ReviewDrugs2004
Repeat prescribing: scale, problems and quality management in ambulatory care patients.
Review in Drugs, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Treatment reviews of older people on polypharmacy in primary care: cluster controlled trial comparing two approaches.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2007Trial
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of primary healthcare practitioners regarding pharmacist clinics: a cross-sectional study in Shanghai.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- GPs' awareness of pregnancy: trends and association with hazardous medication use.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023Article
- Evaluation and pharmacists perspective of repeat prescribing process in refill clinics.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2021Article
- Exploring Patient's Perspectives and Experiences After Start with Inhalation Maintenance Therapy: A Qualitative Theory-Based Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2020Article
- Repeat prescribing of medications: A system-centred risk management model for primary care organisations.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2017Article
- Patient-centred improvement to repeat prescribing using the Always Event concept.BMJ open quality · 2017Article
- Protocol for using mixed methods and process improvement methodologies to explore primary care receptionist work.BMJ open · 2016Article
- Potentially inappropriate prescribing and adverse drug reactions in the elderly: a population-based study.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015Article
- Adherence to Antihypertensive Therapy and Elevated Blood Pressure: Should We Consider the Use of Multiple Medications?PloS one · 2015Article
- Patient and carer experience of obtaining regular prescribed medication for chronic disease in the English National Health Service: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2013Article
- Increased primary healthcare utilisation among women with a history of breast cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2013Article
- The influence of drug use in university hospitals on the pharmaceutical consumption in their surrounding communities.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2013Article
- Targeting outpatient drug safety: recommendations of the Dutch HARM-Wrestling Task Force.Drug safety · 2012Article
- Receptionist input to quality and safety in repeat prescribing in UK general practice: ethnographic case study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2011Article
- Using the costs of drug therapy to screen patients for a community pharmacy-based medication review program.Pharmacy world & science : PWS · 2008Article
- Frequency, nature and determinants of pharmaceutical consultations provided in private by Dutch community pharmacists.Pharmacy world & science : PWS · 2007Article
- A composite screening tool for medication reviews of outpatients: general issues with specific examples.Drugs & aging · 2007Review
- Analysis of polypharmacy in older patients in primary care using a multidisciplinary expert panel.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2006Article
- Linking community pharmacy dispensing data to prescribing data of general practitioners.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The reported scale of repeat prescriptions ranges from 29% to 75% of all items prescribed, depending on the definition of repeat prescribing and other variables. It is likely that a substantial part of repeat prescribing by general practitioners (GPs) occurs without direct doctor-patient contact. While this reduces the workload for the GP and is convenient for the patient, it does not provide the adequate control that is needed to ensure that every repeat prescription is still appropriate, effective and well tolerated, and that it is still being viewed upon and taken by the patient as intended. Infrequent therapy reviews may lead to failure to prevent, identify and solve drug-related problems and drug wastage, and may, thereby, have a negative impact on the effectiveness, safety or cost of the medications prescribed. Studies evaluating the repeat prescribing process have shown that GPs and medical practices vary widely in their degree of administrative and clinical control of repeat prescriptions. Contrary to the opinion that GPs cannot change prescribing behaviour when the prescription is initiated by a medical specialist, GPs have their own responsibility for controlling the repeats of such prescriptions. Intervention studies suggest that a medication review by a pharmacist can help to reduce drug-related problems with repeat prescriptions, and the effectiveness of the intervention may be increased by combining the medication review with a consultation of the patient's medical records and a patient interview. In several studies, such an intervention was relatively inexpensive and, therefore, feasible. However, these conclusions should be viewed with appropriate caution because a number of caveats pertain. There is still no evidence that these types of intervention improve health-related quality of life or reduce healthcare cost, and so far only a few trials have produced any evidence of clinical improvement. As implicit and explicit screening criteria have their own benefits and limitations, a combined application may offer a more thorough assessment but may also be more complex and time consuming. Further studies on the development and evaluation of repeat prescription management models are needed, preferably focussing on improving clinical, humanistic and economic outcomes. New studies should investigate the effects of: different types of interventions; different organisational models; different target populations; and selecting and training different types of healthcare professionals. Future studies should also assess whether results are sustained, the optimal time interval between reviews of repeat prescriptions, and the possibilities offered by new computerised support technologies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15301562What OpenQuestion holds
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.