Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23941110›Full record

ReviewBMC health services research2013

Addressing potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients: development and pilot study of an intervention in primary care (the OPTI-SCRIPT study).

Barbara Clyne, Marie C Bradley, Carmel M Hughes, Daniel Clear, Ronan McDonnell, David Williams, Tom Fahey, Susan M Smith, OPTI-SCRIPT study team

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC health services research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03901820 (Evaluation of a Drug Interactions Software to Limit Polypharmacy), which is not on this map. Cited by 34 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 5 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.

NCT03901820 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of a Drug Interactions Software to Limit Polypharmacy (Evaluación de un Programa de Interacciones Medicamentosas Para Limitar la Polifarmacia)

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Buenos AiresRan2019 to 2021Enrolled1,053ConditionsPolypharmacy, Elderly, Inpatient, Drug InteractionArmsMedication Interaction System of Dr App (SIMDA)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  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

9 authors.

Barbara ClyneHRB Centre for Primary Care Research, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI), Beaux Lane House, Lower Mercer Street, Dublin, Ireland. barbaraclyne@rcsi.ie
Marie C Bradley
Carmel M Hughes
Daniel Clear
Ronan McDonnell
David Williams
Tom Fahey
Susan M Smith
OPTI-SCRIPT study team

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPotentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in older people is common in primary care and can result in increased morbidity, adverse drug events, hospitalizations and mortality. The prevalence of PIP in Ireland is estimated at 36% with an associated expenditure of over €45 million in 2007. The aim of this paper is to describe the application of the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework to the development of an intervention to decrease PIP in Irish primary care.

methodsThe MRC framework for the design and evaluation of complex interventions guided the development of the study intervention. In the development stage, literature was reviewed and combined with information obtained from experts in the field using a consensus based methodology and patient cases to define the main components of the intervention. In the pilot stage, five GPs tested the proposed intervention. Qualitative interviews were conducted with the GPs to inform the development and implementation of the intervention for the main randomised controlled trial.

resultsThe literature review identified PIP criteria for inclusion in the study and two initial intervention components - academic detailing and medicines review supported by therapeutic treatment algorithms. Through patient case studies and a focus group with a group of 8 GPs, these components were refined and a third component of the intervention identified - patient information leaflets. The intervention was tested in a pilot study. In total, eight medicine reviews were conducted across five GP practices. These reviews addressed ten instances of PIP, nine of which were addressed in the form of either a dose reduction or a discontinuation of a targeted medication. Qualitative interviews highlighted that GPs were receptive to the intervention but patient preference and time needed both to prepare for and conduct the medicines review, emerged as potential barriers. Findings from the pilot study allowed further refinement to produce the finalised intervention of academic detailing with a pharmacist, medicines review with web-based therapeutic treatment algorithms and tailored patient information leaflets.

conclusionsThe MRC framework was used in the development of the OPTI-SCRIPT intervention to decrease the level of PIP in primary care in Ireland. Its application ensured that the intervention was developed using the best available evidence, was acceptable to GPs and feasible to deliver in the clinical setting. The effectiveness of this intervention is currently being tested in a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.

trial registrationCurrent controlled trials ISRCTN41694007.

Indexed as

Primary Health CareAgedAlgorithmsConsensusFocus GroupsGeneral PracticeHumansInappropriate PrescribingIrelandPilot ProjectsQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID23941110
PMCPMC3751793

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.