Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36387343›Full record

ArticleSaudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society2022

Validation of an assessment, medical problem-oriented plan, and care plan tools for demonstrating the clinical pharmacist's activities.

Ahmad R Alsayed, Abdullah Al-Dulaimi, Dalal Alnatour, Dima Awajan, Bushra Alshammari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society, 2022. 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  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

5 authors.

Ahmad R AlsayedDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics, Applied Science Private University, Amman 11931-166, Jordan.
Abdullah Al-DulaimiDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics, Applied Science Private University, Amman 11931-166, Jordan.
Dalal AlnatourDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics, Applied Science Private University, Amman 11931-166, Jordan.
Dima AwajanDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics, Applied Science Private University, Amman 11931-166, Jordan.
Bushra AlshammariDepartment of Medical Surgical Nursing, College of Nursing, University of Hail, Hail 2440, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Identifying, preventing, and resolving medical problems are some of the most central functions of clinical pharmacy (CP) and pharmaceutical care (PC) practitioners. Usually, the practitioners and researchers find a challenging to link the problem and the appropriate intervention to be included in the care plan. A comprehensive, well-structured, validated, simple use and standardized tool, which fulfill these requirements in daily clinical practice, are currently rare. Purpose: To design and validate a comprehensive medical problem-oriented plan (MPOP) classification system in addition to assessment and care plan tools for use in practicing, researching, and teaching CP and PC. Materials and methods: The methodology was composed of five steps: literature searching and classification of the problems; developing the assessment of treatments and care plan templates; implementing the tutorial; validation; completion and evaluation of the final version. Results: The classification system (MPOP tool) is an open hierarchical structure, where higher levels are broadly defined, consisting of 5 main categories, and lower levels become more specific. In the MPOP tool's final version, a total of 24 major subcategories were distributed to the major five categories as 4 (Indication), 5 (Effectiveness), 7 (Safety), 3 (Patient), and 5 (Miscellaneous). Different minor subcategories (subcategory 2, n = 62) and 95 plans (interventions) were determined. Each of the subcategories and plans includes a notes section that represents a specific detail. There was strong agreement on using the MPOP tool between the two authors (κ = 1.000, p < 0.0005) and between three random clinical pharmacists out of 17 (κ = 0.947, 95% CI, 0.840 to 1.055, p < 0.0005). The validity and reliability statistics demonstrate that the Alsayed_v1 tools are extremely appropriate. The majority of users expressed high satisfaction with all the assessment, MPOP, and care plan tools. Conclusion: The Alsayed_v1 tools introduced in this paper were applied to actual patient cases and were validated. These tools include: assessment of treatments, MPOP, and care plan. Including the interventions in the classification system is important especially in PC research where the type of recommendations should be documented to assess the value and impact of the service and saves the time of practitioners in typing the appropriate interventions. By applying the steps within these Alsayed tools, the clinical pharmacists can actively provide the best practice to achieve the optimal patient outcome.

Indexed as

Clinical PharmacyCP, clinical pharmacyCVI, Content Validity IndexCVR, Content Validity RatioDRP, drug-related problemMedical Problem-Oriented PlanMPOP, medical-problem oriented planPC, pharmaceutical careTRP, treatment-related problemValidation

Identifiers

PMID36387343
PMCPMC9649348

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.