A SURVEY OF PHARMACY AND THERAPEUTIC COMMITTEES ACROSS CANADA: SCOPE AND RE SPONSIBILITIES
Main Article Content
Keywords
Pharmacy and Therapeutic committees, Canada, survey, formulary decision making
Abstract
Background
Pharmacy and Therapeutics (P&T) committees have traditionally evaluated and developed policies for the clinical use of medications and for ensuring safe and effective drug use and administration.
Objective
The objective of this study was to determine the current activities of hospital P&T committees across Canada.
Methods
Surveys were mailed to 856 (693 English, 163 French translations) Canadian hospitals (acute, chronic or rehabilitation) across Canada. Questions consisted of information on P&T membe rship, scope and responsibilities. Completed surveys were returned by fax. All data was entered into Excel and analyzed for descriptive statistics.
Results
123 surveys were returned, representing 207 hospitals, for an effective response rate of 24%. Four hospitals returned incomplete surveys. Surveys were returned from all areas of Canada, except the territories. On average, P&T committees met six times per year. The average size of the committees was 11 members, with physicians comprising half the membership. Pharmacists and nurses had equal representation; other members were community representatives, dieticians, quality assurance personnel and/or administrators. The top responsibilities of the P&T committee were inpatient formulary management (93% of respondents), drug-use policy making (92%), adverse drug reaction monitoring (83%), patient safety (80%) and drug-use monitoring (80%). Subcommittees were utilized by 46% of P&T committees including antimicrobial (38%), medication safety (25%) and nutrition (14%). Economic evaluations were most frequently completed by a pharmacist who had some previous pharmacoeconomic experience.
Conclusion
This survey reports on the current status and responsibilities, namely formulary management and policy making, of P&T committees in Canada.
References
2. 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(4):37890.
3. 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(7):622-8.
4. Wang Z, Salmon JW, Walton SM. Costeffectiveness analysis and the formulary decision-making process. J Manag Care Pharm 2004;10(1):48-59.
5. Shalansky SJ, Virk R, Ackman M, et al. Access to new cardiovascular therapies in Canadian hospitals: a national survey of the formulary process. Can J Cardiol 2003;19(2):173-9.
6. Balu S, O'Connor P, Vogenberg FR. Contemporary issues affecting P&T committees. Part 2: Beyond managed care. P&T 2004;29(12):780-3.
7. Wade WE, Spruill WJ, Taylor AT, Longe RL, Hawkins DW. The expanding role of pharmacy and therapeutics committees. The 1990s and beyond. Pharmacoeconomics 1996;10(2):123-8.
8. Description and Analysis of the VA National Formulary. Washington: National Academy Press, 2000.
9. Tan EL, Day RO, Brien JA. Prioritising drug and therapeutics committee (DTC) decisions: a national survey. Pharm World Sci 2007;29:906.
10. Nichol MB, Knight TK, Epstein J, Honda DH, Tretiak R. Opinions regarding the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy dossier submission guidelines: Results of a small survey of managed care organizations and pharmaceutical manufacturers. J Manag Care Pharm 2007;13(4):360-71.
11. Odedina FT, Sullivan J, Nash R, Clemmons CD. Use of pharmacoeconomic data in making hospital formulary decisions. Am J Health Syst Pharm 200;59:1441-4.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.