Use of centrally developed pharmacoeconomic assessments for local formulary decisions

June M. Tordoff, John E Murphy, Pauline T. Norris, David M. Reith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose. The distribution, content, timeliness, use, and influence of pharmacoeconomic assessments (PEAs) of drugs in New Zealand public hospitals were examined, Methods. In April 2005, a questionnaire-based, cross-sectional survey was sent to chief pharmacists at all 29 New Zealand hospitals employing a pharmacist. The questionnaire asked pharmacists about the use and influence of PEAs. In their hospitals' formulary decision-making process. Answers were given using a scale of 1 to 6, with 1 being the most positive response, Results. Of the 29 surveys mailed, 24 (83%) were completed. Data on 12 PEAs were analyzed. Assessments were seen and summaries read in most hospitals (median, 77% and 65%, respectively). Full documents were read in fewer hospitals (35%). In general, the PEAs were considered moderately easy to understand, provided a concise summary, and contained adequate detail of the methodology. Of the 24 respondent hospitals, 21 had assessment processes for new medicines; hence, a total of 252 hospital evaluations of Pharmaceutical Management Agency (PHARMAC)-assessed drugs were possible. A total of 132 possible evaluations (52%) were undertaken. More evaluations (106 [42%]) took place before PHARMACs PEAs were distributed and fewer (26 [10%]) after distribution. Where used, the PEAs appeared to have a modest effect on hospital decisions. Conclusion. The provision of 12 PEAS by PHARMAC to hospitals in New Zealand had only a modest influence on their formulary decision-making process, mostly due to the lack of timeliness of the PEAs. The timely delivery of centrally developed PEAs may be essential to generating a greater effect on the formulary decisions at a wider level.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1613-1618
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Journal of Health-System Pharmacy
Volume63
Issue number17
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2006

Fingerprint

Formularies
Pharmaceutical Economics
New Zealand
Pharmacists
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Decision Making
Hospital Formularies
Process Assessment (Health Care)
Public Hospitals
Cross-Sectional Studies
Surveys and Questionnaires

Keywords

  • Data collection
  • Decision-making
  • Formularies
  • Hospital
  • Institutional
  • Methodology
  • Pharmacoeconomics
  • Pharmacy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmaceutical Science
  • Leadership and Management

Cite this

Use of centrally developed pharmacoeconomic assessments for local formulary decisions. / Tordoff, June M.; Murphy, John E; Norris, Pauline T.; Reith, David M.

In: American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, Vol. 63, No. 17, 01.09.2006, p. 1613-1618.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Tordoff, June M. ; Murphy, John E ; Norris, Pauline T. ; Reith, David M. / Use of centrally developed pharmacoeconomic assessments for local formulary decisions. In: American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. 2006 ; Vol. 63, No. 17. pp. 1613-1618.
@article{54f444c136e14373bea5289600fcb789,
title = "Use of centrally developed pharmacoeconomic assessments for local formulary decisions",
abstract = "Purpose. The distribution, content, timeliness, use, and influence of pharmacoeconomic assessments (PEAs) of drugs in New Zealand public hospitals were examined, Methods. In April 2005, a questionnaire-based, cross-sectional survey was sent to chief pharmacists at all 29 New Zealand hospitals employing a pharmacist. The questionnaire asked pharmacists about the use and influence of PEAs. In their hospitals' formulary decision-making process. Answers were given using a scale of 1 to 6, with 1 being the most positive response, Results. Of the 29 surveys mailed, 24 (83{\%}) were completed. Data on 12 PEAs were analyzed. Assessments were seen and summaries read in most hospitals (median, 77{\%} and 65{\%}, respectively). Full documents were read in fewer hospitals (35{\%}). In general, the PEAs were considered moderately easy to understand, provided a concise summary, and contained adequate detail of the methodology. Of the 24 respondent hospitals, 21 had assessment processes for new medicines; hence, a total of 252 hospital evaluations of Pharmaceutical Management Agency (PHARMAC)-assessed drugs were possible. A total of 132 possible evaluations (52{\%}) were undertaken. More evaluations (106 [42{\%}]) took place before PHARMACs PEAs were distributed and fewer (26 [10{\%}]) after distribution. Where used, the PEAs appeared to have a modest effect on hospital decisions. Conclusion. The provision of 12 PEAS by PHARMAC to hospitals in New Zealand had only a modest influence on their formulary decision-making process, mostly due to the lack of timeliness of the PEAs. The timely delivery of centrally developed PEAs may be essential to generating a greater effect on the formulary decisions at a wider level.",
keywords = "Data collection, Decision-making, Formularies, Hospital, Institutional, Methodology, Pharmacoeconomics, Pharmacy",
author = "Tordoff, {June M.} and Murphy, {John E} and Norris, {Pauline T.} and Reith, {David M.}",
year = "2006",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2146/ajhp060027",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "63",
pages = "1613--1618",
journal = "American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy",
issn = "1079-2082",
publisher = "American Society of Health-Systems Pharmacy",
number = "17",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of centrally developed pharmacoeconomic assessments for local formulary decisions

