Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35002251›Full record

ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2021

Outpatients' Opinion And Experience Regarding Telepharmacy During The COVID-19 Pandemic: The Enopex Project.

Luis Margusino-Framiñán, Cecilia M Fernández-Llamazares, Eva Negro-Vega, Begoña Tortajada-Goitia, Garbiñe Lizeaga, Gabriel Mercadal-Orfila, Carmen Almeida-González, Ramón Morillo-Verdugo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Community pharmacy resiliency during Covid-19 pandemic in Iran: A qualitative study.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2025
    Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. 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

8 authors.

Luis Margusino-FramiñánPharmacy Department, A Coruña Universitary Hospital, A Coruña, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-4309-1662
Cecilia M Fernández-LlamazaresPharmacy Department, General Universitary Gregorio Marañón Hospital, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-6254-8715
Eva Negro-VegaPharmacy Department, Getafe Universitary Hospital, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0143-6709
Begoña Tortajada-GoitiaPharmacy Department, Costa del Sol Hospital, Marbella, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2330-0914
Garbiñe LizeagaPharmacy Department, Donostia Universitary Hospital, San Sebastian, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-4896-4875
Gabriel Mercadal-OrfilaPharmacy Department, Mateu Orfila Hospital, Menorca, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-7304-458X
Carmen Almeida-GonzálezStatistics&Methodology Department, Virgen de Valme Universitary Hospital, Sevilla, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-8202-0790
Ramón Morillo-VerdugoPharmacy Department, Virgen de Valme Universitary Hospital, Sevilla, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8849-2737

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTelepharmacy, as a remote pharmaceutical care procedure, is being used worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the aim of preserving the health of patients and professionals. Its future development should incorporate the assessment of patient perception, but no research study has investigated it.

objectiveThe objective was to poll the opinions and experiences of outpatients with telepharmacy through a purpose-developed questionnaire and to assess it's quality through an internal validity and reliability analysis.

methodsCross-sectional observational study of adult patients who used telepharmacy services during the COVID-19 lockdown period in Spain. The subjects answered a 24-item questionnaire, after giving their informed consent. Place of delivery, informed pharmacotherapeutic follow-up, opinion about telepharmacy, future development, ethics/satisfaction, and coordination constituted the six questionnaire categories. After assessing the adequate sample size with the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test, the Bartlett sphericity test analyzed the validity of the questionnaire. The intraclass correlation coefficient and Cronbach's α coefficient calculations verified the reliability and internal consistency.

resultsA total of 9442 interviews were administered to patients from 81 hospitals, of which 8079 were valid (52.8% female). A 54.1% were aged between 41-65 years; 42.7% had been in treatment for more than 5 years; 42.8% lived between 6-31 miles from the hospital. As many as 96.7% of patients were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with telepharmacy, 97.5% considering it complementary to their usual follow-up; 55.9% expressed a preference for being followed up face to face when visiting the hospital. 75.6% said they had rather receive their medication at home. The sample size obtained was deemed appropriate [the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test (0.789) and Bartlett's sphericity test (p<0.005)]. The reliability analysis resulted in a Cronbach α = 0.7.

conclusionPatients have shown high satisfaction with telepharmacy and the ENOPEX questionnaire is a tool with sufficient validity and reliability to be used in the evaluation of the care that patients receive through telepharmacy.

Indexed as

coronavirushealthcare quality assessmenthospital pharmacy servicepatient reported experience measurespharmaceutical caretelepharmacy

Identifiers

PMID35002251
PMCPMC8725846

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.