Cargando…
Grading pharmacists’ risk of complaints to a regulator: A retrospective cohort study
Background: Tools to grade risk of complaint to a regulatory board have been developed for physicians but not for other health practitioner groups, including pharmacists. We aimed to develop a score that classified pharmacists into low, medium and high risk categories. Methods: Registration and comp...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10071827/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37026084 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/jpps.2023.11228 |
_version_ | 1785019269106368512 |
---|---|
author | Morris, Katherine Spittal, Matthew J. |
author_facet | Morris, Katherine Spittal, Matthew J. |
author_sort | Morris, Katherine |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Tools to grade risk of complaint to a regulatory board have been developed for physicians but not for other health practitioner groups, including pharmacists. We aimed to develop a score that classified pharmacists into low, medium and high risk categories. Methods: Registration and complaint data were sourced from Ontario College of Pharmacists for January 2009 to December 2019. We undertook recurrent event survival analysis to predict lodgement of a complaint. We identified those variables that were associated with a complaint and included these in a risk score which we called PRONE-Pharm (Predicted Risk of New Event for Pharmacists). We assessed diagnostic accuracy and used this to identify thresholds that defined low, medium and high risk. Results: We identified 3,675 complaints against 17,308 pharmacists. Being male (HR = 1.72), older age (HR range 1.43–1.54), trained internationally (HR = 1.62), ≥1 prior complaint (HR range 2.83–9.60), and complaints about mental health or substance use (HR = 1.91), compliance with conditions (HR = 1.86), fees and servicing (HR = 1.74), interpersonal behaviour or honesty (HR = 1.40), procedures (HR = 1.75) and treatment or communication or other clinical issues (HR = 1.22) were all associated with lodgement of a complaint. When converted into the PRONE-Pharm risk score, pharmacists were assigned between 0 and 98 points with higher scores closely associated with higher probability of a complaint. A score of ≥25 had sufficient accuracy for classifying medium-risk pharmacists (specificity = 87.0%) and ≥45 for high-risk pharmacists (specificity = 98.4%). Conclusion: Distinguishing isolated incidents from persistent problems poses a significant challenge for entities responsible for the regulation of pharmacists and other health practitioners. The diagnostic properties of PRONE-Pharm (minimizing the false positives) means that the risk score is useful for “ruling-out” low risk pharmacists using routinely collected regulatory data. PRONE-Pharm may be useful when used alongside interventions appropriately matched to a pharmacist’s level of risk. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10071827 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100718272023-04-05 Grading pharmacists’ risk of complaints to a regulator: A retrospective cohort study Morris, Katherine Spittal, Matthew J. J Pharm Pharm Sci Science archive Background: Tools to grade risk of complaint to a regulatory board have been developed for physicians but not for other health practitioner groups, including pharmacists. We aimed to develop a score that classified pharmacists into low, medium and high risk categories. Methods: Registration and complaint data were sourced from Ontario College of Pharmacists for January 2009 to December 2019. We undertook recurrent event survival analysis to predict lodgement of a complaint. We identified those variables that were associated with a complaint and included these in a risk score which we called PRONE-Pharm (Predicted Risk of New Event for Pharmacists). We assessed diagnostic accuracy and used this to identify thresholds that defined low, medium and high risk. Results: We identified 3,675 complaints against 17,308 pharmacists. Being male (HR = 1.72), older age (HR range 1.43–1.54), trained internationally (HR = 1.62), ≥1 prior complaint (HR range 2.83–9.60), and complaints about mental health or substance use (HR = 1.91), compliance with conditions (HR = 1.86), fees and servicing (HR = 1.74), interpersonal behaviour or honesty (HR = 1.40), procedures (HR = 1.75) and treatment or communication or other clinical issues (HR = 1.22) were all associated with lodgement of a complaint. When converted into the PRONE-Pharm risk score, pharmacists were assigned between 0 and 98 points with higher scores closely associated with higher probability of a complaint. A score of ≥25 had sufficient accuracy for classifying medium-risk pharmacists (specificity = 87.0%) and ≥45 for high-risk pharmacists (specificity = 98.4%). Conclusion: Distinguishing isolated incidents from persistent problems poses a significant challenge for entities responsible for the regulation of pharmacists and other health practitioners. The diagnostic properties of PRONE-Pharm (minimizing the false positives) means that the risk score is useful for “ruling-out” low risk pharmacists using routinely collected regulatory data. PRONE-Pharm may be useful when used alongside interventions appropriately matched to a pharmacist’s level of risk. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-03-21 /pmc/articles/PMC10071827/ /pubmed/37026084 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/jpps.2023.11228 Text en Copyright © 2023 Morris and Spittal. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Science archive Morris, Katherine Spittal, Matthew J. Grading pharmacists’ risk of complaints to a regulator: A retrospective cohort study |
title | Grading pharmacists’ risk of complaints to a regulator: A retrospective cohort study |
title_full | Grading pharmacists’ risk of complaints to a regulator: A retrospective cohort study |
title_fullStr | Grading pharmacists’ risk of complaints to a regulator: A retrospective cohort study |
title_full_unstemmed | Grading pharmacists’ risk of complaints to a regulator: A retrospective cohort study |
title_short | Grading pharmacists’ risk of complaints to a regulator: A retrospective cohort study |
title_sort | grading pharmacists’ risk of complaints to a regulator: a retrospective cohort study |
topic | Science archive |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10071827/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37026084 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/jpps.2023.11228 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT morriskatherine gradingpharmacistsriskofcomplaintstoaregulatoraretrospectivecohortstudy AT spittalmatthewj gradingpharmacistsriskofcomplaintstoaregulatoraretrospectivecohortstudy |