Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36353051›Full record

ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2022

Exploring the value of a multidisciplinary-led medication review for elderly individuals at a long-term care facility performed by four different health-care professions in an equal and closely integrated collaboration.

Sara Frandsen, Anne M Drastrup, Dagmar A Dalin, Charlotte Vermehren

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Interdisciplinary medication reviews of psychiatric patients - A mixed method evaluation.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Sara FrandsenDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anne M DrastrupDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Dagmar A DalinDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Charlotte VermehrenDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Bispebjerg Hospital · DKCopenhagen University Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The increasing population of elderly individuals had led to an increasing number of polypharmacy patients. Polypharmacy increases the risk of adverse drug reactions and hospitalization. One means to combat polypharmacy involves performing medication reviews, which can be conducted by different methods and stakeholders. Objective: The study objective was to explore the value of involving different health-care professions in medication reviews at an equal and closely integrated collaborative physical meeting for elderly individuals at a long-term care facility. A specific focus was to explore the contributions and opinions of the different health-care professionals regarding the medication review process. Materials and Methods: A single case study was applied to perform an in-depth study of a group of health-care professionals performing medication reviews in collaboration. Hence, the study was performed in two settings: 1) the practical execution of medication reviews at a long-term care facility in an interprofessional team and 2) qualitative semi-structured interviews conducted to explore the forms of work done by different professional groups in performing an interdisciplinary medication review. Results: Forty-nine residents from a long-term care facility were included in the study and were offered a medication review. In total, they reported 573 prescriptions, for which 150 changes were recommended by the interprofessional team. At the 3- and 8-month follow-ups, 30.0% and 49.5% of the accepted recommendations had been implemented, respectively. According to the interview, the results reveal that the interdisciplinarity of the interprofessional team was perceived as a great advantage to the results of the medication reviews. Conclusion: The results suggest that performing medication reviews in interprofessional collaboration improves the perceived quality of such reviews with a more complete picture of the residents and their medications, leading to more personalized recommendations and resulting in optimized medication reviews for the individual patients.

Indexed as

Caregiving Staffgeneral practicegeneral practitionerhealth-care professionalinterprofessionalinterprofessional teamlong-term care facilitymedication reviewmedicine reviewpharmacistspolypharmacy

Identifiers

PMID36353051
PMCPMC9638591
OpenAlexW4295345990

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.