ArticleBMC health services research2020
Emergency department-based medication review on outpatient health services utilization: interrupted time series.
Article 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 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Emergency Department Programs to Support Medication Safety in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of outcomes reported in studies to optimise the medication use of patients at hospital discharge.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Medication Therapy Management Guided by TIME Criteria in Nursing Home Residents: A Before-After Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Characteristics and outcomes of pharmacy-supported transitions of care interventions in emergency departments: a scoping review.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Enhancing healthcare access for an older population: The age-friendly emergency department.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2024Review
- Drug-Related Problems in Elderly Patients Attended to by Emergency Services.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Clin-STAR corner: Practice changing advances in prescribing for geriatric emergency department patients.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2023Article
- Assessment of drug-related problems at the emergency department in older patients living with frailty: pharmacist-led medication reviews within a geriatric care team.BMC geriatrics · 2023Observational
- The effect of emergency department pharmacists on drug overuse and drug underuse in patients with an ADE-related hospitalisation: a controlled intervention study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- The impact of introducing multidisciplinary care assessments on access to rheumatology care in British Columbia: an interrupted time series analysis.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Collaborative Medication Reviews to Identify Inappropriate Prescribing in Pre-Admission Medications at Emergency Department Short-Term Ward.Integrated pharmacy research & practice · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOne in nine emergency department (ED) visits in Canada are caused by adverse drug events, the unintended and harmful effects of medication use. Medication reviews by clinical pharmacists are interventions designed to optimize medications and address adverse drug events to impact patient outcomes. However, the effect of medication reviews on long-term outpatient health services utilization is not well understood. This research studied the effect of medication review performed by clinical pharmacists on long-term outpatient health services utilization.
methodsData included information from 10,783 patients who were part of a prospective, multi-centre quality improvement evaluation from 2011 to 2013. Outpatient health services utilization was defined as total ED visits and physician contacts, aggregated to four physician specialty groups: general and family practitioners (GP); medical specialists; surgical specialists; and imaging and laboratory specialists. During triage, patients deemed high-risk based on their medical history, were systematically allocated to receive either a medication review (n = 6403) or the standard of care (n = 4380). Medication review involved a critical examination of a patient's medications to identify and resolve medication-related problems and communicate these results to community care providers. Interrupted time series analysis compared the effect of the intervention on health services utilization relative to the standard of care controlling for pre-intervention differences in utilization.
resultsED-based pharmacist-led medication review did not result in a significant level or trend change in the primary outcome of total outpatient health services utilization. There were also no differences in the secondary outcomes of primary care physician visits or ED visits relative to the standard of care in the 12 months following the intervention. Our findings were consistent when stratified by age, hospital site, and whether patients were discharged on their index visit.
conclusionThis was the first study to measure long-term trends of physician visits following an ED-based medication review. The lack of differences in level and trend of GP and ED visits suggest that pharmacist recommendations may not have been adequately communicated to community-based providers, and/or recommendations may not have affected health care delivery. Future studies should evaluate physician acceptance of pharmacist recommendations and should encourage patient follow-up to community providers.
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.