Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34930790›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2022

Initial evaluation of a brief pharmacy-led intervention to modify beliefs about medicines and facilitate adherence among patients hospitalised with acute coronary syndrome.

Jacob Crawshaw, John Weinman, Duncan McRobbie, Vivian Auyeung

Open access · hybridAbstract readControlled Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jacob CrawshawInstitute of Pharmaceutical Science, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6302-1496
John WeinmanInstitute of Pharmaceutical Science, King's College London, London, UK.
Duncan McRobbieDepartment of Pharmacy, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Truts, London, UK.
Vivian AuyeungInstitute of Pharmaceutical Science, King's College London, London, UK vivian.auyeung@kcl.ac.uk.
King's College London · GBGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMedication non-adherence is common among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and is associated with poor clinical outcomes. To date, pharmacists have been underutilised in the delivery of adherence interventions. Across two studies, we assessed the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of a novel pharmacy-led intervention for patients hospitalised with ACS.

methodsThe theory-based intervention was comprised of two personalised sessions addressing perceptual (negative/erroneous treatment beliefs) and practical (suboptimal action planning) barriers to adherence. Study 1: A single-arm, feasibility and acceptability study was conducted to determine proof-of-concept. Pre-post-comparisons using the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire-Specific (BMQ-S) were made. Study 2: A non-randomised controlled before-after pilot study was conducted with the intervention delivered by a team of clinical pharmacists. Follow-up data were collected at 6 and 12 weeks post-discharge. Primary outcome measures included the BMQ-S and the Medication Adherence Report Scale 5.

resultsStudy 1: 15 patients received the intervention and reported higher BMQ-S necessity scores post-intervention. The intervention was deemed highly acceptable to patients; therefore, further testing was sought. Study 2: A total of 56 patients were recruited: control (n=29) versus treatment (n=27). At 6-week follow-up, the treatment group had higher BMQ-S necessity scores (M=21.8, SD=3.1) compared with control (M=19.8, SD=2.7; p=0.045), although this effect was not maintained at 12 weeks. No differences were reported in the other outcome measures.

conclusionsAlthough the intervention was acceptable to patients, poor fidelity in delivery raises questions about its feasibility in practice. Furthermore, there was some impact on patients' beliefs about medications but no effect on adherence. These findings demonstrate the importance of conducting feasibility and acceptability studies when developing adherence innovations in clinical care. Future studies should consider enhancing the training process to ameliorate fidelity issues.

Indexed as

Acute Coronary SyndromePharmacyAftercareHumansPatient DischargePilot Projectsclinical pharmacycontrolled trialischaemic heart diseasemyocardial infarctionquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID34930790
PMCPMC8717792
OpenAlexW2994776075

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.