Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31053135›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

Qualitative and quantitative research of medication review and drug-related problems in Hungarian community pharmacies: a pilot study.

András Szilvay, Orsolya Somogyi, Attiláné Meskó, Romána Zelkó, Balázs Hankó

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Quantitative Analysis of the Vitamin DPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Assessment of Pharmacists' Willingness to Conduct Medication Use Reviews in Poland.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

András SzilvayUniversity Pharmacy Department of Pharmacy Administration, Semmelweis University, Hungary; 7-9 Hőgyes Endre street, Budapest, H-1092, Hungary.
Orsolya SomogyiUniversity Pharmacy Department of Pharmacy Administration, Semmelweis University, Hungary; 7-9 Hőgyes Endre street, Budapest, H-1092, Hungary.
Attiláné MeskóUniversity Pharmacy Department of Pharmacy Administration, Semmelweis University, Hungary; 7-9 Hőgyes Endre street, Budapest, H-1092, Hungary.
Romána ZelkóUniversity Pharmacy Department of Pharmacy Administration, Semmelweis University, Hungary; 7-9 Hőgyes Endre street, Budapest, H-1092, Hungary.
Balázs HankóUniversity Pharmacy Department of Pharmacy Administration, Semmelweis University, Hungary; 7-9 Hőgyes Endre street, Budapest, H-1092, Hungary. hanko.balazs@pharma.semmelweis-univ.hu.
Semmelweis University · HU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPharmaceutical care is the pharmacist's contribution to the care of individuals to optimize medicines use and improve health outcomes. The primary tool of pharmaceutical care is medication review. Defining and classifying Drug-Related Problems (DRPs) is an essential pillar of the medication review. Our objectives were to perform a pilot of medication review in Hungarian community pharmacies, a DRP classification was applied for the first time. Also, our goal was the qualitative and quantitative description of the discovered DRPs, and of the interventions for their solution in order to prove the safety relevance of the service and to map out the competence limits of GPs and community pharmacists to drug therapy.

methodsThe project took place in Hungarian community pharmacies. The study was performed with patients taking vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and/or ACE inhibitor and NSAID simultaneously (ACEI-NSAID). 61 pharmacists and 606 patients participated in the project. Pharmacists reviewed the medication for 3 months and the classification of DRPs was performed (category of DRP1 - DRP6). Patient data were statistically analyzed.

resultsPatients consumed on average 7.9 ± 3.1 medications and other products. 571 DRPs were detected in 540 patients, averaging 1.06 DRPs per patient (SD = 1.07). The highest frequency category was DRP5 (non-quantitative safety problem; 51.0%). The most common root cause was an interaction (42.0%) and non-adherence (19.4%.). The most commonly used intervention was education (25.4%) and medication replacement by the pharmacist (20.1%). The changing of the frequency and dosage in any direction were negligible.

conclusionsPatients are struggling with many DRPs that can be assessed and categorized by this system and which remain unrecognizable without pharmacists. Further projects need to be developed to assist in the development of physician-pharmacist cooperation and the widespread dissemination of pharmaceutical care.

Indexed as

AgedCommunity Pharmacy ServicesDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsDrug UtilizationEvaluation Studies as TopicFemaleHumansHungaryMaleMedical AuditMiddle AgedPharmacistsPilot ProjectsQualitative ResearchACE inhibitorCommunity pharmacyDrug-related problemMedication reviewPharmaceutical careVitamin K antagonist

Identifiers

PMID31053135
PMCPMC6499984
OpenAlexW2947660435

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.