In preparation for the potential approval of pharmacist provider status across the United States, it is essential that pharmacists are privileged by the medical staff at their respective institution. Clinical privileges must be strategically developed with a focus on cost and quality aims and meeting the needs of patients. Implementation and maintenance of high-performing pharmacy privileging programs require both successful leadership and management skills and an understanding of the interprofessional nature of healthcare.

Purpose As members of the future pharmacy workforce, newly practicing pharmacists will be directly involved in key changes in practice. The purpose of this study is to (a) determine the desirability of core health-system pharmacist responsibilities among new practitioners, (b) assess new practitioner satisfaction about the current state of practice, and (c) evaluate the willingness of newly practicing pharmacists to change practice. Results Results from this study indicate new practitioners have a greater preference for clinical, direct patient care activities compared with traditional operational functions. There is a disparity between new practitioner preferences and current practice opportunities. Respondents were satisfied with pharmacy practice at their institution (86%), yet less satisfied (56%) with the current state of health-system pharmacy practice in the United States. Satisfaction with practice at respondents' institutions was significantly associated with region, with respondents from the Great Lakes region significantly more satisfied than respondents from the Eastern, Western, and Southeastern regions (P = .02). Respondents with postgraduate training had 2.3 times higher odds of being satisfied than those without postgraduate training (P = .02). Survey respondents indicated a general willingness to accept change. When these results were compared to director of pharmacy responses from a 2008 survey, differences were identified between new practitioner preferences and practice availability. Conclusion New practitioners tend to prefer clinical functions with greater direct patient contact and are satisfied with pharmacy practice. New practitioners are willing to accept change and, therefore, will be integral to developing and implementing practice models. These findings will help the profession move forward in developing practice models that address new practitioner skills, attitudes, and opinions, successfully building the future vision of pharmacy practice.

Purpose Pharmacists are integral members of the healthcare team, but interventions are not always captured due to documentation limitations. This study evaluated the impact of implementing a tracking tool to address gaps in capturing pharmacist interventions. Methods A prospective, observational study was conducted to assess pharmacist interventions between July and November 2020. Twelve critical care pharmacists captured interventions on 10 weekdays using a tracking tool (iVent—Epic®) embedded in the electronic medical record (EMR) to capture high frequency interventions not standardly captured via existing standard note documentation (e.g., renal/hepatic dose adjustment, parenteral nutrition management). Value added of the interventions is proposed. Patients' baseline demographics, interventions, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) were collected. The primary outcome was to determine the added benefit of using a tracking tool within the EMR to capture pharmacist interventions compared to progress note documentation. Results Two thousand seven hundred and eighty‐three interventions were documented on 514 unique patients over 120 pharmacist shifts. Of these, 2363 (84.9%) interventions were captured through iVent tracking. The median SOFA score on day of intervention was 4 [interquartile range (IQR) 2–7] and ICU LOS was 3.5 days [IQR 1.5–9]. The median number of interventions per patient per day was 2 [IQR 1–3]. A significant difference was observed among days of the week and the number of iVents documented (χ2 = 13.172, p = 0.01, df = 4). The post hoc pairwise comparison revealed more documented iVents on Tuesday than Friday. Conclusion This study reveals that an iVent tracking tool increased total capture of pharmacist interventions by 563%. These interventions can be associated with value‐based programs and further work is needed in highlighting the pharmacist's role in these new payment models. This study confirms that the current standard practice at this institution of solely entering pharmacist progress notes into the patient chart misses a majority of pharmacist interventions.

No abstract