Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31212922›Full record

ArticlePharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2019

An Improved Comprehensive Medication Review Process to Assess Healthcare Outcomes in a Rural Independent Community Pharmacy.

Geoffrey Twigg, Tosin David, Joshua Taylor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 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. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  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

3 authors.

Geoffrey TwiggApple Discount Drugs, Salisbury, MD 21804, USA. geoff@appledrugs.com.
Tosin DavidSchool of Pharmacy, University of Maryland Eastern Shore, Princess Anne, MD 21853, USA. tdavid@umes.edu.
Joshua TaylorSchool of Pharmacy, University of Maryland Eastern Shore, Princess Anne, MD 21853, USA. jtaylor4@umes.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For years many pharmacists have been performing 'brown bag' medication reviews for patients. While most pharmacists and student pharmacists are familiar with this process, it is important to determine the value patients receive from this service. Over the course of this study the authors attempted to modernize the medication reconciliation process and collect data on patient prescription drug and over-the-counter drug use, along with quantifying the types of interventions the pharmacy's clinical staff performed for patients during this process. The pharmacy partnered with a Quality Improvement Organization to trial their Blue Bag Intervention (BBI) program. The BBI program offered several additional services to the traditional brown bag review. The BBI was instituted as a follow-up tool in the pharmacy's diabetes self-management education/training clinic to aid in patient follow-up and help the clinical staff identify medication-related events such as medication adherence issues and drug-drug interactions. The clinical staff identified approximately 2.2 events per patient with over 50% being issues that affected patient safety.

Indexed as

adverse drug eventsbrown bagmedication reconciliationpharmacypharmacy clinical services

Identifiers

PMID31212922
PMCPMC6631051

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.