Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Formularies as Topic”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Acceptance of a pharmacy-based, physician-edited hospital pharmacy and therapeutics committee newsletter.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the level of physician acceptance and perceived usefulness of a pharmacy-prepared, physician-edited pharmacy and therapeutics (P&T) committee newsletter. DESIGN: Two separate surveys conducted after 7 and 24 months of publication, respectively. SETTING: 500-bed, university-affiliated, tertiary-care hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The initial survey was mailed to physicians after 7 months of publication and they were requested to rate various aspects of the newsletter, including timeliness of articles, usefulness of articles, quality of writing and design, and overall value of the publication on a scale of 1-4: (1 = excellent, 2 = good, 3 = fair, 4 = poor). Physicians were also asked to rank different categories of articles (articles on new drugs, drug-class reviews, topical reviews, formulary news, and articles providing P&T committee information) and were encouraged to provide comments. A separate follow-up survey conducted at 24 months asked physicians to indicate whether they (1) regularly received the newsletter, (2) regularly read the newsletter, (3) found the information in the newsletter to be useful, and (4) desired to continue receiving the newsletter. RESULTS: Initial survey results yielded mean newsletter quality scores ranging from 1.54 to 1.66. Respondents preferred, in descending order, articles on new drugs, drug-class reviews, topical reviews, formulary news, and P&T committee information. The 24-month survey revealed that 96 percent of the physicians regularly receiving and reading the newsletter found the information useful and 97 percent felt that the newsletter should continue to be published. Favorable comments were also received from several prominent physicians. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate strong physician acceptance of a pharmacy-prepared, physician-edited newsletter and provide information about the types of articles preferred by physicians in a university hospital setting.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed1991

Medication use during neonatal and pediatric critical care transport.

The Pediatric Critical Care Unit (PCCU) at the Children's Hospital of Western Ontario provides a transport service and team (critical care physician, critical care nurse, respiratory therapist) which transports critically ill newborns, infants, and children. The purpose of this study was to identify the medications used during transport and to determine age-related differences. Results of a prospective study of all drugs administered by the transport team to 174 patients during their stabilization and transport from November 1, 1987 through October 31, 1988 are presented. One hundred and twenty-one (69.5%) patients received at least one medication. The most frequently administered medications were antibiotics (38.5% of patients), followed by morphine (27.0%), anticonvulsants (23.6%), neuromuscular blockers (14.4%), respiratory drugs (11.5%), inotropes (10.9%), and sedatives (7.5%). Miscellaneous medications were administered to 48.8% of patients. The use of different classes of drugs varied with age; anticonvulsants were most frequently administered to children, sedatives and respiratory medications to infants, and antibiotics and miscellaneous medications to newborns. The wide range of medications used may reflect the diversity of diseases causing critical illness which reinforces that transport teams must have access to and knowledge of a variety of medications. The formulary of medications taken by the critical care transport team is included.

Child↗
PubMed1984

Total formulary review--the easy way.

In an effort to minimize drug costs, many hospital pharmacy services have limited their drug inventories through the development of a formulary. Evaluation of drug products for addition to the formulary is the responsibility of the Pharmacy and Therapeutics (P & T) Committee. The deletion of rarely used or outdated products is often overlooked. As a means to "clean up" the formulary, Hamot Medical Center (HMC) underwent a total formulary review. Drugs were separated into classes as defined by the American Hospital Formulary Service (AHFS). Approximately three drug classes were evaluated each month by the P & C Committee. Evaluation criteria was based on the following factors: current formulary status, usage statistics, negative comments appearing in six current publications, hospital acquisition cost, and number of formularies containing each product. A final compilation of all deletions and additions were distributed to all medical staff department and division chiefs. Following receipt of all their comments, a final draft of the formulary was made and prepared for publication. This system is a simple, uncomplicated means of either revising or beginning a formulary. It evaluates a drug based on efficacy, individual hospital usage, and cost of the drug while allowing for input of the medical staff. The end result is a formulary tailored to best fit each institution.

Evaluation Studies as Topic↗
PubMed1991

Multiattribute evaluation in formulary decision making as applied to calcium-channel blockers.

