Background: Shortening the process of prescribing via permitting the pharmacist to select the most appropriate pharmaceuticals for each particular patient may provide great opportunities for pharmacists to develop suitable pharmaceutical care plan, monitor and follow up prescribed medications, communicate and consult physicians for more confirmations.
Objective: The objective of the current protocol for the systematic review and meta-analysis of pharmacists prescribing interventions was to explore, investigate the evidence, assess and compare PICO in patients with medical conditions (population), receiving pharmacist's prescribing care services (interventions) versus non-pharmacist's prescribing (comparators), and identify how it will impact the clinical, humanistic, and economic patient's outcomes (outcomes).
Methods: The necessary elements of PRISMA will be strictly followed to report the systematic review. The meta-analysis will be reported in line with the Cochrane guidelines for synthesis of trials and all forms will be based on quality measures as per the validated Cochrane templates. We will present the results of the systematic review and the meta-analysis based on PICO comparison between the included trials.
Results: We have identified four models of pharmacist prescribing interventions (independent, dependent [collaborative], supplementary, and emergency prescribing). The results will contain a systematic critical evaluation of the included trials in terms of the sample number of the population (characteristics), the type of interventions and the comparators, and the main outcome measures.
Conclusion: This protocol will report the evidence and explore the magnitude of impact of pharmacist prescribing interventions, on clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes. .
Keywords: collaborative prescribing; cost-benefit analysis; dependent prescribing; emergency pharmacist-prescribing; independent prescribing; interrupted time-series interventions; randomized controlled trials.
Copyright: © Pharmacy Practice.