Tera D. Moore

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has been a beacon of what team integration including a clinical pharmacist can do to improve patient care. The VHA is the largest integrated health care system in the United States. Clinical Pharmacist Practitioners (CPP) operate under a scope of practice that allows for initiation, discontinuation, and modification of medication therapies in patients with a confirmed diagnosis as part of providing comprehensive medication management (CMM). Standardization related to the “what” and the “how” CMM is practiced within the VHA have enabled the expansion of clinical pharmacy practice. While variation exists across the country, within the VHA the core components of CPP practice are established through policy and process. Having a standardized credentialing process identical to other non‐pharmacy providers and having that process written in policy allows for less variation from facility to facility.

In the United States, despite evidence that medication treatment for OUD (MOUD) improves outcomes, buprenorphine MOUD (B-MOUD) treatment rates remain suboptimal. The Mainstreaming Addiction Treatment (MAT) Act, passed in 2022, removed federal prescribing restrictions which allowed any health care provider, including pharmacists, with a DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) registration to prescribe B-MOUD unless otherwise restricted by their state of licensure. As of March 2026, only 16 states allow pharmacists to obtain DEA licensure for controlled substance prescriptive authority. The SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Reauthorization Act of 2025 indicates that pharmacists may prescribe B-MOUD independently where state law allows and sends a signal for states to align in this practice. Pharmacists have demonstrated the ability to provide comprehensive medication management in OUD treatment with positive outcomes of increased access, cost savings, reduced physician burden, enhanced medication utilization and adherence, improved treatment retention, and high patient satisfaction. Since implementation of the MAT Act, DEA-registered pharmacists in the Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Health Administration (VHA) have independently prescribed B-MOUD. Clinical Pharmacist Practitioners (CPPs) within VHA practice as members of the interprofessional team and have independent prescriptive authority under a scope of practice based on their qualifications and competencies. This commentary describes CPP independent B-MOUD prescribing within VHA as an effective practice that could model pharmacist care in other large health care systems. Benefits of this model include increased B-MOUD access and retention while maintaining high quality, team-based care and use of telehealth to expand access to underserved areas. Major limitations include state legislative barriers that restrict pharmacist-controlled substance and B-MOUD prescribing. We call for advancements to state practice laws that authorize controlled substance prescriptive authority for pharmacists and reimbursement for services which are essential to continue expanding CPP B-MOUD prescribing within and beyond the VHA.

Reporting interventions thoroughly and consistently in the literature allows for study reproducibility or implementation of the intervention into practice. Although there is currently no standard for describing Board-Certified Psychiatric Pharmacist (BCPP) interventions in the published literature, there are multiple checklists or guides that have been developed for reporting clinical interventions, including the template for intervention description and replication and the pharmacist patient care intervention reporting (PaCIR) checklist, that seek to improve the quality of reporting interventions in the literature. The purpose of this paper is to describe a proposed guide for reporting BCPP interventions in the literature by expanding the PaCIR checklist. Authors use a logic model developed by the American Association of Psychiatric Pharmacists to ensure all elements of the process are addressed in the expanded guide.

Introduction: Pharmacists focusing on psychotropic medication management and practicing across a wide variety of healthcare settings have significantly improved patient-level outcomes. The Systematic Literature Review Committee of the American Association of Psychiatric Pharmacists was tasked with compiling a comprehensive database of primary literature highlighting the impact of psychiatric pharmacists on patient-level outcomes. Methods: A systematic search of literature published from January 1, 1961, to December 31, 2022, was conducted using PubMed and search terms based on a prior American Association of Psychiatric Pharmacists literature review. Publications describing patient-level outcome results associated with pharmacist provision of care in psychiatric/neurologic settings and/or in relation to psychotropic medications were included. The search excluded articles for which there was no pharmacist intervention, no psychiatric disorder treatment, no clinical outcomes, no original research, no access to full text, and/or no English-language version. Results: A total of 4270 articles were reviewed via PubMed, with 4072 articles excluded based on title, abstract, and/or full text in the initial pass and 208 articles selected for inclusion. A secondary full-text review excluded 11 additional articles, and 5 excluded articles were ultimately included based on a secondary review, for a final total of 202 articles meeting the inclusion criteria. A comprehensive database of these articles was compiled, including details on their study designs and outcomes. Discussion: The articles included in the final database had a wide range of heterogeneity. While the overall impact of psychiatric pharmacists was positive, the study variability highlights the need for future publications to have more consistent, standardized outcomes with stronger study designs.

Introduction: The American Association of Psychiatric Pharmacists (AAPP) used multiple modalities to develop and refine 28 attribute statements to describe a best practice model for outpatient psychiatric pharmacists. Before addressing implementation, assessment, and field testing, it was necessary to finalize and confirm the statements and their supporting narratives among stakeholders. The objective of this project was to confirm the attribute statements and supporting justifications for a best practice model for outpatient psychiatric pharmacists providing direct patient care. Methods: The 4 phases that resulted in the 28 attribute statements and supporting narratives have been described and published elsewhere. As part of phase 5, the confirmation survey was distributed to pharmacists and resident members of AAPP in November 2021 for 3 weeks. Results: The survey respondents (n = 74; 6.1%) were licensed pharmacists for an average of 15.6 years (SD = 12.0) and had been practicing as psychiatric pharmacists for an average of 11.3 years (SD = 10.4). Slightly more than half (54.2%) of the respondents reported practicing in the outpatient setting and three-fourths (74.3%) were Board Certified Psychiatric Pharmacists. For each of the 28 statements, more than 90% of respondents either agreed or agreed with minimal reservations. Discussion: Given the high degree of agreement on the proposed practice model statements, they will be used as the basis for the outpatient psychiatric pharmacist best practice model. Next steps in developing this model include establishing implementation guidance, determining appropriate metrics for evaluation of these statements in practice, and establishing appropriate field-testing methods.