The use of multiattribute utility theory (MAUT) to make a formulary decision involving calcium-channel blockers (CCBs) is described. The MAUT method is a procedure for identifying, characterizing, and comparing the many variables that may affect a decision. Although applications in pharmacy have been infrequent, MAUT should be particularly appealing to formulary committees. The steps of the MAUT method are (1) determine the viewpoint of the decision makers, (2) identify the decision alternatives, (3) identify the attributes to be evaluated, (4) identify the factors to be used in evaluating the attributes, (5) establish a utility scale for scoring each factor, (6) transform the values for each factor to its utility scale, (7) determine weights for each attribute and factor, (8) calculate the total utility score for each decision alternative, (9) determine which decision alternative has the greatest total score, and (10) perform a sensitivity analysis. The viewpoint of a formulary committee in a health maintenance organization was simulated to develop a model for using the MAUT method to compare CCBs for single-agent therapy of chronic stable angina in ambulatory patients for one year. The attributes chosen were effectiveness, safety, patient acceptance, and cost and weighted 36%, 29%, 21%, and 14%, respectively, as contributions to the evaluation. The rank order of the decision alternatives was (1) generic verapamil, (2) brand-name verapamil, (3) diltiazem, (4) nicardipine, and (5) nifedipine. The MAUT method provides a standardized yet flexible format for comparing and selecting among formulary alternatives.

Calcium Channel Blockers↗
PubMed1985

Evaluating a restrictive formulary system by assessing nonformulary-drug requests.

Nonformulary-drug requests were used to evaluate a restrictive formulary system in a large university hospital, and a telephone survey of eight similar hospitals was conducted to assess the restrictiveness of their formulary systems. Nonformulary-drug requests were evaluated by two drug information pharmacists over a 12-month period (January-December 1984) to assess the frequency with which nonformulary items were ordered, the costs associated with the procurement of nonformulary drug products, and the rationales given by physicians when ordering nonformulary products. Of all nonformulary requests, 65% were for drugs previously evaluated by the pharmacy and therapeutics committee and denied admission to the formulary. A cost savings of $1887 would have resulted if formulary alternates had been used instead of nonformulary products. Excluding 22% of nonformulary items that were requested for the continuation of preadmission drug therapy, only 13% of the rationales for the remaining requests were appropriate. Although the eight other hospitals surveyed said they had restrictive formularies, all had frequent requests and procedures for procuring nonformulary items and some formularies included most available drugs. The formulary system at the study hospital was considered restrictive, but procedures for nonformulary-drug requests limited the effectiveness of the system. If any benefit is to result from formulary systems, hospitals must strengthen their enforcement of formulary restrictions.

Costs and Cost Analysis↗
PubMed1988

Changes in market shares for internal analgesic products after a Medicaid formulary restriction.

The effects of a Medicaid formulary restriction, adding propoxyphene napsylate to a Negative Drug List, were examined. The market shares of products in subgroups of the internal analgesic therapeutic category were compared for periods before and after the restriction. Data from Wisconsin Medicaid Management Information System claims records were analyzed to determine changes in the percent of recipients, prescriptions, and expenditures. For both noninstitutional patients, the market shares held by propoxyphene napsylate primarily were shifted to propoxyphene hydrochloride products. Secondarily, market shifts to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) occurred, and this effect was more pronounced for noninstitutional patients. The formulary restriction most affected the firm that solely marketed propoxyphene napsylate products prior to the change, since that entire market share was redistributed to other products.

Analgesics↗
PubMed1999

Formulary of common equine drugs.

This article presents in easily accessible form a collection of drug names and dose rates for the drugs recommended or referred to by the authors of the individual articles in this issue. Although the formulary provides recommendations for drug use, the reader is cautioned that the responsibility for the choice of agent, formulation, dose, and dose interval lies with the clinician. The author also addresses regulations that govern the use of drugs in competition horses.

Animals↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Drug use evaluation. Contributions to quality assurance and cost-containment.

Over the past 20 years, drug use review (DUR) activities have become an integral component of inpatient care to assure that medications are being used in the most cost-effective manner. The term drug use evaluation (DUE) has supplanted DUR, because DUE implies an expansive, integrated program that includes retrospective, concurrent, and prospective drug performance evaluations made possible through automation. DUE monitors drug experience outcomes, which allows the Pharmacy & Therapeutics (P&T) Committee to revise the drug formulary in response to patient care and cost-analysis research. Computerized HMOs are now embracing DUE as a result of the competitive drive to balance quality of care and cost-containment. United HealthCare (UHC) has used DUE to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of therapeutically similar medications. The UHC database captures medical and pharmacy claims data, and allows analysis of the total cost of care. UHC has used the system to make rational formulary decisions based on global costs, rather than drug ingredient costs. As data processing systems such as this flourish, other HMOs will be able to conduct similar DUE activities. The HMO environment provides a fertile site for such research to be conducted by pharmaceutical manufacturers.

Cimetidine↗