Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30249610›Full record

Observational studyThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2018

Releasing GP capacity with pharmacy prescribing support and New Ways of Working: a prospective observational cohort study.

Margaret Maskrey, Chris F Johnson, Jason Cormack, Margaret Ryan, Hector Macdonald

Open access · bronzeAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. GPs' and pharmacists' views of integrating pharmacists into general practices: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. BMJ open · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Medication adherence and clinical outcomes in dispensing and non-dispensing practices: a cross-sectional analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Delegating home visits in general practice: a realist review on the impact on GP workload and patient care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020
    Review
  20. Skill-mix change in general practice: a qualitative comparison of three 'new' non-medical roles in English primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Margaret MaskreyInverclyde Health and Social Care Partnership, Port Glasgow Health Centre, Port Glasgow.
Chris F JohnsonWest Glasgow Ambulatory Care Hospital, Glasgow.
Jason CormackWest Glasgow Ambulatory Care Hospital, Glasgow.
Margaret RyanWest Glasgow Ambulatory Care Hospital, Glasgow.
Hector MacdonaldInverclyde Health and Social Care Partnership, Greenock.
Glasgow Life · GBGlasgow Centre for Population Health · GBInverclyde Royal Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGeneral practice in the UK is experiencing a workforce crisis. However, it is unknown what impact prescribing support teams may have on freeing up GP capacity and time for clinical activities.

aimTo release GP time by providing additional prescribing resources to support general practices between April 2016 and March 2017. DESIGN AND

settingProspective observational cohort study in 16 urban general practices that comprise Inverclyde Health and Social Care Partnership in Scotland.

methodGPs recorded the time they spent dealing with special requests, immediate discharges, outpatient requests, and other prescribing issues for 2 weeks prior to the study and for two equivalent periods during the study. Specialist clinical pharmacists performed these key prescribing activities to release GP time and Read coded their activities. GP and practice staff were surveyed to assess their expectations at baseline and their experiences during the final data-collection period. Prescribing support staff were also surveyed during the study period.

resultsGP time spent on key prescribing activities significantly reduced by 51% (79 hours,

conclusionSpecialist clinical pharmacists are safe and effective in supporting GPs and practices with key prescribing activities in order to directly free GP capacity. However, further work is required to assess the impact of such service developments on prescribing cost-efficiency and clinical pharmacist medication review work.

Indexed as

General PracticeGeneral PractitionersPharmacistsAttitude of Health PersonnelCapacity BuildingCommunity Pharmacy ServicesHealth Services ResearchHumansPatient SafetyPatient SatisfactionProspective StudiesScotlandgeneral practicepharmacistsprescribing supportprimary careservice development

Identifiers

PMID30249610
PMCPMC6146005
OpenAlexW2893417257

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.