An example is given of the implementation of a clinical pharmacy service program in a community hospital. The need for establishing an efficient drug distribution system is discussed, and the feasibility of utilizing clinically motivated staff pharmacists is presented. A method of limiting the number of patients admitted to the clinical pharmacy service program is also given.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
OwyangE.: The Pharmacist's New Role in Institutional Patient Care, Am. J. Hosp. Pharm.25: 624–630 (Nov.) 1968.
2.
BassM.: The Pharmacist as a Provider of Primary Care, Can. Med. Assoc. J.112: 60–64 (Jan. 11) 1975.
3.
CohenM.: An Assessment of the Impact and Values of Clinical Pharmacy Services, Hosp. Pharm.12: (Jan.) 1977.
4.
KlotzR.: Improved Pharmacy Services Through Pharmacist Participation in Medical Rounds, Am. J. Hosp. Pharm.33: 349, 1976.
5.
GelperinA.: A Supreme Court Decision Will Require Clinical Pharmacy, Drug Intell. Clin. Pharm.9: 124–125 (Mar.) 1975.
6.
KernaghanS.: Unit Dose: The Successful Failure, Hospitals47: 138–139, 144, 146 (July 1) 1973.
7.
MeansB. J.: Medication Errors in a Multidose and a Computer Based Unit-Dose Drug Distribution System, Am. J. Hosp. Pharm.32: 186–191 (Feb.) 1975.
8.
RiddellB.: Unit Dose—Time for Action, Hosp. Formul. Manag.9: 7, 11 (Nov.) 1974.
9.
SmithW. E.: How Clinical Pharmacy Improves Patient Care in a 680-Bed Hospital, Pharm. Times40: 38–41 (Dec.) 1974.
10.
BowlesG. C.Jr.: Study Says Unit Dose System Costs Less, Reduces Medication Errors and Provides Better Drug Control, Mod. Hosp.120: 164 (Mar.) 1973.
11.
WeiblenJ.: An Administrator's View of Clinical Pharmacy, Hosp. Pharm. Notes4: (Dec.) 1976.
12.
MarshalG.: Clinical Program May Effect Savings, Hospitals48: 79–80, 102 (Dec. 1) 1974.
YorioD.: Cost Comparison of Decentralized Unit-Dose and Traditional Pharmacy Services in a 600-Bed Community Hospital, Am. J. Hosp. Pharm.29: 922–927 (Nov.) 1972.
15.
BellJ. E.: A New Approach to Delivering Drug Information to the Physician Through a Pharmacy Consultation Program, Part III: Evaluation Methodology, Am. J. Hosp. Pharm.30: 220–225 (Mar.) 1973.
16.
BellJ. E.: A New Approach to Delivering Drug Information to the Physician Through a Pharmacy Consultation Program, Part IV: Evaluation Results, Am. J. Hosp. Pharm.30: 300–310 (Apr.) 1973.
17.
YoungW. W.: Clinical Pharmacy Services: Prognostic Criteria for Selective Patient Monitoring, Part I, Am. J. Hosp. Pharm.31: 562–568 (June) 1974.
18.
YoungW. W.: Clinical Pharmacy Services: Prognostic Criteria for Selective Patient Monitoring, Part II, Am. J. Hosp. Pharm.31: 667–676 (July) 1974.
19.
SmithJ. W.: Studies on the Epidemiology of Adverse Drug Reactions, V. Clinical Factors Influencing Susceptibility, Ann. Intern. Med65: 629–640, 1966.
20.
BlockL. H.: A Practical Approach to the Problems of Drug Interactions, Checklist of Factors Which Predispose the Patient to Adverse Reactions, J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. NS10: 68 (Feb.) 1970.
21.
SmithJ. W.: Studies on the Epidemiology of Adverse Drug Reactions, IV. Evaluation of Penicillin Allergy, New Engl J. Med.274: 998–1001 (May 5) 1966.
22.
ThoburnR.: Studies on the Epidemiology of Adverse Drug Reactions, IV. Relationship of Cephalothin and Penicillin Allergy, J. Am. Med. Assoc.198: 345–348 (Oct. 24) 1966.
23.
McCarronM.: Inpatient Drug Monitoring, Drug Intell. Clin. Pharm.9: 80–85 (Feb.) 1975.
