PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: As the shortage of primary care providers widens nationwide, access to care utilizing non-physician providers is one strategy to ensure equitable access to care. This study aimed to compare community pharmacist-provided care for minor ailments to care provided at three traditional sites of care: primary care, urgent care, and emergency department, to determine if care provided by pharmacists improved access with comparable quality and reduced financial strain on the healthcare system.
UNASSIGNED: Pharmacy data was provided from 46 pharmacies and 175 pharmacists who participated across five pharmacy corporations over a 3-year period (2016-2019). Data for non-pharmacy sites of care was provided by a large health plan, matching episodes of care for conditions seen in the community pharmacy. Cost-of-care analysis was conducted using superiority study design and revisit data analysis was conducted using noninferiority study design.
UNASSIGNED: Median cost-of-care across traditional sites of care was $277.78 higher than care provided at the pharmacies, showing superiority. Noninferiority was demonstrated for revisit care when the initial visit was conducted by a pharmacist compared to traditional sites.
UNASSIGNED: The authors conclude community pharmacist-provided care for minor ailments improved cost-effective access for patients with comparable quality and reduced financial strains on the healthcare system.
UNASSIGNED: Pharmacy data was provided from 46 pharmacies and 175 pharmacists who participated across five pharmacy corporations over a 3-year period (2016-2019). Data for non-pharmacy sites of care was provided by a large health plan, matching episodes of care for conditions seen in the community pharmacy. Cost-of-care analysis was conducted using superiority study design and revisit data analysis was conducted using noninferiority study design.
UNASSIGNED: Median cost-of-care across traditional sites of care was $277.78 higher than care provided at the pharmacies, showing superiority. Noninferiority was demonstrated for revisit care when the initial visit was conducted by a pharmacist compared to traditional sites.
UNASSIGNED: The authors conclude community pharmacist-provided care for minor ailments improved cost-effective access for patients with comparable quality and reduced financial strains on the healthcare system.
摘要：
■随着全国范围内初级保健提供者的短缺，利用非医师提供者获得护理是确保公平获得护理的一种策略。本研究旨在将社区药剂师提供的小病护理与三个传统护理场所提供的护理进行比较：初级保健，紧急护理,和急诊科,以确定药剂师提供的护理是否以可比的质量改善了获取，并减轻了医疗保健系统的财务压力。
药房数据来自46家药房和175名药剂师，他们在3年内（2016-2019年）参与了5家药房公司。非药房护理场所的数据由大型健康计划提供，与社区药房中看到的疾病相匹配的护理事件。使用优势研究设计进行护理成本分析，使用非劣效性研究设计进行再访问数据分析。
■传统护理场所的护理费用中位数比药房提供的护理费用高277.78美元，显示优势。与传统站点相比，当药剂师进行初次访问时，证明了重诊护理的非劣效性。
■作者得出结论，社区药剂师为轻微疾病提供的护理改善了具有同等质量的患者的成本效益，并减轻了医疗保健系统的财务压力。
药房数据来自46家药房和175名药剂师，他们在3年内（2016-2019年）参与了5家药房公司。非药房护理场所的数据由大型健康计划提供，与社区药房中看到的疾病相匹配的护理事件。使用优势研究设计进行护理成本分析，使用非劣效性研究设计进行再访问数据分析。
■传统护理场所的护理费用中位数比药房提供的护理费用高277.78美元，显示优势。与传统站点相比，当药剂师进行初次访问时，证明了重诊护理的非劣效性。
■作者得出结论，社区药剂师为轻微疾病提供的护理改善了具有同等质量的患者的成本效益，并减轻了医疗保健系统的财务压力。
