Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34588245›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Effectiveness of the application of an electronic medication management support system in patients with polypharmacy in general practice: a study protocol of cluster-randomised controlled trial (AdAM).

Beate S Müller, Renate Klaaßen-Mielke, Ana Isabel Gonzalez-Gonzalez, Daniel Grandt, Reinhard Hammerschmidt, Juliane Köberlein-Neu, Petra Kellermann-Mühlhoff, Hans J Trampisch, Till Beckmann, Lara Düvel and 18 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03430336 (Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of the Application of an Electronic Medication Management Support System in Patients With Polypharmacy in General Practice), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

NCT03430336 nacompletednot on this map

Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of the Application of an Electronic Medication Management Support System in Patients With Polypharmacy in General Practice (AdAM).

TypeinterventionalSponsorBARMERRan2018 to 2021Enrolled12,000ConditionsPolypharmacyArmsCDSS provides drug-therapy relevant information, Modification of medication, Assessment of medication appropriateness, Medication plan, Guidance in medication process
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. [Focusing on intersectorality-strategies and current research projects for the care of geriatric people].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  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

28 authors at 11 institutions in 4 countries.

Beate S MüllerInstitute of General Practice, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6745-1047
Renate Klaaßen-MielkeDepartment of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany.
Ana Isabel Gonzalez-GonzalezInstitute of General Practice, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany gonzalezgonzalez@allgemeinmedizin.uni-frankfurt.de.ORCID 0000-0002-1707-0596
Daniel GrandtDepartment of Internal Medicine, Clinic Saarbrücken, Saarbrücken, Germany.
Reinhard HammerschmidtAssociation of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, Region Westphalia/Lippe, Dortmund, Germany.
Juliane Köberlein-NeuCenter for Health Economics and Health Services Research, University of Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany.
Petra Kellermann-MühlhoffBARMER, Wuppertal, Germany.
Hans J TrampischDepartment of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany.
Till BeckmannBARMER, Wuppertal, Germany.
Lara DüvelBARMER, Wuppertal, Germany.
Bastian SurmannDepartment of Health Economics and Health Care Management. Faculty of Health Science, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.
Benno FlaigInstitute of General Practice, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Peter IhlePMV Research Group, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Sara SölingInstitute for Medical Sociology, Health Services Research and Rehabilitation Science, Department of Health Services Research, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Simone GrandtRpDoc Solutions GmbH, Saarbrücken, Germany.
Truc Sophia DinhInstitute of General Practice, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Alexandra PiotrowskiCenter for Health Economics and Health Services Research, University of Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany.
Ingo MeyerPMV Research Group, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Ute KarbachDepartment of Rehabilitation Sociology, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Technical University Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany.
Sebastian HarderInstitute for Clinical Pharmacology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Rafael PereraNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2418-2091
Paul GlasziouCentre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice (CREBP), Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7564-073X
Holger PfaffInstitute of Medical Sociology, Health Services Research and Rehabilitation Science, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Wolfgang GreinerDepartment of Health Economics and Health Care Management. Faculty of Health Science, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.
Ferdinand M GerlachInstitute of General Practice, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Nina TimmesfeldDepartment of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany.
Christiane MuthInstitute of General Practice, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8987-182X
AdAM study group
Goethe University Frankfurt · DEUniversity of Cologne · DEBARMER GEK · DEZimmer Biomet (Germany) · DEBielefeld University · DEUniversity of Wuppertal · DEBond University · AUKlinikum Saarbrücken · DENational Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians · DETU Dortmund University · DEUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionClinically complex patients often require multiple medications. Polypharmacy is associated with inappropriate prescriptions, which may lead to negative outcomes. Few effective tools are available to help physicians optimise patient medication. This study assesses whether an electronic medication management support system (eMMa) reduces hospitalisation and mortality and improves prescription quality/safety in patients with polypharmacy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Planned design: pragmatic, parallel cluster-randomised controlled trial; general practices as randomisation unit; patients as analysis unit. As practice recruitment was poor, we included additional data to our primary endpoint analysis for practices and quarters from October 2017 to March 2021. Since randomisation was performed in waves, final study design corresponds to a stepped-wedge design with open cohort and step-length of one quarter. SCOPE: general practices, Westphalia-Lippe (Germany), caring for BARMER health fund-covered patients. POPULATION: patients (≥18 years) with polypharmacy (≥5 prescriptions). SAMPLE SIZE: initially, 32 patients from each of 539 practices were required for each study arm (17 200 patients/arm), but only 688 practices were randomised after 2 years of recruitment. Design change ensures that 80% power is nonetheless achieved.

interventioncomplex intervention eMMa. FOLLOW-UP: at least five quarters/cluster (practice). recruitment: practices recruited/randomised at different times; after follow-up, control group practices may access eMMa. OUTCOMES: primary endpoint is all-cause mortality and hospitalisation; secondary endpoints are number of potentially inappropriate medications, cause-specific hospitalisation preceded by high-risk prescribing and medication underuse. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: primary and secondary outcomes are measured quarterly at patient level. A generalised linear mixed-effect model and repeated patient measurements are used to consider patient clusters within practices. Time and intervention group are considered fixed factors; variation between practices and patients is fitted as random effects. Intention-to-treat principle is used to analyse primary and key secondary endpoints. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Trial approved by Ethics Commission of North-Rhine Medical Association. Results will be disseminated through workshops, peer-reviewed publications, local and international conferences.

trial registrationNCT03430336. ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03430336).

Indexed as

General PracticePolypharmacyElectronicsHumansMedication Therapy ManagementPotentially Inappropriate Medication ListPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as Topicchange managementgeneral medicine (see internal medicine)health & safety

Identifiers

PMID34588245
PMCPMC8479941
OpenAlexW3202135404

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.