Evaluation of a hybrid remote clinical pharmacy services model

The purpose of the project was to compare the impact of implementing a hybrid remote care model compared to a traditional in-house pharmacy clinical services model.

The retrospective, quasi-experimental study had an intervention phase with a hybrid remote care model in which one pharmacist worked remotely handling non-patient-facing tasks while the other worked onsite managing patient-facing responsibilities. This was implemented in a 2:3 pharmacist-to-unit ratio, compared to a control phase with a traditional in-house model with both pharmacists working onsite in a 1:1 pharmacist-to-unit ratio. The primary outcome was the rate of documented notes for patient-facing and non-patient-facing activities completed by the clinical pharmacists. The secondary outcomes evaluated were length of stay and patient experience.

The study showed an increase in the rate of patient-facing activities documented, with 108 pharmacy notes per 1,000 patient days in the intervention phase compared to 77 pharmacy notes per 1,000 patient days in the control phase (P = 0.017). Documentation rates for non-patient-facing activities were not significantly different between the phases. The median length of hospital stay decreased from 4.69 days in the control phase to 4.1 days in the intervention phase (P = 0.002). A higher proportion of patients with positive responses to questions evaluating patient satisfaction was seen in the intervention phase, with 62% havaving positive responses compared to 47% in the control phase (P = 0.009).

This study demonstrates that implementation of a hybrid remote care model may lead to an increase in the rate of patient-facing activities performed with improved patient satisfaction and reduced length of stay. However, the nontraditional study design and variability in patient load and staff adherence may have influenced outcomes.