Global healthcare expenditure is escalating at an unsustainable rate. Money spent on medicines and managing medication-related problems continues to grow. The high prevalence of medication errors and inappropriate prescribing is a major issue within healthcare systems, and can often contribute to adverse drug events, many of which are preventable. As a result, there is a huge opportunity for pharmacists to have a significant impact on reducing healthcare costs, as they have the expertise to detect, resolve, and prevent medication errors and medication-related problems. The development of clinical pharmacy practice in recent decades has resulted in an increased number of pharmacists working in clinically advanced roles worldwide. Pharmacist-provided services and clinical interventions have been shown to reduce the risk of potential adverse drug events and improve patient outcomes, and the majority of published studies show that these pharmacist activities are cost-effective or have a good cost:benefit ratio. This review demonstrates that pharmacists can contribute to substantial healthcare savings across a variety of settings. However, there is a paucity of evidence in the literature highlighting the specific aspects of pharmacists’ work which are the most effective and cost-effective. Future high-quality economic evaluations with robust methodologies and study design are required to investigate what pharmacist services have significant clinical benefits to patients and substantiate the greatest cost savings for healthcare budgets.

Background: Multi-morbidity and polypharmacy increase the risk of non-trivial adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in older people during hospitalization. Despite this, there are no established interventions for hospital-acquired ADR prevention. Methods: We undertook a pragmatic, multi-national, parallel arm prospective randomized open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE) controlled trial enrolling patients at six European medical centres. We randomized 1,537 older medical and surgical patients with multi-morbidity and polypharmacy on admission in a 1:1 ratio to SENATOR software-guided medication optimization plus standard care (intervention, n = 772, mean number of daily medications = 9.34) or standard care alone (control, n = 765, mean number of daily medications = 9.23) using block randomization stratified by site and admission type. Attending clinicians in the intervention arm received SENATOR-generated advice at a single time point with recommendations they could choose to adopt or not. The primary endpoint was occurrence of probable or certain ADRs within 14 days of randomization. Secondary endpoints were primary endpoint derivatives; tertiary endpoints included all-cause mortality, re-hospitalization, composite healthcare utilization and health-related quality of life. Results: For the primary endpoint, there was no difference between the intervention and control groups (24.5 vs. 24.8%; OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.77–1.24; P = 0.88). Similarly, with secondary and tertiary endpoints, there were no significant differences. Among attending clinicians in the intervention group, implementation of SENATOR software-generated medication advice points was poor (~15%). Conclusions: In this trial, uptake of software-generated medication advice to minimize ADRs was poor and did not reduce ADR incidence during index hospitalization.

Background: findings from a recent qualitative study indicate that the perceived clinical relevance of computer-generated STOPP/START recommendations was a key factor affecting their implementation by physician prescribers caring for hospitalised older adults in the SENATOR trial. Aim: to systematically evaluate the clinical relevance of these recommendations and to establish if clinical relevance significantly affected the implementation rate. Methods: a pharmacist–physician pair retrospectively reviewed the case records for all SENATOR trial intervention patients at Cork University Hospital and assigned a degree of clinical relevance for each STOPP/START recommendation based on a previously validated six-point scale. The chi-square test was used to quantify the differences in prescriber implementation rates between recommendations of varying clinical relevance, with statistical significance set at P < 0.05. Results: in 204 intervention patients, the SENATOR software produced 925 STOPP/START recommendations. Nearly three quarters of recommendations were judged to be clinically relevant (73.6%); however, nearly half of these were deemed of ‘possibly low relevance’ (320/681; 47%). Recommendations deemed of higher clinical relevance were significantly more likely to be implemented than those of lower clinical relevance (P < 0.05). Conclusions: a large proportion (61%) of the computer-generated STOPP/START recommendations provided were of potential ‘adverse significance’, of ‘no clinical relevance’ or of ‘possibly low relevance’. The adjudicated clinical relevance of computer-generated medication recommendations significantly affects their implementation. Meticulous software refinement is required for future interventions of this type to increase the proportion of recommendations that are of high clinical relevance. This should facilitate their implementation, resulting in prescribing optimisation and improved clinical outcomes for multimorbid older adults.

There is a paucity of research describing the pharmacist's role in the multidisciplinary care of older adults in the intermediate care setting. To determine the types of drug-related problems (DRPs) in older patients in this setting, to evaluate the implementation rate of pharmacist recommendations and the factors affecting implementation, and to assess the clinical significance of these recommendations. Data were collected over a 12-week period on one pharmacist's recommendations to reduce clinically relevant DRPs identified during medication reconciliation and review for all patients ≥65 years admitted to an intermediate care unit. The clinical significance of the recommendations was judged by four independent assessors using a validated tool. Statistical significance was predetermined as p < 0.05. Of 494 clinically relevant DRPs identified in 91 patients (mean age: 82 years), 406 recommendations were communicated to the medical team, and 89.2% were implemented. Overall, 48.5% were communicated verbally, but no difference was found between the implementation rates of verbal and written recommendations (87.8% versus 90.4%; p = 0.4). Medication reconciliation recommendations were implemented more commonly than those regarding medication review (96.5% versus 79.5%; p < 0.0001). Recommendations judged to be of 'moderate significance' (66.8% of total) were implemented more often than those of 'minor significance' (93.2% versus 81.6%; p < 0.001). The consultant was provided with a significantly higher proportion of recommendations of 'moderate significance' when compared to the junior doctor (79.6% versus 63.3%; p = 0.02), but implemented significantly fewer recommendations (69.4% versus 91.9%; p < 0.0001). The high implementation rate in this study shows the importance of pharmacist involvement to reduce DRPs in the multidisciplinary care of older adults in an intermediate care unit. Future research should focus on investigating the impact of pharmacist interventions on older patient outcomes and the associated cost-effectiveness in this setting.

Background: Pharmacist services in general practice are expanding worldwide, with evidence to show pharmacists’ presence in general practice has financial, workload, and clinical benefits. Yet, little is known globally about general practitioners’ (GPs’) views on their presence in general practice.Objective: To synthesize the qualitative research evidence on GPs’ views of pharmacist services in general practice.Methods: Qualitative evidence synthesis; 8 electronic databases were searched from inception to April 2021 for qualitative studies that reported the views of GPs regarding pharmacist services in general practice. Data from included studies were analyzed using thematic synthesis. The Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (CERQual) approach was used to assess the confidence in individual review findings.Results: Nineteen studies were included, which captured the views of 159 GPs from 8 different countries. Four analytical themes describing the factors that should be considered in the development or optimization of pharmacist services in general practice, based on the views of GPs, were developed from the coded data and descriptive themes: (i) optimal environment for a pharmacist, (ii) the ideal pharmacist characteristics, (iii) complex stakeholder relationships, and (iv) benefits of an effective pharmacist.Conclusion: Based on the synthesis of GPs’ views, we have created a conceptual model of factors that should be considered by policymakers, GPs, pharmacists, and other relevant stakeholders when developing or optimizing pharmacist services in general practice going forward.