Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24505112›Full record

ArticleBMJ quality & safety2014

Collaborative pharmaceutical care in an Irish hospital: uncontrolled before-after study.

Tamasine C Grimes, Evelyn Deasy, Ann Allen, John O'Byrne, Tim Delaney, John Barragry, Niall Breslin, Eddie Moloney, Catherine Wall

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Tamasine C GrimesPharmacy Department, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland.
Evelyn DeasyPharmacy Department, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland.
Ann AllenPharmacy Department, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
John O'ByrnePharmacy Department, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Tim DelaneyPharmacy Department, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
John BarragryMedical Directorate, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Niall BreslinMedical Directorate, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Eddie MoloneyMedical Directorate, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Catherine WallMedical Directorate, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Tallaght University Hospital · IETrinity College Dublin · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe investigated the benefits of the Collaborative Pharmaceutical Care in Tallaght Hospital (PACT) service versus standard ward-based clinical pharmacy in adult inpatients receiving acute medical care, particularly on prevalence of medication error and quality of prescribing.

methodsUncontrolled before-after study, undertaken in consecutive adult medical inpatients admitted and discharged alive, using at least three medications. Standard care involved clinical pharmacists being ward-based, contributing to medication history taking and prescription review, but not involved at discharge. The innovative PACT intervention involved clinical pharmacists being team-based, leading admission and discharge medication reconciliation and undertaking prescription review. Primary outcome measures were prevalence per patient of medication error and potentially severe error. Secondary measures included quality of prescribing using the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) in patients aged ≥65 years.

findingsSome 233 patients (112 PACT, 121 standard) were included. PACT decreased the prevalence of any medication error at discharge (adjusted OR 0.07 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.15)); number needed to treat (NNT) 3 (95% CI 2 to 3) and no PACT patient experienced a potentially severe error (NNT 20, 95% CI 10 to 142). In patients aged ≥65 years (n=108), PACT improved the MAI score from preadmission to discharge (Mann-Whitney U p<0.05; PACT median -1, IQR -3.75 to 0; standard care median +1, IQR -1 to +6).

conclusionsPACT, a collaborative model of pharmaceutical care involving medication reconciliation and review, delivered by clinical pharmacists and physicians, at admission, during inpatient care and at discharge was protective against potentially severe medication errors in acute medical patients and improved the quality of prescribing in older patients.

Indexed as

Interprofessional RelationsAgedCooperative BehaviorFemaleHumansIrelandMaleMedication ErrorsMedication ReconciliationMedication Systems, HospitalMiddle AgedOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePharmacistsPharmacy Service, HospitalPhysiciansMedication reconciliationMedication safetyPharmacistsTeamworkTransitions in care

Identifiers

PMID24505112
PMCPMC4078714
OpenAlexW2153216598

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.