Introduction: Mental health (MH) clinical pharmacy specialists (CPS) are increasingly functioning as integral providers in MH care teams. MH providers may delegate many medication management tasks to the CPS. As there is a shortage of primary care and specialist MH providers, CPS are increasingly being utilized in MH care clinics. We assess provider and CPS perceptions of the contributions of CPS to MH clinical teams in the Veterans Health Administration.Methods: We examined the roles and functions of CPS in MH clinics through surveys (n = 374) and semistructured interviews (n = 16) with MH CPS and other members of MH clinical teams (psychiatrists, nurse practitioners, registered nurses, social workers) to gain insight into how CPS were integrated in these settings. We assessed perceptions of CPS contributions to MH teams, interactions between CPS and other providers, and challenges of integrating CPS into MH clinical teams.Results: Contributions of CPS in MH were received positively by clinical team members. Clinical pharmacy specialists providing comprehensive medication management were especially valuable in the management of clozapine. The knowledge and training of CPS reassured providers who frequently referred to them with questions about medication and medication therapy management. MH CPS were also perceived to be received well by patients.Discussion: The integration of MH CPS into MH teams was well received by team members and patients alike. The MH CPS have become important members of the MH team and are widely viewed as being able to improve access, quality, and workflow.

Introduction: Despite the high prevalence of those with mental illnesses, there is a critical shortage of psychiatric providers in the United States. Psychiatric pharmacists are valuable members of the health care team who meet patient care needs, especially those practicing with prescriptive authority (PA). Methods: A cross-sectional electronic survey was administered to Board Certified Psychiatric Pharmacists (BCPPs) and non-BCPP members of the College of Psychiatric and Neurologic Pharmacists. The objective of this study was to compare demographic and practice characteristics between respondents with and without PA. Results: Of the 334 respondents, 155 (46.4%) reported having PA. Those with PA, including those with Veterans Affairs (VA) affiliated PA, had fewer mean number of years of licensure than those without PA (P = .008 and P = .007, respectively). The majority with PA practiced in outpatient settings (53.5%). Respondents with PA (including those with VA-affiliated PA) were more likely to have their positions funded by practice sites (P < .001). The most common referral source for medication management for those with PA were physicians although pharmacists also provided referrals in both VA and non-VA settings. Pharmacists with PA were more likely to track practice outcomes versus those without PA (P < .001). Discussion: The current study confirms the variability in PA among psychiatric pharmacists. Demographics of the respondents reflect changes in residency accreditation and increased numbers of psychiatric residencies within VA facilities. Psychiatric pharmacists with PA reported treating psychiatric and medical conditions, creating added value. Psychiatric pharmacists should be empowered to track outcomes and help meet the critical shortage of psychiatric providers.

Introduction: A comprehensive review of psychiatric pharmacy practice has never been performed in the United States. As psychiatric pharmacists become more involved in mental illness treatment, determining the current state of practice is important to help advance the specialty. The Professional Affairs Committee of the College of Psychiatric and Neurologic Pharmacists (CPNP) was charged with performing this review to define current psychiatric pharmacy practice. Methods: An electronic survey was sent to all pharmacist members of CPNP and all nonmember Board Certified Psychiatric Pharmacists (BCPPs) in the United States in late summer 2019. The survey consisted of 36 questions across multiple domains to obtain information about respondents' education and training background, practice setting and type, and information about prescriptive authority and other areas. An initial e-mail invitation was sent along with 2 reminder e-mails over the subsequent 2 weeks. Results: A total of 334 of 1015 pharmacists completed the survey (32.9%). Responders completed a postgraduate residency 77.8% of the time, and 88.3% were BCPP. Practice settings were split evenly between inpatient and outpatient practices or a combination of the 2. Among respondents, 46.5% reported having prescriptive authority as part of their practice, and 41.3% reported treating nonpsychiatric as well as psychiatric illnesses. Prescriptive authority was more likely in outpatient practices and in those treating nonpsychiatric illnesses. Discussion: The current practice of psychiatric pharmacy is incredibly varied in terms of practice setting, activities performed, and services provided. Further exploration is needed to help determine the optimal role of psychiatric pharmacists.

Introduction: Psychiatric and neurologic illnesses are highly prevalent and are often suboptimally treated. A 2015 review highlighted the value of psychiatric pharmacists in improving medication-related outcomes. There is a need to describe areas of expansion and strengthened evidence regarding pharmacist practice and patient care impact in psychiatric and neurologic settings since 2015.Methods: A systematic search of literature published from January 2014 to June 2019 was conducted. Publications describing patient-level outcome results associated with pharmacist provision of care in a psychiatric/neurologic setting and/or in relation to central nervous system (CNS) medications were included.Results: A total of 64 publications were included. There was significant heterogeneity of published study methods and data, prohibiting meta-analysis. Pharmacists practicing across a wide variety of health care settings with focus on CNS medication management significantly improved patient-level outcomes, such as medication adherence, disease control, and avoidance of hospitalization. The most common practice approach associated with significant improvement in patient-level outcomes was incorporation of psychiatric pharmacist input into the interprofessional health care team.Discussion: Pharmacists who focus on psychiatric and neurologic disease improve outcomes for patients with these conditions. This is important in the current health care environment as most patients with psychiatric or neurologic conditions continue to have unmet needs. Additional studies designed to measure pharmacists' impact on patient-level outcomes are encouraged to strengthen these findings.