Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

INTEGRATING HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT PRINCIPLES IN FORMULARY MANAGEMENT

  • Monica Teng (a1), Ai Leng Khoo (a2), Ying Jiao Zhao (a2), Liang Lin (a2) and Boon Peng Lim (a2)...

Abstract

Objectives: Effective formulary management in healthcare institutions safeguards rational drug use and optimizes health outcomes. We implemented a formulary management program integrating the principles of health technology assessment (HTA) to improve the safe, appropriate, and cost-effective use of medicine in Singapore.

Methods: A 3-year formulary management program was initiated in 2011 in five public healthcare institutions. This program was managed by a project team comprising HTA researchers. The project team worked with institutional pharmacy and therapeutics (P&T) committees to: (i) develop tools for formulary drug review and decision making; (ii) enhance the HTA knowledge and skills of formulary pharmacists and members of P&T committees; (iii) devise a prioritization framework to overcome resource constraints and time pressure; and (iv) conceptualize and implement a framework to review existing formulary.

Results: Tools that facilitate drug request submission, drug review, and decision making were developed for formulary drug inclusion. A systematic framework to review existing formulary was also developed and tested in selected institutions. A competency development plan was rolled out over 2 years to enhance formulary pharmacists’ proficiency in systematic literature search and review, meta-analysis, and pharmacoeconomic evaluation. The plan comprised training workshops and on-the-job knowledge transfer between the project team and institutional formulary pharmacists through collaborating on selected drug reviews. A resource guide that consolidated the tools and templates was published to encourage the adoption of best practices in formulary management.

Conclusions: Based on the concepts of HTA, we implemented an evidence-based approach to optimize formulary management.

Copyright

References

Hide All
1. Tyler, LS, Cole, SW, May, JR, et al. ASHP guidelines on the pharmacy and therapeutics committee and the formulary system. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008;65:12721283.
2. ASHP statement on the formulary system. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1983;40:13841385.
3. Mittmann, N, Knowles, S. A survey of Pharmacy and Therapeutic committees across Canada: scope and responsibilities. Can J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;16:e171e177.
4. Puigventos, F, Santos-Ramos, B, Ortega, A, Duran-Garcia, E. Structure and procedures of the pharmacy and therapeutic committees in Spanish hospitals. Pharm World Sci. 2010;32:767775.
5. World Health Organisation. WHO Global Health Expenditure Atlas. 2012. www.who.int/nha/atlas.pdf (accessed June 30, 2014).
6. Ministry of Health, Singapore. Our Healthcare System. 2014. www.moh.gov.sg/content/moh_web/home/our_healthcare_system.html (accessed June 30, 2014).
7. Ministry of Health, Singapore. Costs and financing. 2014. http://www.moh.gov.sg/content/moh_web/home/costs_and_financing.html (accessed June 30, 2014).
8. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD). CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. United Kingdom: University of York; 2008. http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/pdf/Systematic_Reviews.pdf (accessed June 30, 2014).
9. The Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies, 3rd ed. Canada: 2006. http://www.cadth.ca/media/pdf/186_EconomicGuidelines_e.pdf (accessed June 30, 2014).
10. The Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy. The AMCP format for formulary submissions – A format for submission of clinical and economic evidence of pharmaceuticals in support of formulary consideration version 3.1. 2012. http://www.graceprinciples.org/doc/AMCP-formularySubmission-GL-dec2012.pdf (accessed June 30, 2014).
11. Khoo, AL, ed. Formulary management – A practical guide. 1st ed. Singapore: National Healthcare Group Pte Ltd. 2014.
12. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Therapeutic Review Framework. 2012. http://www.cadth.ca/media/pdf/TR_Framework.pdf (accessed June 30, 2014).
13. International Society For Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). ISPOR Good Practices for Outcomes Research. http://www.ispor.org/workpaper/practices_index.asp (accessed June 30, 2014).
14. Higgins, J, Green, S, eds. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane-handbook.org (accessed June 30, 2014).
15. European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA). EUnetHTA Project (2006-2008) work Packages. http://www.eunethta.eu/activities/EUnetHTA%20Project%20%282006-08%29/eunethta-project-2006-2008 (accessed June 30, 2014).
16. International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA). HTA agencies and decision makers. http://www.inahta.org/upload/HTA_resources/HTA%20%20Decision%20Makers.pdf (accessed June 30, 2014).
17. Simpson, S, Hiller, J, Gutierrez-Ibarluzea, I, et al. A toolkit for the identification and assessment of new and emerging health technologies. Euroscan, University of Birmingham, United Kingdom; 2009. http://euroscan.org.uk/mmlib/includes/sendfile.php?id=24 (accessed June 30, 2014).
18. Management Sciences for Health and World Health Organization. Drug and Therapeutics Committee Training Course. 2007. http://www.who.int/medicines/technical_briefing/tbs/Participant-s-Guide-All-Sessions.pdf (accessed June 30, 2014).
19. Russia Rational Pharmaceutical Management Project, Management Sciences for Health. Manual for the Development and Maintenance of Hospital Drug Formularies. 1996. http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNACE005.pdf (accessed June 30, 2014).
20. Tan, EL, Day, RO, Brien, JA. Prioritising drug and therapeutics committee (DTC) decisions: a national survey. Pharm World Sci. 2007;29:9096.
21. Schiff, GD, Galanter, WL, Duhig, J, Koronkowski, MJ, Lodolce, AE, Pontikes, P, et al. A prescription for improving drug formulary decision making. PLoS Med. 2012;9:17.

Keywords

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Teng supplementary material
Table S1

 Word (18 KB)
18 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed