search for


Evaluation of Clinical Pharmacist’s Interventions in Hematology
J. Kor. Soc. Health-syst. Pharm. 2020;37:429-443
Published online November 30, 2020;
© 2020 Korean Society of Health-System Pharmacists

Ji Seon Yooa*, So Young Leea*, Jae Song Kima, Eun Sun Sona† and Yun Mi Yub

Department of Pharmacy, Severance Hospital, College of Medicine, Yonsei University, 50-1 Yonsei-ro Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Koreaa
Department of Pharmacy and Yonsei Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, Yonsei University 85 Songdogwahak-ro, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, 21983, Republic of Koreab
Correspondence to: 유윤미 Tel:032-749-4505 E-mail:
손은선 Tel:02-2228-6888 E-mail:
*유지선과 이소영은 공동 제1저자로서 본 논문에 동등하게 기여함
Received April 16, 2020; Revised June 18, 2020; Accepted October 21, 2020.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Background : The significance of the pharmacist’s clinical role has been demonstrated through several studies, and its importance is further emphasized through medication therapy management in hematology. Although many hematology clinical pharmacists operate in various hospitals domestically and abroad, few studies have evaluated the value of the pharmacists’ prescription interventions. The only domestic study to analyze the prescription interventions by hematology clinical pharmacists was published in 2014. However, it does not use the current revised classification criteria. Thus, the purpose of this study was to re-examine the prescription interventions of hematology clinical pharmacists in the current clinical context.
Methods : The details of drug-related interventions were studied among patients admitted to a hospital’s hematology department July 2018-June 2019. The intervention cases were analyzed using the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe (PCNE) version 9.0 criteria to determine the type of prescription interventions, the cause of drug-related problems, and if accepted. The Overhage criteria was applied to assess the significance of the interventions.
Results : A total of 394 cases of drug prescription intervention were identified for analysis. The study results revealed that the most prescription-mediated drugs were antiemetics (15.3%), followed by antibiotics (13.4%), and antifungal agents (10.2%). According to the PCNE, the most frequently observed prescription intervention was “Effect of drug treatment not optimal (36.3%)”. The most frequent cause for the prescription intervention was “No or incomplete drug treatment in spite of existing indication (31.3%)”. The prescription intervention was accepted in 68.5%, of which 94.7% had clinical significance.
Conclusion : This study confirmed that the clinical pharmacist in hematology conducts various and clinically significant interventions which optimize patient care. Thus, the results affirmed the positive/health-promoting role of the clinical pharmacist and we expect such results to serve as a basis for increasing in awareness of the role and importance of the clinical pharmacist.
Keywords : Hematology, Clinical pharmacist, Prescription intervention, Medication therapy management

November 2020, 37 (4)