ArticleTrials2020
Protocol for the process evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of independent pharmacist prescribing in care home: the CHIPPS study.
Article in Trials, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Interventions for preventing falls in older people in care facilities.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- What happens when pharmacist independent prescribers lead on medicine management in older people's care homes: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2023Trial
- Evaluation of effectiveness and safety of pharmacist independent prescribers in care homes: cluster randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Trial
- Evaluation of a training programme for Pharmacist Independent Prescribers in a care home medicine management intervention.BMC medical education · 2022Trial
- Process evaluation for the Care Homes Independent Pharmacist Prescriber Study (CHIPPS).BMC health services research · 2021Trial
- Five years of the Implementation Research Logic Model: a citation analysis and systematic scoping review of its use in implementation research and practice.Implementation science : IS · 2026Article
- Assessing implementation fidelity of an on-site pharmacist intervention within Australian residential aged care facilities: A mixed methods study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Enhancing deprescribing: A qualitative understanding of the complexities of pharmacist-led deprescribing in care homes.Health & social care in the community · 2022Article
- Interventions to optimize medication use in nursing homes: a narrative review.European geriatric medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrescribing, monitoring and administration of medicines in care homes could be improved. A cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) is ongoing to evaluate the effectiveness of an independent prescribing pharmacist assuming responsibility for medicines management in care homes compared to usual care. AIMS AND
objectivesTo conduct a mixed-methods process evaluation of the RCT, in line with Medical Research Council (MRC) process evaluation guidance, to inform interpretation of main trial findings and if the service is found to be effective and efficient, to inform subsequent implementation.
objectives1. To describe the intervention as delivered in terms of quality, quantity, adaptations and variations across triads and time. 2. To explore the effects of individual intervention components on the primary outcomes. 3. To investigate the mechanisms of impact. 4. To describe the perceived effectiveness of relevant intervention components [including pharmacist independent prescriber (PIP) training and care home staff training] from participant [general practitioner (GP), care home, PIP and resident/relative] perspectives. 5. To describe the characteristics of GP, care home, PIP and resident participants to assess reach. 6. To estimate the extent to which intervention delivery is normalised among the intervention healthcare professionals and related practice staff.
methodsA mix of quantitative (surveys, record reviews) and qualitative (interviews) approaches will be used to collect data on the extent of the delivery of detailed tasks required to implement the new service, to collect data to confirm the mechanism of impact as hypothesised in the logic model, to collect explanatory process and final outcome data, and data on contextual factors which could have facilitated or hindered effective and efficient delivery of the service. DISCUSSION: Recruitment is ongoing and the trial should complete in early 2020. The systematic and comprehensive approach that is being adopted will ensure data is captured on all aspects of the study, and allow a full understanding of the implementation of the service and the RCT findings. With so many interrelated factors involved it is important that a process evaluation is undertaken to enable us to identify which elements of the service were deemed to be effective, explain any differences seen, and identify enablers, barriers and future adaptions.
trial registrationISRCTN17847169. Date registered: 15 December 2017.
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.