ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2014
Evaluation of a Danish pharmacist student-physician medication review collaboration model.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ambulatory Care Pharmacist Perception of Formulary Medication Shortage: Tertiary Center Experience.Hospital pharmacy · 2022Article
- Over-the-counter medicines, economic conditions, and citizens most in need in Greece: Is it a challenge for primary care research?Currents in pharmacy teaching & learning · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterprofessional collaboration between pharmacists and physicians to conduct joint home medication reviews (HMR) is important for optimizing the medical treatment of patients suffering from chronic illnesses. However, collaboration has proved difficult to achieve. The HMR programme "Medisam" was launched in 2009 at the University of Copenhagen with the aim of "developing, implementing and evaluating a collaboration model for HMRs and medicine reconciliations in Denmark". The Medisam programme involves patients, pharmacy internship students, the (pharmacist) supervisor of the pharmacy students and physicians.
objectiveTo explore if it was possible through the Medisam programme to obtain a fruitful HMR collaboration between pharmacy internship students and physicians as a means to develop HMR collaboration between trained pharmacists and physicians further.
settingTen matching pairs of student-physician collaboration were studied across Denmark.
methodSemi-structured interviews about existing collaboration were conducted with pharmacy internship students in the HMR programme, their supervisors and physicians partners. The theoretical framework forming the analyses was derived especially from works of Bradley et al. (Res Soc Adm Pharm 8:36-46, 2012), and Snyder et al. (Res Soc Adm Pharm 6:307-23, 2010) on pharmacists/physician collaboration.
main outcome measureThe development of inter-professional collaboration between students and physicians according to the three collaboration drivers: trustworthiness, role specification and professional interaction.
resultsFull collaboration was not achieved. Physicians found collaboration satisfactory, students however expressed the need of more interaction with physicians. The written collaboration contracts did not ensure a possible need of students to re-negotiate roles and tasks, and did therefore not entirely ensure role specification. Developing mutual professional interdependence through students being recognized by physicians to contribute to improved patient outcomes was also limited.
conclusionSome challenges to fruitful collaboration were identified. Solutions to these challenges include students and their pharmacist supervisors to find ways to present their collaborative needs to physicians and for students to illustrate more explicitly the benefits patient achieve if physicians implement the recommendations of students.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24771414What OpenQuestion holds
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.