ArticleJournal of primary care & community health
Impact of a Pharmacist-Provided Spirometry Service on Access to Results in a Primary Care Setting.
Article in Journal of primary care & community health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacist Provided Spirometry Services: A Scoping Review.Integrated pharmacy research & practice · 2021Article
- Pharmacist-Driven Spirometry Screening to Target High-Risk Patients in a Primary Care Setting.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe primary objective of this study was to determine the effect of a pharmacist-provided spirometry service within a federally qualified health center on the percentage of spirometry referrals completed with results reviewed by the ordering provider. Secondary objectives evaluated differences between internal and external referrals, medication recommendations made by the pharmacist, and revenue brought in by the service.
methodsChart reviews were completed to determine the referral completion rates between patients who received a spirometry referral before (December 2014-September 2015) and after (January 2016-October 2016) the implementation of the pharmacy-provided spirometry service. Chart reviews were also used to determine the number and completion rate among referrals for internal and external services in the postimplementation time frame. Chart reviews also assessed medication recommendations made by the pharmacist.
resultsThe results demonstrate an increase in referral completion rate from 38.1% to 47.0% ( P = .08) between the pre- and postimplementation time frames. In the postimplementation time frame, there was a statistically significant difference in the percentage of referrals completed between in-house referrals and external referrals (70.0% and 40.9%, respectively, P = .0004). Comparing clinics with and without the spirometry service, there was a statistically significant difference in the total number of spirometry referrals (1.13% and 0.59%, respectively, P < .0001) and the percent of referrals completed (0.55% and 0.27%, respectively, P = .0002).
conclusionThe results suggest that offering spirometry within the primary care setting helps to increase the rate of completed spirometry tests with results available to the primary care provider. Additionally, the results show that there is an increased completion rate in patients who receive an internal spirometry referral, which may be due to reduced barriers in obtaining this testing. Overall, these results demonstrate that providing spirometry in the primary care setting helps to increase spirometry results obtained and could be beneficial in other primary care settings.
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.