Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30666611›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2019

Pharmacist-led academic detailing intervention in primary care: a mixed methods feasibility study.

David O Riordan, Eimir Hurley, Carol Sinnott, Rose Galvin, Kieran Dalton, Patricia M Kearney, James D Halpin, Stephen Byrne

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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.

David O RiordanPharmaceutical Care Research Group, Cavanagh Pharmacy Building, School of Pharmacy, University College Cork, College Road, Cork, Republic of Ireland. davidoriordan@ucc.ie.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6367-8383
Eimir HurleyCentre for Health Policy and Management, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Republic of Ireland.
Carol SinnottThe Healthcare Improvement Studies (THIS) Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Rose GalvinDepartment of Clinical Therapies, Health Research Institute, University of Limerick, Limerick, Republic of Ireland.
Kieran DaltonPharmaceutical Care Research Group, Cavanagh Pharmacy Building, School of Pharmacy, University College Cork, College Road, Cork, Republic of Ireland.
Patricia M KearneySchool of Public Health, University College Cork, Cork, Republic of Ireland.
James D HalpinDepartment of Elderly Medicine, University Hospital Limerick, Limerick, Republic of Ireland.
Stephen ByrnePharmaceutical Care Research Group, Cavanagh Pharmacy Building, School of Pharmacy, University College Cork, College Road, Cork, Republic of Ireland.

Funding

Health Research Board SPHeRE/2013/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Academic detailing is a form of continuing medical education in which a trained health professional such as a physician or pharmacist visits prescribers in their practice to provide evidence-based information. While academic detailing has been adopted in other countries, this strategy is not routinely used in Ireland. Objective The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability to General Practitioners (GPs) of a pharmacist-led academic detailing intervention in Ireland. Setting General Practice in County Cork, Ireland. Method A mixed methods feasibility study comprising a pharmacist-led academic detailing intervention on urinary incontinence in older people, quantitative data from patient medical records, and qualitative data from focus groups with GPs. The medical records for all patients aged ≥ 65 years who were attending a participating GP with a diagnosis of urinary incontinence were analysed using a before-after approach. The measures of prescribing assessed before and after the intervention were: LUTS-FORTA criteria, Drug Burden Index, and the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden scale. Focus groups were carried out with GPs who participated in the academic detailing intervention. Main outcome measure The quantitative prescribing patterns of the GPs and their qualitative responses from the focus groups. Results Twenty-three GPs participated in the academic detailing intervention from a selection of different types of general practice. The medical records of 154 patients were analysed. There was minimal or no change in any of the prescribing measures used. Fourteen GPs attended focus groups. GPs considered the topic of urinary incontinence as relevant to general practice. Participants appreciated the succinct nature of the information in the educational materials but expressed a preference for a more easily retrievable format, such as an online version rather than paper-based. Conclusion This study demonstrated that a pharmacist-led academic detailing intervention was acceptable to GPs in Ireland. Further research is needed in a larger population evaluating the impact and cost effectiveness of academic detailing to optimise patient care.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelPharmacistsProfessional RoleAgedAged, 80 and overEducation, Medical, ContinuingElectronic Health RecordsFeasibility StudiesFemaleFocus GroupsGeneral PractitionersHumansIrelandMalePractice Patterns, Physicians'Primary Health CareDrug prescriptionsEvidence-based educationInterprofessional relationsIrelandPractice patternsPrimary careQuality improvement

Identifiers

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.