Korean Journal of Clinical Pharmacy (한국임상약학회지)

Korean College Of Clinical Pharmacy (한국임상약학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Effect of a Computerized Pharmacist Communication Application-based SBAR Tool

  • Young Ju Cheon (Department of Pharmacy, Kyunghee University Hospital at Gangdong) ;
  • Kyong Nam Ye (Department of Pharmacy, Kyunghee University Hospital at Gangdong) ;
  • Jung Bo Kim (Department of Pharmacy, Kyunghee University Hospital at Gangdong) ;
  • Jung Tae Kim (Department of Pharmacy, Kyunghee University Hospital at Gangdong) ;
  • Sook Hee An (College of Pharmacy, Wonkwang University)
  • Received : 2023.06.04
  • Accepted : 2023.06.16
  • Published : 2023.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: Pharmacists communicate with a variety of healthcare experts to prevent medication errors. Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation (SBAR) is a tool used for concise and accurate communication. In 2018, we developed the pharmacy-SBAR (P-SBAR) to deliver pharmacists intervention more quickly and effectively through quality improvement activities. Objectives: This study evaluates the efficacy of P-SBAR on pharmacists' intervention activities before and after the implementation of P-SBAR applications. We assessed the impact of P-SBAR on reducing the burden of intervention work, promoting pharmacists' participation, and enhancing the acceptance rate. Methods: This is a retrospective study of the two groups before and after P-SBAR implementation. All pharmacists' intervention records during two periods (2016-2017 and 2019-2020) were extracted from the data warehouse system at Kyunghee University Hospital at Gangdong, Seoul. The outcome was the number of inpatients and pharmacists who participated in the prescription monitoring activity, the number of interventions, and the physicians' acceptance rate. Results: Although the total number of inpatients decreased (364,753 vs. 348,229), the number of pharmacists who participated in intervention activity increased (monthly mean: 15.8 vs. 18.0, p=0.001). The total number of interventions (2,767 vs. 4,389), the frequency of full acceptance (2,018 vs. 3,710), and the monthly acceptance rate increased significantly (73.8% vs. 83.8%, p<0.001). Conclusion: P-SBAR improved accessibility and convenience by digitalizing the intervention activities performed in an offline environment. Improvement in work burden and acceptance rate using P-SBAR is expected to contribute toward reducing medication errors.

Keywords

References

  1. The Basel Statements on the future of hospital pharmacy. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2009;66(5 Suppl 3):S61-6. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp080666
  2. Vermeulen LC, Moles RJ, Collins JC, et al. Revision of the International Pharmaceutical Federation's Basel Statements on the future of hospital pharmacy: From Basel to Bangkok. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2016;73(14):1077-86. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp150641
  3. Joo SH, Shin HW, La HO. Revised Basel Statements on the future of hospital pharmacist: Guiding the roles of pharmacist. Korean Journal of Community Pharmacy. 2018;4(1):71-7.
  4. Choi EK, Bae SJ. Hospital pharmacists' intervention for patient safety: A review. Yakhak Hoeji. 2020;64(3):197-203. https://doi.org/10.17480/psk.2020.64.3.197
  5. Lee SY, Cho E. A systematic review of outcomes research in the hospital pharmacists' interventions in South Korea. Korean J Clin Pharm. 2019;29(3):193-201.
  6. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. SBAR: Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation. Available from http://www.ihi.org/Topics/SBARCommunicationTechnique/Pages/default.aspx. Accessed December 21, 2021.
  7. Haig KM, Sutton S, Whittington J. SBAR: a shared mental model for improving communication between clinicians. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2006;32(3):167-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1553-7250(06)32022-3
  8. Bello J, Quinn P, Horrell L. Maintaining patient safety through innovation: an electronic SBAR communication tool. Comput Inform Nurs. 2011;29(9):481-3. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCN.0b013e31822ea44d
  9. Kim HY, Jeong YJ, Kang JY, Mun HS. The effect of SBAR reports on communication clarity and nurse-physician collaborative relationships: A one group pretest-posttest design. J Muscle Jt. Health. 2016;23(2):105-13. https://doi.org/10.5953/JMJH.2016.23.2.105
  10. Noh YG, Lee I. Effect of stepwise communication education program using SBAR among nursing students: Focusing on scenarios and nursing case-based role playing. J Korean Acad Soc Nurs Educ. 2018;24(2):115-26. https://doi.org/10.5977/jkasne.2018.24.2.115
  11. Won JP, Cheon YJ, Lee MK, Kim JB, Jeong KJ, Kim JT. Improvement of pharmacists' intervention work using SBAR tool. J. Kor. Soc. Health-Syst. Pharm. 2019;36(2):261-71.
  12. The Joint Commission. Most commonly reviewed sentinel event types updated 02/01/2021. Available from https://www.jointcommission.org/-/media/tjc/documents/resources/patient-safety-topics/sentinel-event/most-frequently-reviewed-event-types-2020.pdf. Accessed December 21, 2021.
  13. Muller M, Jurgens J, Redaelli M, Klingberg K, Hautz WE, Stock S. Impact of the communication and patient hand-off tool SBAR on patient safety: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2018;8(8):e022202.
  14. von Dossow V, Zwissler B. Recommendations of the German Association of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI) on structured patient handover in the perioperative setting: The SBAR concept. Anaesthesist 2016;65(Suppl 1):1-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00101-016-0237-5
  15. Lee SY, Dong L, Lim YH, Poh CL, Lim WS. SBAR: towards a common interprofessional team-based communication tool. Med Educ. 2016;50(11):1167-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13171
  16. Dunsford J. Structured communication: improving patient safety with SBAR. Nurs Womens Health 2009;13:384-90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-486X.2009.01456.x
  17. Fassett WE. Key performance outcomes of patient safety curricula: root cause analysis, failure mode and effects analysis, and structured communications skills. Am J Pharm Educ. 2011;75(8):164.
  18. Brust-Sisti LA, Sturgill M, Volino LR. Situation, background, assessment, recommendation (SBAR) technique education enhances pharmacy student communication ability and confidence. Curr Pharm Teach Learn. 2019;11(4):409-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2019.01.006
  19. Franko TS 2nd, Shah V, Hong KL, Bommareddy A. Evaluation of long term retention and utilization of the situation, background, assessment, recommendation (SBAR) communication technique. Curr Pharm Teach Learn. 2021;13(2):122-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2020.09.001
  20. Kane-Gill SL, Hanlon JT, Fine MJ, et al. Physician perceptions of consultant pharmacist services associated with an intervention for adverse drug events in the nursing facility. Consult Pharm. 2016;31(12):708-20. https://doi.org/10.4140/TCP.n.2016.708
  21. Leape LL, Cullen DJ, Clapp MD, et al. Pharmacist participation on physician rounds and adverse drug events in the intensive care unit. JAMA. 1999;282(3):267-70. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.282.3.267
  22. Langebrake C, Hilgarth H. Clinical pharmacists' interventions in a German university hospital. Pharm World Sci. 2010;32(2):194-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-010-9367-z
  23. Nachtigall A, Heppner HJ, Thurmann PA. Influence of pharmacist intervention on drug safety of geriatric inpatients: a prospective, controlled trial. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2019;10:2042098619843365.
  24. Tefera GM, Zeleke AZ, Jima YM, Kebede TM. Drug therapy problems and the role of clinical pharmacist in surgery ward: prospective observational and interventional study. Drug Healthc Patient Saf. 2020;12:71-83. https://doi.org/10.2147/DHPS.S251200