Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27783313›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2016

The status of the performance of medication reviews in German community pharmacies and assessment of the practical performance.

Claudia Greißing, Katharina Kössler, Johanna Freyer, Lucie Hüter, Peter Buchal, Susanne Schiek, Thilo Bertsche

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article 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 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors.

Claudia GreißingPharmacy Department, Klinikum Konstanz, Luisenstraße 7, 78464, Constance, Germany.
Katharina KösslerPharmacy Department, Klinikum Konstanz, Luisenstraße 7, 78464, Constance, Germany.
Johanna FreyerDrug Safety Center, Leipzig University and University Hospital of Leipzig, Eilenburger Straße 15a, 04317, Leipzig, Germany.
Lucie HüterDrug Safety Center, Leipzig University and University Hospital of Leipzig, Eilenburger Straße 15a, 04317, Leipzig, Germany.
Peter BuchalPharmacy Department, Klinikum Konstanz, Luisenstraße 7, 78464, Constance, Germany.
Susanne SchiekDrug Safety Center, Leipzig University and University Hospital of Leipzig, Eilenburger Straße 15a, 04317, Leipzig, Germany.
Thilo BertscheDrug Safety Center, Leipzig University and University Hospital of Leipzig, Eilenburger Straße 15a, 04317, Leipzig, Germany. thilo.bertsche@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Pharmacist-led medication reviews have shown to prevent drug-related problems (DRPs). So far, data is rare about the implementation in routine care, the conditions for intensifying this service and the practical skills of community pharmacists to perform medication reviews. Objective To assess the current status of medication review implementation in German community pharmacies and the performance of identifying DRPs in a ficticious patient example. Setting German community pharmacies. Method An online survey was conducted from July to September 2015 including questions about medication reviews currently performed in routine care of community pharmacies and hidden DRPs in a ficticious patient example. Pharmacists were invited via newsletters from three local chambers of pharmacists. Main outcome measure (i) Frequency, conditions for implementation, and criteria of medication reviews currently being performed in routine care, (ii) requested further information to perform medication reviews, and (iii) proportion of pharmacists who identify DRPs in the patient example. Results A total of 143 community pharmacists completed the questionnaire. (i) One hundred and twenty-seven respondents (89 %) reported reviewing the medication regularly in routine care, whereas 56 (39 %) stated that they performed medication reviews between one and five times monthly. For 124 pharmacists (87 %), remuneration would be a necessary condition for performing medication reviews more frequently. When reviewing the medication, 112 (78 %) of the pharmacists considered the criterion 'drug-drug interactions' and 107 (75 %) reviewed the criterion 'correct dosage'. One of the least reviewed criteria was 'effectiveness of medication' [22 (16 %)]. (ii) According to the participants, laboratory values should be available in the community pharmacy, since 87/143 (61 %) would appreciate the GFR and the HbA1c level. Twenty-two of 54 respondents (41 %) would appreciate further administration instructions and 5 of 54 (15 %) think they would benefit from information about the recommended duration of drug use. (iii) Depending on the category, 4 (3 %) to 49 (34 %) of all 143 pharmacists identified the hidden DRP in the patient example. Conclusion German community pharmacists reported reviewing the medication of their patients regularly; however, most of the respondents review the medication very rarely in routine care. Consequently, their practical performance needs to be improved.

Indexed as

Professional RoleSurveys and QuestionnairesCommunity Pharmacy ServicesFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMedication Therapy ManagementPharmacistsCommunity pharmacistsDrug-related problemsGermanyImplementationMedication reviewOnline questionnairePractical performance

Identifiers

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.