Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27052212›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2016

Implications of a clinical medication review and a pharmaceutical care plan of polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder.

Marlies M E Geurts, Roy E Stewart, Jacobus R B J Brouwers, Pieter A de Graeff, Johan J de Gier

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Adoption of clinical pharmacist roles in primary care: longitudinal evidence from English general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Impact of pharmaceutical care on mental well-being and perceived health among community-dwelling individuals with type 2 diabetes.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2019
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marlies M E GeurtsDepartment Pharmacotherapy and Pharmaceutical Care, University of Groningen, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Roy E StewartDepartment Community and Occupational Health, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Jacobus R B J BrouwersDepartment Pharmacotherapy and Pharmaceutical Care, University of Groningen, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Pieter A de GraeffDepartment Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Johan J de GierDepartment Pharmacotherapy and Pharmaceutical Care, University of Groningen, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV, Groningen, The Netherlands. j.j.de.gier@rug.nl.
University of Groningen · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background A clinical medication review, including patient involvement, is expected to improve pharmaceutical care. Objective To determine whether a clinical medication review followed by a pharmaceutical care plan decreases the number of potential drug-related problems (DRPs) and pharmaceutical care issues (PCIs) and leads to a positive effect on relevant clinical and laboratory parameters for elderly cardiovascular patients with multiple drug use. Setting Randomized controlled trial in eight primary care settings in the Netherlands. Method Elderly polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder were randomized into two groups. Intervention patients received a clinical medication review, followed by a pharmaceutical care plan developed in cooperation between these patients' pharmacists and general practitioners (GPs), and agreed to by the patients. Control patients received care as usual. Patient data were collected at the start of the study (t = 0) and after 1-year follow-up (t = 1). Main outcome measure Decrease in potential DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs, improvement of clinical and laboratory parameters. Results 512 patients were included. An average of 2.2 potential DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs were defined per patient in the intervention group. After 1-year follow-up, 47.2 % of potential DRPs and PCIs were resolved. In total, 156 care interventions were proposed (0.9/patient), 108 of which were implemented after 1 year (69.2 %). For control-group patients, a total of 47 proposed care interventions were documented for 255 patients (0.2/patient); after 1 year, 43 had been implemented (91.5 %). The study intervention (p < 0.001) and the number of medicines used (p = 0.030) had a significant effect on the number of interventions proposed. Small biochemical changes in cardiovascular risk factors did occur, but the differences were small and not considered clinically relevant. Conclusion The integrated use of a clinical medication review with a pharmaceutical care plan in a primary care setting supports the detection of and decrease in DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs in almost half of the patients. Its benefit in terms of control of cardiovascular risk factors and safety parameters was relatively low. Risk stratification might be necessary to decide which patients might benefit most from this type of intervention.

Indexed as

AgedCardiovascular DiseasesCommunity Pharmacy ServicesDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsDrug Utilization ReviewFemaleHumansMaleNetherlandsPharmaceutical ServicesPolypharmacyPrimary Health CareTreatment OutcomeCommunity pharmacyNetherlandsPharmaceutical carePharmacist consultationPharmacy practicePolypharmacySafety

Identifiers

PMID27052212
PMCPMC4929171
OpenAlexW2334148135

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.