Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23690938›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2013

Effects of pharmacists' interventions on appropriateness of prescribing and evaluation of the instruments' (MAI, STOPP and STARTs') ability to predict hospitalization--analyses from a randomized controlled trial.

Ulrika Gillespie, Anna Alassaad, Margareta Hammarlund-Udenaes, Claes Mörlin, Dan Henrohn, Maria Bertilsson, Håkan Melhus

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04360746 (The Influence of Clinical Pharmacist on the Quality of Drug Prescribing and Rehabilitation Outcomes in Post-acute Hip Fractured Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 70 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04360746 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

The Influence of Clinical Pharmacist on the Quality of Drug Prescribing and Rehabilitation Outcomes in Post-acute Hip Fractured Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorRabin Medical CenterRan2020 to 2022Enrolled200ConditionsHip Fractures, Clinical Pharmacists, Rehabilitation OutcomeArmsPharmaceutical intervention, Rehabilitation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Hospital pharmacists working with geriatric patients in Europe: a systematic literature review.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2018
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

10 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

7 authors.

Ulrika GillespieDivision of Pharmacokinetics and Drug Therapy, Department of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University and Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden. Ulrika.gillespie@akademiska.se
Anna Alassaad
Margareta Hammarlund-Udenaes
Claes Mörlin
Dan Henrohn
Maria Bertilsson
Håkan Melhus

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAppropriateness of prescribing can be assessed by various measures and screening instruments. The aims of this study were to investigate the effects of pharmacists' interventions on appropriateness of prescribing in elderly patients, and to explore the relationship between these results and hospital care utilization during a 12-month follow-up period.

methodsThe study population from a previous randomized controlled study, in which the effects of a comprehensive pharmacist intervention on re-hospitalization was investigated, was used. The criteria from the instruments MAI, STOPP and START were applied retrospectively to the 368 study patients (intervention group (I) n = 182, control group (C) n = 186). The assessments were done on admission and at discharge to detect differences over time and between the groups. Hospital care consumption was recorded and the association between scores for appropriateness, and hospitalization was analysed.

resultsThe number of Potentially Inappropriate Medicines (PIMs) per patient as identified by STOPP was reduced for I but not for C (1.42 to 0.93 vs. 1.46 to 1.66 respectively, p<0.01). The number of Potential Prescription Omissions (PPOs) per patient as identified by START was reduced for I but not for C (0.36 to 0.09 vs. 0.42 to 0.45 respectively, p<0.001). The summated score for MAI was reduced for I but not for C (8.5 to 5.0 and 8.7 to 10.0 respectively, p<0.001). There was a positive association between scores for MAI and STOPP and drug-related readmissions (RR 8-9% and 30-34% respectively). No association was detected between the scores of the tools and total re-visits to hospital.

conclusionThe interventions significantly improved the appropriateness of prescribing for patients in the intervention group as evaluated by the instruments MAI, STOPP and START. High scores in MAI and STOPP were associated with a higher number of drug-related readmissions.

Indexed as

Health Services for the AgedPharmacistsAged, 80 and overHospitalizationHumansInappropriate PrescribingMedication ErrorsMedication Therapy ManagementPractice Patterns, Physicians'

Identifiers

PMID23690938
PMCPMC3656885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.