Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16456211›Full record

Trial reportQuality & safety in health care2006

Factors predicting the guideline compliant supply (or non-supply) of non-prescription medicines in the community pharmacy setting.

M C Watson, C M Bond, J Grimshaw, M Johnston

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Quality & safety in health care, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 83 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Allergic rhinitis self-care advice in community pharmacies: A simulated patient study.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M C WatsonDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB25 2AY, UK. m.c.watson@abdn.ac.uk
C M Bond
J Grimshaw
M Johnston
University of Aberdeen · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe reclassification of prescription only medicines to pharmacy and general sales list medicines (also known as non-prescription medicines) provides the public with greater access to medicines that they can purchase for self-care. There is evidence that non-prescription medicines may be associated with inappropriate supply. This study investigated factors predicting evidence-based (guideline compliant) supply or non-supply of non-prescription medicines.

methodSecondary analysis of results from a randomised controlled trial of educational interventions to promote the evidence based supply of non-prescription medicines. Ten actors made simulated patient (customer) visits to 60 community pharmacies using seven scenarios reflecting different types of presentations. The dependent variable was appropriate (guideline compliant) supply of antifungal medication for treatment of vaginal candidiasis.

resultsNo significant association was shown between guideline compliant behaviour and pharmacy type or location, or with the actor making the visit. The likelihood of guideline compliant outcome was significantly greater with symptom presentations than with condition or product presentations (p < 0.001). The likelihood of a guideline compliant outcome increased (a) as more information was exchanged (p < 0.001), (b) with the use of WWHAM (a mnemonic frequently used by medicine counter assistants during consultations for non-prescription medicines) (p < 0.001); (c) when specific WWHAM questions were used (including "description of symptoms" (p < 0.001) and "whether other medication was currently being used" (p < 0.001); and (d) in consultations involving solely pharmacists compared with those involving only medicine counter assistants (p = 0.017). After adjustment for presentation type, a significant association persisted between appropriate outcome and consultations with WWHAM scores of 2 and > or = 3, respectively.

conclusionsThe nature and extent of information exchange between pharmacy staff and customers has a strong influence on the guideline compliant supply of non-prescription medicines. Future interventions to promote the safe and effective use of non-prescription medicines should address the apparent deficit in communication between pharmacy staff in general, and medicine counter assistants in particular, which may reflect both pharmacy staff skills and customer expectations.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based MedicineGuideline AdherencePharmaciesAdultAntifungal AgentsCandidiasis, VulvovaginalCommunicationData Interpretation, StatisticalFemaleForecastingHumansMaleNonprescription DrugsPatient SimulationResearchScotlandAntifungal AgentsNonprescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID16456211
PMCPMC2564005
OpenAlexW2107874956

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.