EAHP statements survey 2016: sections 1, 3 and 4 of the European Statements of Hospital Pharmacy. Issue 5 (9th August 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Horák, Petr; Gibbons, Nicholas; Sýkora, Juraj; Batista, Aida; Underhill, Jonathan
• Is Part Of: European journal of hospital pharmacy. Volume 24:Issue 5(2017)
• Page Start: 258
• Page End: 265
• Publication Date: 2017-08-09
• Subjects: Healthcare Survey -- Hospitals -- hospital pharmacy services -- EAHP -- European Statements of Hospital Pharmacy; Pharmacy -- Periodicals; Hospital pharmacies -- Periodicals; 615.1
• DOI: 10.1136/ejhpharm-2017-001334
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2047-9956

Abstract

Abstract : Background: The 2016 European Association of Hospital Pharmacists (EAHP) Statements survey builds on previous surveys and focuses on sections 1, 3 and 4. Objective: To collect statistical data about the level of implementation of the Statements, and identify important barriers to their implementation. Methods: An online questionnaire was sent to all hospital pharmacies in EAHP member countries. Data were analysed by researchers from Keele University School of Pharmacy, UK and the EAHP Survey Group. If an incomplete survey was submitted, the quantitative data were not used, although any free-text responses were incorporated. Results: The overall response rate was 16% (904 out of 5711 requests) with 730 complete responses. In the first part of the survey, data were collected on the hospital pharmacy setting. While almost half (n=335) of hospital pharmacies served over 500 beds, 77% (n=564) of hospital pharmacies had ≤10 pharmacists. In section B, evidence was gathered about the degree of implementation of sections 1, 3 and 4 of the Statements and the main barriers to, and drivers of, implementation. The questions related to production and compounding (section 3) received very positive responses (all questions from this section received at least a 70% positive response rate), indicating that responders are having less difficulty implementing these statements compared with others. The introductory statements and governance questions (section 1) received a more mixed response. Only 343 (47%) responses indicated that the pharmacists worked routinely as part of multidisciplinary team. Many of the questions relating to clinical pharmacy services (section 4) received a more negative response overall, with six questions receiving <50% positive responses. Conclusions: This iteration of the survey provides the EAHP with further insight into the implementation of the Statements across the member countries as well as the barriers to, and drivers of, implementation in sections 1, 3 and 4. This is essential to inform the plans for EAHP to best support their implementation.