Pharmacy research improves patient care

By rocka 19/10/2026 4 min read 27 views

Many assume pharmacy research happens only within academic settings, but in truth, it thrives across all clinical environments—from community pharmacies and primary care to hospital floors and intensive care units. In ICUs, where patient conditions shift rapidly and treatment plans evolve constantly, clinical decisions demand urgency. Here, research isn’t an isolated activity; it grows directly from the challenges practitioners face daily. The most pressing questions rarely emerge from theoretical studies but instead arise at the bedside when evidence fails to guide a critical choice. These real-world uncertainties often spark research designed to enhance patient outcomes.

Integrating Research into Daily Pharmacy Work

As pharmacy research gains greater professional recognition, particularly with the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s transformation into the Royal College of Pharmacy on 15 April 2026, its practical value becomes clearer. Everyday research serves as a vital tool for refining medication use in high-risk patients, reinforcing decision-making under pressure, and delivering personalized care. By challenging established practices, filling evidence gaps, and translating frontline insights into measurable improvements, research helps pharmacists demonstrate their impact on patient welfare.

Many research questions originate as informal observations before evolving into structured investigations. This perspective is central to a recent conversation with Cathrine McKenzie, a professor of intensive care pharmacy at the University of Southampton, an honorary consultant pharmacist at University Hospital Southampton, and chair of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine’s pharmacology and pharmacotherapy section. McKenzie discusses how clinical inquiries develop into research, the determination required to advance ideas, and why pharmacy professionals should recognize their ability to contribute meaningfully to scientific inquiry.

For McKenzie, research didn’t begin as an academic aspiration but stemmed from persistent clinical puzzles. Early in her career, she noticed that some critically ill patients, especially those with kidney or multi-organ dysfunction, didn’t regain consciousness as expected after switching sedation from propofol to midazolam. Existing medical literature offered little explanation for this pattern. Instead of accepting the uncertainty, she pursued it, turning that initial observation into years of study and eventually a doctoral degree.

Adopting a Research-Oriented Approach

McKenzie emphasizes that research has sharpened her clinical skills, altering how she evaluates medications, questions assumptions, and prioritizes patient safety. Rather than treating research as a separate discipline, she integrates it into her daily practice. This approach involves identifying risks in standard care, scrutinizing systems more deeply, and producing evidence that directly enhances safety protocols.

A defining example was her work on medication reconciliation in intensive care. After a patient’s thyroid hormone replacement was accidentally omitted, revealing the serious risks of missed routine drugs in critical care, she reexamined the process. This led her to study which regular medications are most frequently discontinued or overlooked during ICU admissions and what consequences they may have. The experience showed how routine practices can carry hidden dangers when not closely examined.

McKenzie defines research broadly, beyond grants or large-scale trials, as a mindset rooted in inquiry and analytical thinking. It means questioning why certain treatments became standard, assessing their ongoing relevance, and exploring potential consequences. She points to continuous IV opioid infusions in ICUs as a case in point, noting that while the practice is common, it raises concerns about tolerance, dependence, and withdrawal symptoms.

Her approach reflects a leadership model embedded in daily clinical work: identifying trends, assessing their impact, and converting frontline concerns into evidence-based changes. When addressing obstacles to research, McKenzie acknowledges common challenges, time constraints, competing priorities, funding difficulties, and the lack of dedicated research hours. She also highlights a cultural barrier: pharmacy professionals often view research as distinct from their core responsibilities rather than an essential part of them. Additionally, funding and development initiatives frequently overlook pharmacists, focusing instead on nurses and other allied health providers. To strengthen pharmacy’s research role, she argues, the profession must both claim its legitimacy in research and be recognized by others as capable research leaders.

For pharmacists interested in research, McKenzie offers practical, incremental advice: begin with small projects, cultivate habits of questioning and analysis, share findings locally, submit abstracts to conferences, present results, and publish when possible.

Looking Ahead

McKenzie’s journey demonstrates how a single unresolved clinical question can evolve into work that reshapes professional standards and patient care. Her message to pharmacists and pharmaceutical scientists is straightforward: “Play the long game, and you can do it.” While opportunities exist, they often require proactive pursuit, steady development, and sustained effort over time.

Tags: clinical