Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30305634›Full record

ArticleNPJ primary care respiratory medicine2018

A non-randomised controlled pilot study of clinical pharmacist collaborative intervention for community dwelling patients with COPD.

Vicki Hunt, Dave Anderson, Richard Lowrie, Colette Montgomery Sardar, Susan Ballantyne, Graeme Bryson, John Kyle, Peter Hanlon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ primary care respiratory medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

8 authors.

Vicki HuntEast Renfrewshire Health and Social Care Partnership Eastwood Health and Care Centre, Drumby Crescent, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Dave AndersonThe New Victoria Infirmary, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Richard LowriePharmacy and Prescribing Support Unit, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, G3 8SJ, United Kingdom. Richard.Lowrie@ggc.scot.nhs.uk.
Colette Montgomery SardarPharmacy and Prescribing Support Unit, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, G3 8SJ, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3379-5220
Susan BallantynePrescribing Support Pharmacy Team, North East Glasgow HSCP, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Graeme BrysonGlasgow City Health and Social Care Partnership, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
John KyleGeneral Practice and Primary Care Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Peter HanlonGeneral Practice and Primary Care Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

UK, home-based patients with COPD receive specialist care from respiratory physicians, nurses, and general practitioners (GPs), but increasing complexity of therapeutic options and a GP/Nurse workforce crisis suggests merit in testing the role of home visits by a clinical pharmacist. We conducted a non-randomised intervention study with a contemporaneous comparator group, in Glasgow (Scotland). A clinical pharmacist (working closely with a consultant respiratory physician) visited patients with COPD living at home, assessing respiratory and other co-morbid conditions, and medicines then, with patient approval, agreed treatment modifications with a consultant physician. Comparator group-patients were drawn from another hospital out-patient clinic. Main outcomes were exacerbations during 4-months of follow-up and respiratory hospitalisations (number and duration) after 1 year. In the intervention group, 86 patients received a median of three home visits; 87 received usual care (UC). At baseline, patients in the intervention group were similar to those in UC in terms of respiratory hospitalisations although slightly younger, more likely to receive specific maintenance antibiotics/Prednisolone and to have had exacerbations. Sixty-two (72.1%) of the intervention group received dose changes; 45 (52.3%) had medicines stopped/started and 21 (24.4%) received an expedited review at the specialist respiratory consultant clinic; 46 (53.5%) were referred to other healthcare services. Over one-third were referred for bone scans and 11% received additional investigations. At follow-up, 54 (63.5%) of intervention group participants had an exacerbation compared with 75 (86.2%) in the UC group (p = 0.001); fewer had respiratory hospitalisations (39 (45.3%) vs. 66 (76.7%); p < 0.001). Hospitalisations were shorter in the intervention group. Pharmacist-consultant care for community dwelling patients with COPD, changed clinical management and improved outcomes. A randomised controlled trial would establish causality.

Indexed as

Community Pharmacy ServicesIndependent LivingAgedFemaleHumansMaleNon-Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicPilot ProjectsPulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive

Identifiers

PMID30305634
PMCPMC6180130

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.