Evaluation of an electronic health record documentation tool use to improve pharmacist intervention tracking in the intensive care unit

PurposePharmacists are integral members of the healthcare team, but interventions are not always captured due to documentation limitations. This study evaluated the impact of implementing a tracking tool to address gaps in capturing pharmacist interventions. MethodsA prospective, observational study was conducted to assess pharmacist interventions between July and November 2020. Twelve critical care pharmacists captured interventions on 10 weekdays using a tracking tool (iVent-Epic (R)) embedded in the electronic medical record (EMR) to capture high frequency interventions not standardly captured via existing standard note documentation (e.g., renal/hepatic dose adjustment, parenteral nutrition management). Value added of the interventions is proposed. Patients' baseline demographics, interventions, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) were collected. The primary outcome was to determine the added benefit of using a tracking tool within the EMR to capture pharmacist interventions compared to progress note documentation. ResultsTwo thousand seven hundred and eighty-three interventions were documented on 514 unique patients over 120 pharmacist shifts. Of these, 2363 (84.9%) interventions were captured through iVent tracking. The median SOFA score on day of intervention was 4 [interquartile range (IQR) 2-7] and ICU LOS was 3.5 days [IQR 1.5-9]. The median number of interventions per patient per day was 2 [IQR 1-3]. A significant difference was observed among days of the week and the number of iVents documented (chi(2) = 13.172, p = 0.01, df = 4). The post hoc pairwise comparison revealed more documented iVents on Tuesday than Friday. ConclusionThis study reveals that an iVent tracking tool increased total capture of pharmacist interventions by 563%. These interventions can be associated with value-based programs and further work is needed in highlighting the pharmacist's role in these new payment models. This study confirms that the current standard practice at this institution of solely entering pharmacist progress notes into the patient chart misses a majority of pharmacist interventions.