Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11298072›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2001

Outcomes of a randomized controlled trial of a clinical pharmacy intervention in 52 nursing homes.

M S Roberts, J A Stokes, M A King, T A Lynne, D M Purdie, P P Glasziou, D A Wilson, S T McCarthy, G E Brooks, F J de Looze and 1 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readClinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03713112 (Efficacy and Feasibility of De-prescribing Rounds in a Singapore Rehabilitative Hospital- a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 89 papers, 25 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
89citing papers in PubMed, 25 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03713112 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Efficacy and Feasibility of De-prescribing Rounds in a Singapore Rehabilitative Hospital- a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorBright Vision HospitalRan2018 to 2020Enrolled260ConditionsDeprescribing, Multi-disciplinary, RoundsArmsWeekly MDT deprescribing rounds for certain drugs
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

89 citing papers in PubMed, 25 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 224 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Interventions to optimise prescribing for older people in care homes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

29 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M S RobertsDepartment of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. mroberts@medicine.pa.uq.edu.au
J A Stokes
M A King
T A Lynne
D M Purdie
P P Glasziou
D A Wilson
S T McCarthy
G E Brooks
F J de Looze
C B Del Mar
University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo evaluate whether a year long clinical pharmacy program involving development of professional relationships, nurse education on medication issues, and individualized medication reviews could change drug use, mortality and morbidity in nursing home residents.

methodsA cluster randomised controlled trial, where an intervention home was matched to three control homes, was used to examine the effect of the clinical pharmacy intervention on resident outcomes. The study involved 905 residents in 13 intervention nursing homes and 2325 residents in 39 control nursing homes in south-east Queensland and north-east New South Wales, Australia. The outcome measures were: continuous drug use data from government prescription subsidy claims, cross-sectional drug use data on prescribed and administered medications, deaths and morbidity indices (hospitalization rates, adverse events and disability indices).

resultsThis intervention resulted in a reduction in drug use with no change in morbidity indices or survival. Differences in nursing home characteristics, as defined by cluster analysis with SUDAAN, negated intervention-related apparent significant improvements in survival. The use of benzodiazepines, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, laxatives, histamine H2-receptor antagonists and antacids was significantly reduced in the intervention group, whereas the use of digoxin and diuretics remained similar to controls. Overall, drug use in the intervention group was reduced by 14.8% relative to the controls, equivalent to an annual prescription saving of A64 dollars per resident (approximately 25 pound sterling).

conclusionsThis intervention improved nursing home resident outcomes related to changes in drug use and drug-related expenditure. The continuing divergence in both drug use and survival at the end of the study suggests that the difference would have been more significant in a larger and longer study, and even more so using additional instruments specific for measuring outcomes related to changes in drug use.

Indexed as

Health Services for the AgedNursing HomesAgedAged, 80 and overAge DistributionConfounding Factors, EpidemiologicCost-Benefit AnalysisCross-Sectional StudiesDrug UtilizationHomes for the AgedHumansLongitudinal StudiesOutcome Assessment, Health CareResidence CharacteristicsSurvival Analysis

Identifiers

PMID11298072
PMCPMC2015028
OpenAlexW1507048682

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.