The present reformed health care system is driven mainly by cost containment. This posses some challenges to health care practitioners in regards to the decision on what therapeutic agents (drugs) get added or deleted from the formulary. The challenge is in utilizing pharmacoeconomic tools and outcomes (clinical and humanistic) research to arrive at a formulary that provides the patient with effective drug therapy. The literature suggests that effective drug therapy improves clinical outcomes and enhances patients' quality of life. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this pilot study was to assess the use or extent of use of pharmacoeconomic methods and clinical and humanistic outcomes by pharmacists (serving on a pharmacy and therapeutic (P&T) committee) in making formulary decisions. The secondary objective of the study was to examine the association between training in pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research, and the application of the principles and methods of these two disciplines. METHOD: A 30-item survey instrument was administered to a convenient sample of 17 pharmacists. The instrument was designed to collect data on the demographics, pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research training, and application of pharmacoeconomic tools and outcomes research to formulary decision-making. RESULTS: The percentage of respondents who indicated using cost-minimization, cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit, cost-utility, onset of action of drug/therapy, and recurrence of symptoms in formulary decision-making were 82.4%, 58.8%, 70.6%, 29.4%, 64%, and 76.5%, respectively. There were a number significant correlations between the application of pharmacoeconomic methods and outcome measures (clinical and humanistic). Generally, there was no significant association between formal training and application of the pharmacoeconomic methods and outcomes research. CONCLUSION: The study suggests that pharmacists on P&T committees generally apply pharmacoeconomic methods and outcomes research in making formulary decisions.