AU - Tordoff, June M.

AU - Murphy, John E

AU - Norris, Pauline T.

AU - Reith, David M.

PY - 2006/9/1

Y1 - 2006/9/1

N2 - Purpose. The distribution, content, timeliness, use, and influence of pharmacoeconomic assessments (PEAs) of drugs in New Zealand public hospitals were examined, Methods. In April 2005, a questionnaire-based, cross-sectional survey was sent to chief pharmacists at all 29 New Zealand hospitals employing a pharmacist. The questionnaire asked pharmacists about the use and influence of PEAs. In their hospitals' formulary decision-making process. Answers were given using a scale of 1 to 6, with 1 being the most positive response, Results. Of the 29 surveys mailed, 24 (83%) were completed. Data on 12 PEAs were analyzed. Assessments were seen and summaries read in most hospitals (median, 77% and 65%, respectively). Full documents were read in fewer hospitals (35%). In general, the PEAs were considered moderately easy to understand, provided a concise summary, and contained adequate detail of the methodology. Of the 24 respondent hospitals, 21 had assessment processes for new medicines; hence, a total of 252 hospital evaluations of Pharmaceutical Management Agency (PHARMAC)-assessed drugs were possible. A total of 132 possible evaluations (52%) were undertaken. More evaluations (106 [42%]) took place before PHARMACs PEAs were distributed and fewer (26 [10%]) after distribution. Where used, the PEAs appeared to have a modest effect on hospital decisions. Conclusion. The provision of 12 PEAS by PHARMAC to hospitals in New Zealand had only a modest influence on their formulary decision-making process, mostly due to the lack of timeliness of the PEAs. The timely delivery of centrally developed PEAs may be essential to generating a greater effect on the formulary decisions at a wider level.

AB - Purpose. The distribution, content, timeliness, use, and influence of pharmacoeconomic assessments (PEAs) of drugs in New Zealand public hospitals were examined, Methods. In April 2005, a questionnaire-based, cross-sectional survey was sent to chief pharmacists at all 29 New Zealand hospitals employing a pharmacist. The questionnaire asked pharmacists about the use and influence of PEAs. In their hospitals' formulary decision-making process. Answers were given using a scale of 1 to 6, with 1 being the most positive response, Results. Of the 29 surveys mailed, 24 (83%) were completed. Data on 12 PEAs were analyzed. Assessments were seen and summaries read in most hospitals (median, 77% and 65%, respectively). Full documents were read in fewer hospitals (35%). In general, the PEAs were considered moderately easy to understand, provided a concise summary, and contained adequate detail of the methodology. Of the 24 respondent hospitals, 21 had assessment processes for new medicines; hence, a total of 252 hospital evaluations of Pharmaceutical Management Agency (PHARMAC)-assessed drugs were possible. A total of 132 possible evaluations (52%) were undertaken. More evaluations (106 [42%]) took place before PHARMACs PEAs were distributed and fewer (26 [10%]) after distribution. Where used, the PEAs appeared to have a modest effect on hospital decisions. Conclusion. The provision of 12 PEAS by PHARMAC to hospitals in New Zealand had only a modest influence on their formulary decision-making process, mostly due to the lack of timeliness of the PEAs. The timely delivery of centrally developed PEAs may be essential to generating a greater effect on the formulary decisions at a wider level.

KW - Data collection

KW - Decision-making

KW - Formularies

KW - Hospital

KW - Institutional

KW - Methodology

KW - Pharmacoeconomics

KW - Pharmacy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33748807794&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33748807794&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2146/ajhp060027

DO - 10.2146/ajhp060027

M3 - Article

VL - 63

SP - 1613

EP - 1618

JO - American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

JF - American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

SN - 1079-2082

IS - 17

ER -