| People | Locations | Statistics |
|---|---|---|
| Naji, M. |
| |
| Motta, Antonella |
| |
| Aletan, Dirar |
| |
| Mohamed, Tarek |
| |
| Ertürk, Emre |
| |
| Taccardi, Nicola |
| |
| Kononenko, Denys |
| |
| Petrov, R. H. | Madrid |
|
| Alshaaer, Mazen | Brussels |
|
| Bih, L. |
| |
| Casati, R. |
| |
| Muller, Hermance |
| |
| Kočí, Jan | Prague |
|
| Šuljagić, Marija |
| |
| Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-Artemi | Brussels |
|
| Azam, Siraj |
| |
| Ospanova, Alyiya |
| |
| Blanpain, Bart |
| |
| Ali, M. A. |
| |
| Popa, V. |
| |
| Rančić, M. |
| |
| Ollier, Nadège |
| |
| Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro |
| |
| Landes, Michael |
| |
| Rignanese, Gian-Marco |
|
Steinke, D.
in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%
Topics
Publications (1/1 displayed)
Places of action
| Organizations | Location | People |
|---|
article
Development of the Manchester framework for the evaluation of emergency department pharmacy services
Abstract
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Background</jats:title><jats:p>Many countries, including the United Kingdom, have established Emergency Department (ED) pharmacy services where some ED pharmacists now work as practitioners. They provide both traditional pharmaceutical care and novel practitioner care i.e. clinical examination, yet their impact on quality of care is unknown.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Aim</jats:title><jats:p>To develop a framework of structures, processes and potential outcome indicators to support evaluation of the quality of ED pharmacy services in future studies.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Method</jats:title><jats:p>Framework components (structures, processes and potential outcome indicators) were identified in three ways: from a narrative review of relevant international literature, and separate panel meetings with ED pharmacists and then other ED healthcare professionals. Structures and processes were collated into categories developed iteratively throughout data collection, with outcome indicators collated into six domains of quality as proposed by the Institute of Medicine. These raw data were then processed e.g. outcome indicators screened for clarity i.e. those which explicitly stated what would be measured were included in the framework.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>A total of 190 structures, 533 processes, and 503 outcome indicators were identified. Through data processing a total of 153 outcome indicators were included in the final framework divided into the domains safe (32), effective (50), patient centred (18), timely (24), efficient (20) and equitable (9).</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title><jats:p>The first framework specific to the quality evaluation ED pharmacy services, service evaluators should validate potential outcome indicators prior to their use. The minimum expected of a high-quality service should also be defined to enable interpretation of relevant measurements.</jats:p></jats:sec>