Alaskan CPAs may include multiple pharmacists and multiple practitioners (for example. B a pharmacist who hires a CPA with a group of staff physicians, several pharmacists who take a CPA with a physician, or multiple pharmacists who will receive a CPA with multiple pharmacists), although a “primary prescribing practitioner” must be designated. The CPA must indicate the disease states, medications (or classes of medications) on which pharmacists can make decisions, as well as a procedure/minutes in place for those decisions. Decisions must be reviewed at least every three months at the same time as the entities covered and the protocols are only valid for a maximum period of two years.  Alaskan CPAs allows pharmacists to track “drug treatment” in accordance with AAFC 12.52.995, including conducting a comprehensive patient analysis, measuring vital parameters, and ordering/evaluating laboratory tests covered by the CPA.   A common practice agreement can be described as an advisory agreement, a doctor-pharmacist agreement, a standing order or a medical protocol or delegation. The CDTM is an extension of the traditional pharmacist sector that enables pharmacist-managed medication problem management (DRPs), with a focus on a collaborative and interdisciplinary approach to pharmacy practice in the healthcare sector. The conditions for a CPA are set by the pharmacist and the cooperating doctor, although there are online templates. CSAs may be specific to a patient population of interest to both parties, a clinical situation or a specific disease condition and/or may draw up an evidence-based protocol for the management of patient treatment under the CPA.
ASAs have been the subject of intense debate in pharmacy and the medical professions. A pharmacist must meet one of the following criteria to be eligible for the CPP: CSAs can be used as tools for pharmacists to better integrate with practicing clinicians in Accountable Care Organization (ACO) offices, reduce the time constraints of family physician visits, and minimize delays in treating patients` chronic diseases.  Pharmacists must be able to assess the health status of their patients, implement a pharmaceutical care plan, communicate with stakeholders, and track the patient`s progress. It also involves being able to determine when to intervene in a patient`s drug therapy.  Pharmacists may receive registration information from organizations approved by the pharmacy`s board of directors.  ASAs have been implemented to treat a large number of chronic diseases, including diabetes mellitus, asthma and high blood pressure. There is evidence that ASAs have given positive health outcomes for affected patients. Pharmacists working with providers as part of ASAs have been shown to contribute to a better quality of care in the field of oncology, including the treatment of antiemetics (anti-vomiting). In these parameters, ASCs improved the results of target laboratories such as hemoglobin A1c for diabetics, improved lung function for asthmatics and better blood pressure control for people with high blood pressure.  In the keynote address at the 2013 APhA Annual Meeting, Reid Blackwelder, President of the American Academy of Family Physicists (AAFP), advocated for a “collaborative vision of health care.”  Pharmacists involved in CSAs may participate in clinical services that do not fall within the traditional scope of pharmacists. In particular, pharmacists are not required to participate in ASPs to offer many pharmacy services already covered by their traditional activity, such as. B the management of drug therapy, the provision of disease prevention services (e.g.
B vaccinations), participation in public health screening (e.g. B screening for depressive disorders such as.B. severe depressive disorders, by route of administration of P HQ-2), provide information on the state of the disease (e.g. B as a certified diabetes educator) and advise patients on information about their medications.  In 2012, the AAFP developed a position paper expressing its support for ASAs, but highlighting the risk of fragmentation of care if pharmacists enjoyed fully autonomous prescribing privileges. .