Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28241789›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2017

Nurses' and pharmacists' learning experiences from participating in interprofessional medication reviews for elderly in primary health care - a qualitative study.

H T Bell, A G Granas, I Enmarker, R Omli, A Steinsbekk

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Characterizing Research About Interprofessional Education Within Pharmacy.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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 4 institutions in 2 countries.

H T BellDepartment of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Nord University, Namsos, Norway. hege.t.bell@nord.no.
A G GranasSchool of Pharmacy, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
I EnmarkerCentre for Care research Mid- Norway, Steinkjer, Norway.
R OmliDepartment of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Nord University, Namsos, Norway.
A SteinsbekkDepartment of Public Health and General Practice, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Norwegian University of Science and Technology · NONord University · NORuralis - Institute for Rural and Regional Research · NOUniversity of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTraditionally, drug prescription and follow up have been the sole responsibility of physicians. However, interprofessional medication reviews (IMRs) have been developed to prevent drug discrepancies and patient harm especially for elderly patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity. What participating nurses and pharmacists learn from each other during IMR is poorly studied. The aim of this study was to investigate nurses' and pharmacists' perceived learning experience after participating in IMRs in primary health care for up to two years.

methodsA qualitative study with semi-structured focus group interviews and telephone interviews with nurses and pharmacists with experience from IMRs in nursing homes and home based services. The data was analysed thematically by using systematic text condensation.

resultsThirteen nurses and four pharmacists were interviewed. They described some challenges concerning how to ensure participation of all three professions and how to get thorough information about the patient. As expected, both professions talked of an increased awareness with time of the benefit of working as a team and the perception of contributing to better and more individual care. The nurses' perception of the pharmacist changed from being a controller of drug management routines towards being a source of pharmacotherapy knowledge and a discussant partner of appropriate drug therapy in the elderly. The pharmacists became more aware of the nurses' crucial role of providing clinical information about the patient to enable individual advice. Increasingly the nurses learned to link the patient's symptoms of effect and side effect to the drugs prescribed.

conclusionsAlthough experiencing challenges in conducting IMRs, the nurses and pharmacists had learning experiences they said improved both their own practice and the quality of drug management. There are some challenges concerning how to ensure participation of all three professions and how to get thorough information about the patient.

Indexed as

Nurse's RolePolypharmacyProfessional RoleQualitative ResearchAgedDrug PrescriptionsFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMalePharmacistsPhysiciansPrimary Health CareProblem-Based LearningInappropriate drug useLearningMedication reviewNursePharmacistPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID28241789
PMCPMC5330158
OpenAlexW2593615654

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.