Prof. Iman Basheti
Amman, 11931, Jordan
NCT Number: NCT03803033
Clinical pharmacy services are vital in the prevention of adverse drug events (ADEs) in clinical practice, extending beyond the hospital to chronic disease management in outpatient settings. This study sought to evaluate the cost-benefit of a clinical pharmacy intervention in resolving treatment-related problems (TRPs) among hospital outpatients with chronic diseases. From the hospital system perspective, the cost-benefit analysis was based on a randomized clinical trial in the general outpatients of the major hospital in Jordan. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to either an intervention or a control group. TRPs were identified in both study groups, but interventions were delivered only to the intervention group via a home medication management review (HMMR) by a clinical pharmacist. A follow-up in both groups took place 3 months after recruitment. The total economic benefit was the sum of (i) cost savings due to intervention and (ii) cost avoidance associated with preventable ADEs. The primary outcome measures were the net benefit and benefit-to-cost ratio with the clinical pharmacist-based HMMR. Based on both of the annual net benefit and benefit-to-cost ratio, the study intervention demonstrated to be cost beneficial. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of results. The RCT-based cost-benefit evaluation provided evidence-based insight into the economic benefit of a clinical pharmacist-provided HMMR for preventing ADEs in the general chronic diseases outpatients. This intervention method against the TRPs among outpatients is cost beneficial and offers substantial cost savings to the healthcare hospital payer in Jordan.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Amman, 11931, Jordan
Economic evaluation The total economic benefit of the intervention was calculated as the sum of the cost savings and the cost avoidance associated with the intervention.
Cost savings Cost savings based on the intervention were the reduced cost of therapy associated with treatment changes due to the intervention. Cost savings were therefore calculated as (the reduced cost of therapy in the intervention arm) minus (the reduced cost of therapy in the control arm).
Cost avoidance Cost avoidance was the cost avoided by eliminating the occurrence of ADEs as a consequence of the pharmacist interventions.
Cost-benefit analysis The net benefit was calculated as (cost saving) + (cost avoidance). It was assumed that no intervention would increase the probability of a preventable ADE.
Only direct medical costs were considered in calculations, and all costs were adjusted based on the Jordanian consumer price index to the financial year 2017/18.
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
A baseline interview by the clinical pharmacist was conducted with patients at their homes to assess their use of treatment and to collect all relevant information needed to identify TRPs. Upon TRP identification at baseline, the clinical pharmacist generated a written report of findings and recommendations, which was delivered directly to the patient's physician in a sealed envelope. Patients were asked to refer back to their physicians if they required confirmation of any changes in treatment. Physicians maintained the blinding of patients with regard to whether changes were based on recommendations by the pharmacist. In both the intervention and the control groups, the clinical pharmacist performed a follow-up interview with patients 3 months after the initial interview, during a regular follow-up visit to their physician at the hospital. Assessments in the follow-up interview, regardless of the study group, involved changes in treatment and number of TRPs.
Time frame: Three months
The benefit-to-cost ratio was the (sum of cost savings and cost avoidance) divided by (cost of the intervention). The net benefit of the intervention was the (sum of cost savings and cost avoidance) minus (cost of the intervention).
The scope of this is limited to cost consequences of TRPs and interventions addressing them, and does not include humanistic and clinical outcomes of interventions. Net benefit and benefit-to-cost ratio with the clinical pharmacist-based home-based service.
Applied Science Private University
Other
Cost-benefit Analysis of a Clinical Pharmacist Intervention in Preventing Adverse Drug Events in the General Chronic Diseases Outpatients
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT06916247
Chronic Disease, Disease Attributes
Los Angeles, California, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT03195127
Chronic Disease, Critical Illness
Baltimore, Maryland, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05574699
Cardiovascular Diseases, Chronic Disease
Baltimore, Maryland, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT04264897
Aging, Chronic Disease
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States
View Trial Details