Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29404780›Full record

Observational studyInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2018

Pharmaceutical interventions on prescribed medicines in community pharmacies: focus on patient-reported problems.

Karen A Maes, Kurt E Hersberger, Markus L Lampert

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05348538 (Feasibility Study of the Medication Review With Follow up Service for Patients With Polypharmacy in Swiss Community Pharmacies), 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.

NCT05348538 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Feasibility Study of the Medication Review With Follow up Service for Patients With Polypharmacy in Swiss Community Pharmacies

TypeinterventionalSponsorCenter for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisante), University of Lausanne, SwitzerlandRan2023 to 2024Enrolled162ConditionsChronic DiseaseArmsMedication review with follow up or MaJ? for the acronym in french
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  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

3 authors.

Karen A MaesPharmaceutical Care Research Group, Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Basel, Klingelbergstrasse 50, 4056, Basel, Switzerland. karen.maes@unibas.ch.
Kurt E HersbergerPharmaceutical Care Research Group, Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Basel, Klingelbergstrasse 50, 4056, Basel, Switzerland.
Markus L LampertPharmaceutical Care Research Group, Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Basel, Klingelbergstrasse 50, 4056, Basel, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background While dispensing prescribed medicines, pharmacists frequently encounter technical and clinical problems that require a pharmaceutical intervention. Objective To describe the pharmaceutical interventions performed by community pharmacists while dispensing prescribed medicines and to investigate, in-depth, the patient-reported problems with the prescribed medicines that triggered pharmaceutical interventions. Method Twenty-one pharmacists each collected 30 prescriptions requiring a pharmaceutical intervention on five selected days within a five-week period. All pharmaceutical interventions were classified using the PharmDISC system. Results Of all 430 pharmaceutical interventions, 286 (66.5%) pharmaceutical interventions had a clinical cause and 144 (33.5%) pharmaceutical interventions a technical cause. Pharmacists mainly intervened to substitute a drug (n = 132, 30.7%), adjust a dose (n = 57, 13.3%), and clarify/complete information (n = 48, 11.2%). A total of 243 (56.5%) pharmaceutical interventions resulted in a change of the prescription. The implementation rate of pharmaceutical interventions reached 88.6%. Altogether, patient-reported problems triggered 99 (23.0%) pharmaceutical interventions. In 15 (15.2%) of these PIs, contact with the prescriber was necessary, whereas 61 (84.8%) PIs only involved the pharmacist. Conclusion While dispensing prescribed medicines, pharmacists performed individualised pharmaceutical interventions to solve or prevent drug-related problems. That almost a quarter of all pharmaceutical interventions triggered by patient-reported problems highlights the importance of direct patient-pharmacist interaction when dispensing prescribed medicines.

Indexed as

Professional RoleCommunity Pharmacy ServicesHumansMedication ErrorsPharmacistsPrescription DrugsProspective StudiesSelf ReportSwitzerlandPrescription DrugsClassification systemCommunity pharmacy practiceDrug-related problemPharmaceutical carePharmaceutical interventionSwitzerland

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.