Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31941489›Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2020

Effectiveness of pharmacist home visits for individuals at risk of medication-related problems: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Rebecca A Abbott, Darren A Moore, Morwenna Rogers, Alison Bethel, Ken Stein, Jo Thompson Coon

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rebecca A AbbottEvidence Synthesis Team, PenCLAHRC University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK. r.a.abbott@exeter.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4165-4484
Darren A MooreGraduate School of Education, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Morwenna RogersEvidence Synthesis Team, PenCLAHRC University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Alison BethelEvidence Synthesis Team, PenCLAHRC University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Ken SteinEvidence Synthesis Team, PenCLAHRC University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Jo Thompson CoonEvidence Synthesis Team, PenCLAHRC University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
University of Exeter · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedication mismanagement is a major cause of both hospital admission and nursing home placement of frail older adults. Medication reviews by community pharmacists aim to maximise therapeutic benefit but also minimise harm. Pharmacist-led medication reviews have been the focus of several systematic reviews, but none have focussed on the home setting. REVIEW

methodsTo determine the effectiveness of pharmacist home visits for individuals at risk of medication-related problems we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Thirteen databases were searched from inception to December 2018. Forward and backward citation of included studies was also performed. Articles were screened for inclusion independently by two reviewers. Randomised controlled studies of home visits by pharmacists for individuals at risk of medication-related problems were eligible for inclusion. Data extraction and quality appraisal were performed by one reviewer and checked by a second. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed where sufficient data allowed and narrative synthesis summarised all remaining data.

resultsTwelve RCTs (reported in 15 articles), involving 3410 participants, were included in the review. The frequency, content and purpose of the home visit varied considerably. The data from eight trials were suitable for meta-analysis of the effects on hospital admissions and mortality, and from three trials for the effects on quality of life. Overall there was no evidence of reduction in hospital admissions (risk ratio (RR) of 1.01 (95%CI 0.86 to 1.20, I

conclusionA systematic review of twelve RCTs assessing the impact of pharmacist home visits for individuals at risk of medication related problems found no evidence of effect on hospital admission or mortality rates, and limited evidence of effect on quality of life. Future studies should focus on using more robust methods to assess relevant outcomes.

Indexed as

House CallsPharmacistsAgedDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHealth Services ResearchHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk AssessmentCommunityHome visitHospital admissionMedication reviewOlder adultsPharmacist interventionRandomised controlled trialsSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID31941489
PMCPMC6961241
OpenAlexW3005038520

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.