Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27708675›Full record

ArticleCanadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC2016

Uptake of the MedsCheck annual medication review service in Ontario community pharmacies between 2007 and 2013.

Lisa Dolovich, Giulia Consiglio, Linda MacKeigan, Lusine Abrahamyan, Petros Pechlivanoglou, Valeria E Rac, Nedzad Pojskic, Elizabeth A Bojarski, Jiandong Su, Murray Krahn and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Community pharmacy Medicines Use Review: current challenges.Integrated pharmacy research & practice · 2017
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Community pharmacists' experiences with the Saskatchewan Medication Assessment Program.Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Follow-up in community pharmacy should be routine, not extraordinary.Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lisa DolovichDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton (Dolovich).
Giulia ConsiglioDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton (Dolovich).
Linda MacKeiganDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton (Dolovich).
Lusine AbrahamyanDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton (Dolovich).
Petros PechlivanoglouDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton (Dolovich).
Valeria E RacDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton (Dolovich).
Nedzad PojskicDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton (Dolovich).
Elizabeth A BojarskiDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton (Dolovich).
Jiandong SuDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton (Dolovich).
Murray KrahnDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton (Dolovich).
Suzanne M CadaretteDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton (Dolovich).
University of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedsCheck Annual (MCA) is an Ontario government-funded medication review service for individuals taking 3 or more prescription medications for chronic conditions.

methodsThis cohort study analyzed linked administrative claims data from April 1, 2007, to March 31, 2013. Trends in MCA claims and recipient characteristics were examined.

resultsA total of 1,498,440 Ontarians (55% seniors, 55% female) received an MCA. One-third (36%) had 2 or more MCAs within 6 years. Service provision increased over time, with a sharper increase from 2010 onward. Almost half of Ontario pharmacies made at least 1 MCA claim in the first month of the program. Hypertension, respiratory disease, diabetes, psychiatric conditions and arthritis were common comorbidities. Recipients older than 65 years were most commonly dispensed an antihypertensive and/or antihyperlipidemic drug in the prior year and received an average of 11 unique prescription medications. Thirty-eight percent of recipients visited an emergency department or were hospitalized in the year prior to their first MCA. DISCUSSION: Over the first 6 years of the program, approximately 1 in 9 Ontarians received an MCA. There was rapid and widespread uptake of the service. Common chronic conditions were well represented among MCA recipients. Older MCA recipients had less emergency department use compared with population-based estimates.

conclusionsMedication reviews increased over time; however, the number of persons receiving the service more than once was low. Service delivery was generally consistent with program eligibility; however, there are some findings possibly consistent with delivery to less complex patients.

Identifiers

PMID27708675
PMCPMC5032934
OpenAlexW2518396779

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.