Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20524710›Full record

Trial reportDrugs & aging2010

Effects of medication assessment as part of a comprehensive geriatric assessment on drug use over a 1-year period: a population-based intervention study.

Pasi Lampela, Sirpa Hartikainen, Piia Lavikainen, Raimo Sulkava, Risto Huupponen

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Drugs & aging, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Practical Assessment and Management of Vulnerabilities in Older Patients Receiving Chemotherapy: ASCO Guideline for Geriatric Oncology.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2018
    Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Deprescribing: a primary care perspective.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2017
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Predicting risk of adverse drug reactions in older adults.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2016
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Observational
  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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Pasi LampelaDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Kuopio, Kuopio, Finland. Pasi.Lampela@uku.fi
Sirpa Hartikainen
Piia Lavikainen
Raimo Sulkava
Risto Huupponen
University of Eastern Finland · FIUniversity of Turku · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High drug consumption among the elderly and inappropriate prescribing practices increase the risk of adverse drug effects in this population. This risk may be decreased by conducting, for example, a medication review alone or as part of a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA); however, little is known about the fate of the changes in medication made as a result of the CGA or medication review. To study the performance of the CGA with regards to medication changes and to determine the persistence of these changes over a 1-year period. This study was a population-based intervention study. A random sample of 1000 elderly (age > or =75 years) was randomized either to a CGA group or to a control group. Home-dwelling patients from these groups (n = 331 and n = 313 for intervention and control groups, respectively) were analysed in this study. Study nurses collected information on medication at study entry and 1 year later in both groups; in the intervention group, study physicians assessed, and changed when appropriate, the medication at study entry. The medication changes and their persistence over 1 year were then evaluated. Medication changes were more frequent in the intervention group than in the control group. Regular medication was changed during follow-up in 277 (83.7%) and in 228 (72.8%) [odds ratio (OR) 1.9; 95% CI 1.3, 2.8] patients in the intervention and control groups, respectively. In the intervention group, study physicians were responsible for 35.4% of all new prescriptions and for 15.6% of all drug terminations. Changes took place particularly in the prescription of CNS drugs. About 58% of the drugs initiated by study physicians were still in use 1 year later, and 25.5% of those terminated by study physicians had been reintroduced. Drug intervention as part of a CGA can be used to rationalize the drug therapy of a patient. However, its effectiveness is subsequently partly counteracted by other physicians working in the healthcare system.

Indexed as

Drug TherapyAgedAged, 80 and overDrug InteractionsDrug PrescriptionsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsDrug Utilization ReviewFinlandGeriatric AssessmentHumansInterviews as TopicMedical RecordsOutpatientsPolypharmacy

Identifiers

PMID20524710
OpenAlexW2237122565

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.