The Annals New | Pharmaco Epidemiology and Therapeutic Risk Management
home help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Drug Intelligence & Clinical Pharmacy: Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 302-306.
© 1986 Harvey Whitney Books Company.
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Articles Ahead of Print
Right arrow [Order Reprint]
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sveska, K.
Right arrow Articles by Solomon, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sveska, K.
Right arrow Articles by Solomon, D.


Research Articles

Evaluation of a quality assurance technique for a pharmacokinetic dosing service

KJ Sveska, BD Roffe, and DK Solomon

A quality assurance (QA) technique that measured process and outcome was tested on a clinical pharmacokinetic dosing service (CPDS). The process measurement criteria evaluated the CPDS pharmacists' ability to maintain serum aminoglycoside levels within the desired range (peak 6-10 micrograms/ml, trough less than 2.0 micrograms/ml). The outcome measurement criteria evaluated the patients' clinical response to the aminoglycoside therapy based on changes in the patients' temperature, white blood cell count, bacterial cultures, and other variables. The process evaluation found that in a majority of the patients (80 percent), the CPDS pharmacist was performing at a level exceeding the process criteria. The outcome evaluation found that in a majority of the patients (76 percent), the therapeutic outcome criteria were not met. Statistical analysis using Spearman's Rho was not able to relate process and outcome measures significantly (p greater than 0.05). The patient outcome criteria may not have accurately measured patient outcome because of inflexibility, not measuring other patient variables, and the lack of a subjective component. Validation of the QA technique was not possible in this study.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Oncol Pharm PractHome page
A. Aldaz Pastor, I. T. de la Asuncion, C. Gonzalez-Criado, and A. Idoate Garcia
Clinical pharmacokinetics in oncology: Outcome in vancomycin
Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice, January 1, 1996; 2(3): 139 - 146.
[Abstract] [PDF]




homecopy help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
Copyright © 1986 by Harvey Whitney Books Company.