Trial reportHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2022
Patient and general practitioner experiences of implementing a medication review intervention in older people with multimorbidity: Process evaluation of the SPPiRE trial.
Trial report in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- A NASSS framework-guided systematic review and exploratory modelling of digital health interventions for polypharmacy management in older adults.BMC geriatrics · 2025Pooled it
- Implementation of interprofessional quality circles on deprescribing in Swiss nursing homes: an observational study.BMC geriatrics · 2023Pooled it
- Trial
- Patient and general practitioner experiences of implementing a medication review intervention in older people with multimorbidity: Process evaluation of the SPPiRE trial.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Trial
- Do process evaluations open up the 'black box' of implementation interventions in health care? A scoping review.Implementation science : IS · 2025Article
- Attitudes and confidence toward deprescribing: a survey among Italian general practitioners.BMC primary care · 2025Observational
- Implementation of medication reviews to optimize the use of medications in Swiss nursing homes: a mixed-methods study.BMC health services research · 2025Observational
- Impact of eliciting treatment priorities on analgesic prescribing in older patients with high levels of polypharmacy.Family practice · 2025Article
- Multimorbidity Management: A Scoping Review of Interventions and Health Outcomes.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Older Adults' Attitudes Toward Deprescribing in 14 Countries.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Defining, identifying and addressing problematic polypharmacy within multimorbidity in primary care: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Recruiting general practitioners and older patients with multimorbidity to randomized trials.Family practice · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe SPPiRE cluster randomized controlled trial found that a general practitioner (GP)-delivered medication review that incorporated screening for potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIP), a brown bag review and a patient priority assessment, resulted in a significant but small reduction in the number of medicines and no significant reduction in PIP. This process evaluation aims to explore the experiences of GPs and patients and the potential for system-wide implementation.
methodsThe trial included 51 general practices and 404 participants with multimorbidity aged ≥65 years, prescribed ≥15 medicines. The process evaluation used mixed methods and ran parallel to the trial. Quantitative data was collected from the SPPiRE intervention website and analysed descriptively. Qualitative data on medication changes were collected from intervention GPs (18/26) and a purposive sample of intervention patients (27/208) via semi-structured telephone interviews. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic analysis. Qualitative and quantitative data were integrated using a triangulation protocol.
resultsThe analysis generated two themes, intervention implementation and mechanisms of action, and both were underpinned by the theme of context. Intervention delivery varied among practices and 45 patients (28%) had no review, primarily due to insufficient GP time. 80% of reviewed patients had ≥1 PIP identified, 59% had ≥1 problem identified during the brown bag review and 79% had ≥1 priority recorded. The brown bag review resulted in the most deprescription of medications. GPs and patients responded positively to the intervention but most GPs did not engage with the patient priority-setting process. GPs identified a lack of integration into practice software and resources as barriers to future implementation.
conclusionThe SPPiRE intervention had a small effect in reducing the number of medicines and this was primarily mediated through the brown bag review. The context of resource shortages and deep-seated views around medical decision-making influenced intervention implementation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Qualitative data on the implementation of the medication review and their wider views on their medicines was collected from older people with multimorbidity through semi-structured telephone interviews. CLINICAL
trial registrationThe SPPiRE trial was registered prospectively on the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN12752680).
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.