Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24330781›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2013

Bridging evidence-practice gaps: improving use of medicines in elderly Australian veterans.

Elizabeth E Roughead, Lisa M Kalisch Ellett, Emmae N Ramsay, Nicole L Pratt, John D Barratt, Vanessa T LeBlanc, Philip Ryan, Robert Peck, Graeme Killer, Andrew L Gilbert

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Precision public-health intervention for care coordination: a real-world study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. A Scoping Review of Interventions Targeting the Mental Health of Australian Veterans.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Quasi experimental designs in pharmacist intervention research.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2016
    Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elizabeth E Roughead
Lisa M Kalisch EllettQuality Use of Medicines and Pharmacy Research Centre, School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, Sansom Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia. lisa.kalisch@unisa.edu.au.
Emmae N Ramsay
Nicole L Pratt
John D Barratt
Vanessa T LeBlanc
Philip Ryan
Robert Peck
Graeme Killer
Andrew L Gilbert
University of South Australia · AUUniversity of Adelaide · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Australian Government Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) funds an ongoing health promotion based program to improve use of medicines and related health services, which implements interventions that include audit and feedback in the form of patient-specific feedback generated from administrative claims records. We aimed to determine changes in medicine use as a result of the program.

methodsThe program provides targeted patient-specific feedback to medical practitioners. The feedback is supported with educational material developed by a clinical panel, subject to peer review and overseen by a national editorial committee. Veterans who meet target criteria also receive educational brochures. The program is supported by a national call centre and ongoing national consultation. Segmented regression analyses (interrupted time series) were undertaken to assess changes in medication use in targeted veterans pre and post each intervention.

results12 interventions were included; three to increase medicine use, seven which aimed to reduce use, and two which had combination of messages to change use. All programs that aimed to increase medicine use were effective, with relative effect sizes at the time of the intervention ranging from 1% to 8%. Mixed results were seen with programs aiming to reduce inappropriate medicine use. Highly specific programs were effective, with relative effect sizes at the time of the intervention of 10% decline in use of NSAIDs in high risk groups and 14% decline in use of antipsychotics in dementia. Interventions targeting combinations of medicines, including medicine interactions and potentially inappropriate medicines in the elderly did not change practice significantly. Interventions with combinations of messages targeting multiple components of practice had an impact on one component, but not all components targeted.

conclusionsThe Veterans' MATES program showed positive practice change over time, with interventions increasing use of appropriate medicines where under-use was evident and reduced use of inappropriate medicines when single medicines were targeted. Combinations of messages were less effective, suggesting specific messages focusing on single medicines are required to maximise effect. The program provides a model that could be replicated in other settings.

Indexed as

VeteransAustraliaDrug TherapyEvidence-Based PracticeFeedbackHumansInappropriate PrescribingMedical AuditPractice Patterns, Physicians'Quality Improvement

Identifiers

PMID24330781
PMCPMC3878826
OpenAlexW2062434749

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.