Angaran DM. Quality assurance to quality improvement: Measuring and monitoring pharmaceutical care. Am. J. Hosp. Pharm 1991;48:1901-7Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Anon. Preliminary report of the ASHP Quality assurance Indicators Development Group. Am. J. Hosp. Pharm 1991;48:1941-7Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Department of Health. armacy in the future-implementing the NHS plan London: The Department; 2000Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Department of Health and Community Care. Our National Health: a plan for action, a plan for change. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive; 2000Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Person et al. Nursing Quality Management. Quality assurance methods for peer review. Wiley, London (1987)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ovretveit J. A peer review process for improving service quality. BIOSS, Brunel University (1988)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Meyer J. Using qualitative methods in health related action research. Brit.Med.J 2000;320:178-81Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Turpin RS, D'Arcy LA, Koss R, McMahill C, Meyne K, Morton D et al. A model to assess the usefulness of performance indicators. International J. of Quality in Health Care. 1996;8(4):321-9.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zimmerman CR, Smolarek RT, Stevenson JG. Peer review and continuous quality improvement of pharmacists' clinical interventions. Am J Health-Syst Pharm 1997;54:1722-7Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lucey T. Management information systems. DP Publications 1991Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cantrill JA, Devlin M, Jackson C, Queensborough R. Quality Street: Why wait to be asked? Pharm. J. 2000;264(7092):588Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Radley
    • 1
  • B. Millar
    • 1
  • J. Hamley
    • 1
  1. 1.Perth Royal InfirmaryTayside University Hospitals NHS TrustPerth, ScotlandUK

Personalised recommendations