Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34251594›Full record

ArticleDrugs & aging2021

MediQuit, an Electronic Deprescribing Tool for Patients on Polypharmacy: Results of a Feasibility Study in German General Practice.

Ulrike Junius-Walker, Annika Viniol, Matthias Michiels-Corsten, Navina Gerlach, Norbert Donner-Banzhoff, Tanja Schleef

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drugs & aging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Communication Processes Related to Decision-Making in Medication Management Between Healthcare Providers, Older People and Their Carers: A Systematic Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Polypharmacy and precision medicine.Cambridge prisms. Precision medicine · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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.

Ulrike Junius-WalkerInstitute of General Practice, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. junius-walker.ulrike@mh-hannover.de.ORCID 0000-0002-0250-9885
Annika ViniolInstitute of General Practice, Marburg University, Marburg, Germany.
Matthias Michiels-CorstenInstitute of General Practice, Marburg University, Marburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2714-4376
Navina GerlachInstitute of General Practice, Marburg University, Marburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2236-9637
Norbert Donner-BanzhoffInstitute of General Practice, Marburg University, Marburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8688-1835
Tanja SchleefInstitute of General Practice, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDeprescribing is an important task for general practitioners (GPs) in the face of risky polypharmacy. The electronic tool "MediQuit" was developed to guide GPs and patients through a deprescribing consultation that entails a drug-selection phase, shared decision making, and advice on safe implementation.

objectivesA pilot study was conducted to determine the target group of patients that is selected for consultation and to assess the impact, patient involvement, and feasibility of the tool.

methodsThis was an uncontrolled pilot study. GPs from two German regions were invited to use MediQuit in consultations with a view to deprescribing one drug, if appropriate. They selected patients on the basis of broad inclusion criteria. Collected data entailed participants' characteristics, patients' medication lists, deprescribed drugs, and feasibility assessments. Patients were contacted shortly after the consultation and again after 4 weeks.

resultsIn total, 16 GPs agreed to participate, of whom ten actually performed deprescribing consultations. They selected 41 predominately older patients on excessive polypharmacy. Deprescribing was achieved in 70% of consultations in agreement with patients. Drugs deprescribed were symptom-lowering and preventive drugs (mainly anatomical therapeutic chemical classes A and C). GPs found MediQuit useful in initiating communication on this issue and enhancing deliberations for a deprescribing decision. The median consultation length was 15 min (interquartile range 10-20). At follow-up, GPs and patients infrequently disagreed on which drug(s) was discontinued, and GPs rated patient involvement higher than did patients themselves. DISCUSSION: MediQuit assists in identifying concrete deprescribing opportunities, patient involvement, and shared decision making. The three-step deprescribing procedure is well-accepted once initial organizational efforts are overcome. After revision, further studies are needed to enhance the quality of evidence on acceptance and effectiveness.

Indexed as

DeprescriptionsGeneral PracticeElectronicsFeasibility StudiesHumansPilot ProjectsPolypharmacy

Identifiers

PMID34251594
PMCPMC8342343

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.