INDICATORS FOR DRUG AND THERAPEUTICS COMMITTEES

Aims This study describes development and field testing of a set of in dicators for drug and therapeutics committees (DTCs) in hospitals. It was intended that these indicators should be accessible, useful and re levant in the Australian setting. Methods Candidate indicators were wr itten following consultation and data collection. A framework of outco me, impact and process indicators was based on DTC goals, objectives a nd strategies. The candidate indicators were field tested over a 2 mon th period in teaching, city non-teaching, rural and private hospitals. The field tests provided response data for each indicator and evaluat ion of the indicators against criteria for accessibility, relevance, u sefulness, clarity and resource utilisation. Consensus on which indica tors to accept, modify or reject was reached at a workshop of stakehol ders and experts, taking account of the field test results. Results Th irty-five candidate indicators were tested in 16 hospitals. Twenty-two had a response from > 80% of sites, 23 had a mean relevance rating > 3.5, 19 had a mean usefulness rating > 3.5, 27 were correctly interpre ted by > 90% of sites and 25 could be collected in an acceptable time. The roost acceptable indicators required least data collection or pro vided data deemed useful for purposes other than the field test. At th e consensus workshop 13 indicators were accepted with no or minor chan ge, nine were accepted after major modification and eight were discard ed. It was recommended that a further five indicators should be merged or subsumed into one indicator. Conclusions This study has developed and field tested a set of indicators for DTCs in Australia. The indica tors have been taken up enthusiastically as a first attempt to monitor DTC performance but require ongoing validation and development to ens ure continuing relevance and usefulness.