ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2017
Pharmacist intervention acceptance for the reduction of potentially inappropriate drug prescribing in acute psychiatry.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prescriber Implementation of STOPP/START Recommendations for Hospitalised Older Adults: A Comparison of a Pharmacist Approach and a Physician Approach.Drugs & aging · 2019Trial
- The impact of the bedside check of medication appropriateness (BED-CMA) at the hematology ward: a mixed-methods study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
- The Treatment of Psychotic and Bipolar Disorders Within the South African Context: Perspectives of a Clinical Pharmacist.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of a pharmacist-led tele-psychiatric clinic in managing drug-related problems.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2025Article
- Multidisciplinary medication review during older patient hospitalization according to STOPP/START criteria reduces potentially inappropriate prescriptions: MoPIM cohort study.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Implementation and evaluation of STOPP/START criteria to address polypharmacy in older adults in an inpatient psychiatric setting.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2023Article
- An Intervention Program to Reduce Medication-Related Problems Among Polymedicated Home-Dwelling Older Adults (OptiMed): Protocol for a Pre-Post, Multisite, Pilot, and Feasibility Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Reviewing Potentially Inappropriate Medication in Hospitalized Patients Over 65 Using Explicit Criteria: A Systematic Literature Review.Drug, healthcare and patient safety · 2021Review
- Impact of Pharmaceutical Interventions in Hospitalized Patients: A Comparative Study Between Clinical Pharmacists and an Explicit Criteria-Based Tool.Current therapeutic research, clinical and experimental · 2021Article
- Impact of pharmacists on outcomes for patients with psychiatric or neurologic disorders.The mental health clinician · 2020Article
- Using Deprescribing Practices and the Screening Tool of Older Persons' Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions Criteria to Reduce Harm and Preventable Adverse Drug Events in Older Adults.Journal of patient safety · 2020Article
- Polypharmacy Among Home-Dwelling Older Adults: The Urgent Need for an Evidence-Based Medication Management Model.Patient preference and adherence · 2019Article
- Validation of pharmacist-physician collaboration in psychiatry: 'the Eichberger-model'.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2018Article
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
Background Prescribing for the elderly is challenging. A previous observational study conducted in our geriatric psychiatry admission unit (GPAU) using STOPP/START criteria showed a high number of potentially inappropriate drug prescriptions (PIDPs). A clinical pharmacist was added to our GPAU as a strategy to reduce PIDPs. Objective The objective of the present study was to assess the impact of a clinical pharmacist on PIDPs by measuring acceptance rates of pharmacist interventions (PhIs). Setting This study was conducted at the GPAU of Lausanne University Hospital. Method The clinical pharmacist attended four GPAU meetings weekly. Complete medication reviews were performed daily. The clinical pharmacist conducted standard analyses based on clinical judgment and STOPP/START criteria assessment. A PhI was generated when a PIDP was detected. When a PhI was accepted, the PIDP was considered as eliminated. Acceptance rate of PhI was calculated (number of PhI accepted/total number of PhI). Main outcome measure PhIs acceptance rates. Results In a cohort of 102 patients seen between July 2013 and February 2014, a total of 697 PhIs (average 6.8/patient) were made based on standard evaluation (n = 479) and STOPP/START criteria (n = 243). The global acceptance rate was 68% (standard, 78%; STOPP/START, 47%). Conclusion Good PhIs acceptance rates demonstrated that a clinical pharmacist can reduce PIDPs in a GPAU. PhIs based on standard evaluation had a higher acceptance than those based on STOPP/START criteria, probably because they are better adapted to individual patients. However, these two evaluation approaches can be used in a complementary manner.
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.