4CPS-204 Abstract withdrawn

<h3>Background and Importance</h3> The demographic shift toward an ageing population in developed countries has led to a higher incidence of chronic diseases and polypharmacy, significantly increasing the risk of medication-related complications. In the context of telepharmacy programs (TP) managing large patient cohorts, stratification models are essential. These models enable systematic identification and prioritisation patients requiring more intensive pharmaceutical care (PC). <h3>Aim and Objectives</h3> To evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of the SEFH Chronic Patient Stratification Model (CPSMS) within a hospital TP for prioritising patients requiring pharmaceutical care. <h3>Material and Methods</h3> A retrospective descriptive study was conducted over 1 year, focusing on patients enrolled in TP. Data collected included demographics and clinical records. Polypharmacy was defined as &gt;5 medications, and chronic patients were classified as multipathological or fragile. The CPSMS stratified patients into three levels: Level 1 (&gt;14 points): Requires frequent PC. Level 2 (6–14 points): Requires moderate PC. Level 3 (&lt;6 points): Requires basic PC. Score variables included age (&gt;75 years), cognitive impairment, mental disorder, socioeconomic difficulties, multi-pathological status, polypharmacy, high-risk medications, recent changes in therapy, adherence (Morisky-Green test), and adverse events. To assess the effectiveness of the stratification tool, PC reports were collected. Level 1 patients, being the highest priority, were expected to have the most reports. <h3>Results</h3> A total of 245 patients (54% women, mean age 66.2 ± 18.5 years) were enrolled in the TP. Polypharmacy patients constituted 31% (n=76), and 43% (n=106) were classified as chronic. The CPSMS categorised chronic patients as: Level 1: 19 (17.9%). Level 2: 50 (47%). Level 3: 37 (34%). The total number of PC reports generated was 395, with 40% (n=158) specific to chronic patients. The distribution of PC reports across CPSMS levels was: Level 1: 31 reports (19%), 1.63 reports/patient. Level 2: 73 reports (46%), 1.46 reports/patient. Level 3: 54 reports (34%), 1.45 reports/patient. Level 1 patients, identified as having the highest risk, had the greatest average number of reports per patient, reflecting their priority status within the stratification model. <h3>Conclusion and Relevance</h3> The TP showed a high proportion of patients requiring PC. CPSMS was effective in identifying high-risk patients and facilitated targeted PC interventions, demonstrating its utility in hospital telepharmacy settings. <h3>References and/or Acknowledgements</h3> <h3>Conflict of Interest</h3> No conflict of interest