• G T Schumock, R A Hutchinson, and B A Bilek.
• Hospital Pharmacy Services, University of Illinois Hospital (UIH), Chicago 60612.
• Am J Hosp Pharm. 1992 Sep 1; 49 (9): 2211-4.

AbstractManual and computerized systems for documenting interventions by pharmacists at a large university teaching hospital are compared. The manual system allows patient data and pharmacist interventions to be quickly documented on written profiles. Completed forms are entered into a personal computer for analysis. The computerized system is a direct-entry version of the manual intervention log. Five screens allow pharmacists to enter information into a mainframe computer from any terminal. Data can be downloaded from the mainframe into a personal computer. During the first part of the study, nine pharmacists used the manual system for seven days. After a two-week pause, the same pharmacists used the computerized system for seven days. The systems were evaluated by using time-and-motion analysis and a questionnaire. Also, the number of interventions documented and the characteristics of each were compared. The mean +/- S.D. time required to document an intervention was significantly less with the computerized system (81.8 +/- 24.9 seconds) than with the manual system (100.7 +/- 37.3 seconds). Administrative time for analysis and report generation was also less with the computerized system. The pharmacists rated the computerized system more highly in terms of ease of use, accessibility, time efficiency, and acceptability. The number of interventions documented did not differ between the systems. A computerized system for documenting pharmacist interventions compared favorably with a manual system.

16 keywords...

hide…