ArticleBMC rheumatology2022
Pharmacist knowledge of gout management: impact of an educational intervention.
Article in BMC rheumatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gout: a practical approach to diagnosis and management in low- and middle-income countries and resource-limited settings.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Review
- The Therapeutic Management of Chemical and Herbal Medications on Uric Acid Levels and Gout: Modern and Traditional Wisdom.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPharmacists play a key role in community gout education. We investigated pharmacist knowledge of gout management and developed an educational intervention which was assessed in a cohort of Irish pharmacists.
methodsA ten-question questionnaire about gout management was developed to assess pharmacists' knowledge. A 14 min 26 s video educational intervention was co-designed by a rheumatologist, a pharmacist, and designer of pharmacy education resources. The effectiveness of this pharmacy-specific intervention was assessed using the same questionnaire in 53 pharmacists (25 in the intervention group; 28 in the control group). Contingency tables were used to analyse differences between groups.
resultsThere were 173 pharmacist respondents to the initial survey; 35.3% answered that first-line therapy for gout involves a combination of a xanthine oxidase inhibitor (e.g., allopurinol) combined with a prophylactic agent (e.g., colchicine), and 28.9% of respondents answered that colchicine prophylaxis should be used when initiating urate-lowering therapy. Following the educational intervention, pharmacist's knowledge about gout management increased across many domains, including serum urate targets when using urate-lowering therapy (p = 0.006), use of colchicine prophylaxis (p = 0.011), and duration of colchicine use (p < 0.001).
conclusionGout management recommendations can be impeded if translation into pharmacy practice is neglected. Pharmacists are a valuable information resource for patients. Co-designing a brief education intervention with pharmacists is an effective, low-cost way to increase pharmacist knowledge on the management of gout.
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.