ArticleBMJ open2019
Delivering the right information to the right person at the right time to facilitate deprescribing in hospital: a mixed methods multisite study to inform decision support design in Australia.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention in older inpatients: an implementation study with retrospective control group.European geriatric medicine · 2026Trial
- Article
- What Deprescribing Information Should Be Communicated on Discharge and How? A Qualitative Study of Pharmacists' Perspectives on Deprescribing at Transitions of Care.Australasian journal on ageing · 2026Article
- Elements of healthcare delivery required to facilitate the clinical governance of hospital pharmacy services: a document review.Health research policy and systems · 2025Review
- Impact of in-hospital medication changes on clinical outcomes in older inpatients: the journey and destination.Age and ageing · 2025Article
- Attitudes and barriers towards deprescribing in older patients experiencing polypharmacy: a narrative review.npj aging · 2024Review
- A stewardship program to facilitate anticholinergic and sedative medication deprescribing using the drug burden index in electronic medical records.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2023Article
- Barriers and Opportunities Regarding Implementation of a Machine Learning-Based Acute Heart Failure Risk Stratification Tool in the Emergency Department.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Development and Validation of Comprehensive Healthcare Providers' Opinions, Preferences, and Attitudes towards Deprescribing (CHOPPED Questionnaire).Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Supporting deprescribing in hospitalised patients: formative usability testing of a computerised decision support tool.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
- Iterative Development of Clinician Guides to Support Deprescribing Decisions and Communication for Older Patients in Hospital: A Novel Methodology.Drugs & aging · 2021Article
- Managing Polypharmacy in Older Adults with Cancer Across Different Healthcare Settings.Drug, healthcare and patient safety · 2021Review
- Should Hospital Admission Be Used as an Opportunity for Deprescribing in Older Adults?The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo inform the design of electronic decision support (EDS) to facilitate deprescribing in hospitals we set out to (1) explore the current processes of in-hospital medicines review, deprescribing and communication of deprescribing decisions with the patient's general practitioner (GP), (2) identify barriers to undertaking these tasks and (3) determine user preferences for EDS.
designMultimethod, multisite study comprising observations, semistructured interviews and focus groups.
settingGeneral medicine, geriatric medicine and rehabilitation wards at six hospitals in two local health districts in Sydney, Australia and primary care practices in one primary healthcare district in Sydney, Australia.
participants149 participants took part in observations, interviews and focus groups, including 69 hospital doctors, 13 nurses, 55 pharmacists and 12 GPs.
main outcome measuresObservational data on who was involved in medicines review and deprescribing, when medicines review took place, and what artefacts (eg, forms) were used. Participants reported perceptions of medicines review, polypharmacy and deprescribing and preferences for EDS.
resultsDeprescribing, undertaken during medicines review, was typically performed by a junior doctor, following a decision to deprescribe by a senior doctor. Key barriers to deprescribing included a perception that deprescribing was not the responsibility of hospital doctors, a lack of confidence among junior doctors and pharmacists in broaching this topic with senior doctors and a lack of patient engagement in the deprescribing process. In designing EDS, the tools, likely to be used by junior doctors, pharmacists and nurses, should be available throughout the hospitalisation and should comprise non-interruptive evidence-based guidance on why and how to deprescribe.
conclusionsDeprescribing decisions are complex and influenced by multiple factors. The implementation of EDS alone is unlikely to address all barriers identified. To achieve sustained improvements in monitoring of polypharmacy and subsequent deprescribing, a multifaceted intervention is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.