Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27871324›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2016

Factors affecting the delivery of community pharmacist-led medication reviews: evidence from the MedsCheck annual service in Ontario.

Petros Pechlivanoglou, Lusine Abrahamyan, Linda MacKeigan, Giulia P Consiglio, Lisa Dolovich, Ping Li, Suzanne M Cadarette, Valeria E Rac, Jonghyun Shin, Murray Krahn

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06274710 (Open Access Digital CommunitY Promoting Self-Care, Peer Support, and HEalth LitEracy), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT06274710 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Open Access Digital CommunitY Promoting Self-Care, Peer Support, and HEalth LitEracy (ODYSSEE) for Kidney Health (KH) Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Health Network, TorontoRan2023 to 2026Enrolled344ConditionsChronic Kidney DiseasesArmsODYSSEE-KH
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Community pharmacists' experiences with the Saskatchewan Medication Assessment Program.Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC
    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

10 authors.

Petros PechlivanoglouToronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaborative, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. petros.pechlivanoglou@sickkids.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-5090-7936
Lusine AbrahamyanToronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaborative, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Linda MacKeiganLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Giulia P ConsiglioLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Lisa DolovichLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Ping LiInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences , Toronto, ON, Canada.
Suzanne M CadaretteLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Valeria E RacToronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaborative, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Jonghyun ShinLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Murray KrahnToronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaborative, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedication reviews have become part of pharmacy practice across developed countries. This study aimed to identify factors affecting the likelihood of eligible Ontario seniors receiving a pharmacy-led medication review called MedsCheck annual (MCA).

methodsWe designed a cohort study using a random sample of pharmacy claims for MCA-eligible Ontario seniors using linked administrative data from April 2012 to March 2013. Guided by a conceptual framework, we constructed a generalized-estimating-equations model to estimate the effect of patient, pharmacy and community factors on the likelihood of receiving MCA.

resultsOf the 2,878,958 eligible claim-dates, 65,605 included an MCA. Compared to eligible individuals who did not receive an MCA, recipients were more likely to have a prior MCA (OR = 3.03), receive a new medication on the claim-date (OR = 1.78), be hypertensive (OR = 1.18) or have a recent hospitalization (OR = 1.07). MCA recipients had fewer medications (e.g., OR = 0.44 for ≥12 medications versus 0-4 medications), and were less likely to receive an MCA in a rural (OR = 0.74) or high-volume pharmacy (OR = 0.65).

conclusionsThe most important determinant of receiving an MCA was having had a prior MCA. Overall, MCA recipients were healthier, younger, urban-dwelling, and taking fewer medications than non-recipients. Policies regarding current and future medication review programs may need to evolve to ensure that those at greatest need receive timely and comprehensive medication reviews.

Indexed as

Medication Therapy ManagementPharmaceutical ServicesPharmaciesAgedAged, 80 and overCohort StudiesDrug Utilization ReviewFemaleHumansHypertensionMaleNational Health ProgramsOntarioPolypharmacySocioeconomic FactorsCommunityElderlyMedication reviewPharmacyPredictors

Identifiers

PMID27871324
PMCPMC5117572

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.