ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2016
Evaluating patients' comprehensibility of a standardized medication plan.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- The evidence for pharmacist care in outpatients with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.ESC heart failure · 2021Pooled it
- Benefits of medication charts provided at transitions of care: a narrative systematic review.BMJ open · 2020Pooled it
- Pharmacy-Based Approach to Improving Heart Failure Medication Use by Older Adults with Limited Health Literacy: Learning from Interdisciplinary Experience.Drugs & aging · 2018Trial
- How to handle polypharmacy in heart failure. A clinical consensus statement of the Heart Failure Association of the ESC.European journal of heart failure · 2025Review
- [Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy in old age].Herz · 2023Article
- Development and evaluation of pharmacist-provided teach-back medication counselling at hospital discharge.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Article
- Patients' Use of a Standardized Medication List - A Mixed Methods Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Article
- Improving Primary Care Medication Processes by Using Shared Electronic Medication Plans in Switzerland: Lessons Learned From a Participatory Action Research Study.JMIR formative research · 2021Article
- [How complete is the Germany-wide standardised medication list ("Bundeseinheitlicher Medikationsplan")? An analysis at hospital admission.]Deutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2020Article
- Adherence to tamoxifen in breast cancer patients: What role does the pharmacist play in German primary care?Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPCArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeA standardized medication plan for patients has been developed and recently enacted into German law depicting all medicines taken. It can only increase medication safety if patients use and understand it. We evaluated patients' comprehensibility of the medication plan and analyzed potential variables influencing patients' understanding.
methodsThe medication plan template v2.0 was first tested in N = 40 patients, and the "Evaluation Tool to test the handling of the Medication Plan" (ET-MP) was developed, rating patients' understanding from 0 to 100 %. The cut-off, distinguishing if patients understand the medication plan, was set at 90 %. The ET-MP was then applied to an amended medication plan questioning N = 40 general internal medicine (GIM) and N = 50 patients with chronic heart failure (CHF).
resultsThe mean (± standard deviation (SD)) age of the study cohort was 69 ± 13 years, 47 % female. Patients took 8 ± 3 drugs chronically. The CHF patients had a lower level of education compared to the GIM group (p = 0.004). The overall ET-MP score was 82 ± 21 % (GIM 86 ± 19 %, CHF 78 ± 23 %; p = 0.16). Forty-three percent achieved a score >90 %. A moderate correlation was found between the ET-MP score and the level of education (r = 0.45) and age (r = -0.46), respectively (both p < 0.001). Cognitively impaired CHF patients (p = 0.03) and patients with advanced CHF (p = 0.006) achieved a lower ET-MP score. In the CHF cohort, signs of depression or a lower level of self-care behaviour were not associated with a lower ET-MP score.
conclusionThe ET-MP is suitable to explore patients' understanding of a medication plan. Less than 50 % of the patients reached a score above 90 %. Higher age and lower level of education but not the diagnosis of CHF seem to correlate with impaired understanding of the standardized medication plan. In addition to a medication plan, a significant number of patients are in need of further and continuous care to improve medication safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.