ArticleBMC primary care2022
Patient perceptions and experiences of medication review: qualitative study in general practice.
Article in BMC primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- What patients want from access to UK general practice: systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Pooled it
- Perspectives of patients on the role of general practice pharmacists: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.BMC primary care · 2025Pooled it
- Systematic review on the frequency and quality of reporting patient and public involvement in patient safety research.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Patients' experiences of a patient-centred polypharmacy medication review intervention: a mixed-methods study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Trial
- A consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) informed exploration of a primary care intervention to support deprescribing for problematic polypharmacy in older adults living with frailty (DEPPLOY) in England: a qualitative study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Medication Experience and Associated Factors in Older Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions in Rural Henan Province, China: A Single-Center Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Patients' perspectives and experiences regarding medication reviews: A cross-sectional survey study.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Protocol of the medygen-2024 study: assessment of antihypertensive medication use by sex in community pharmacies.Farmaceuticos comunitarios · 2026Article
- Editorial: Optimizing medication management in older adults: addressing polypharmacy, deprescribing and represcribing challenges.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- How do pharmacists navigate clinical uncertainty when reviewing polypharmacy? A critical literature review.BMC primary care · 2025Review
- Patient and hospital staff perspectives on introducing pharmacist-led medication reviews at an orthopedic ward: a mixed methods pilot study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
- Interdisciplinary medication reviews of psychiatric patients - A mixed method evaluation.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2025Article
- Service delivery and the role of clinical pharmacists in UK primary care for older people, including people with dementia: a scoping review.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Article
- Attitudes and expectations toward medication review among community pharmacy customers in Germany: a cross-sectional study.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2025Article
- Developing Integrated Extended Pharmacist Roles and Services for Equitable Access and Outcomes in Primary Healthcare: A Realist Evaluation.International journal of health policy and management · 2025Article
- Deprescribing oral antidiabetics in elderly patients: Do electronic leaflets across the world address it?Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence to assist decision-making on pharmacotherapy: A feasibility study.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024Article
- Frequency and impact of medication reviews for people aged 65 years or above in UK primary care: an observational study using electronic health records.BMC geriatrics · 2023Observational
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical medication reviews are a recognised strategy to address polypharmacy, a key part of general practice and positively associated with patient safety and clinical effectiveness. To date there has been little investigation of the patient perspective of medication reviews.
objectiveTo explore patient experiences of medication review including the processes and activities that led up to and shaped the review.
methodsQualitative interview study within 10 general practices in Bristol. Participants were adults with polypharmacy (≥ 4 medications) and ≥ 2 long-term conditions who had a record of medication review with either a GP or pharmacist. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically using a data driven approach. Co-design work was undertaken with four patient and public involvement advisers to design and develop resources to support patient preparation for medication review.
resultsTwenty-one patients were interviewed (10 female, mean age 73 years, range 59-88 years). Medication review was viewed as an opportunity to assess the effectiveness and need for medications. Participants expected the review to focus upon medication related concerns, side-effects and symptoms. Those who were newer to review, were uncertain of the intended purpose, and described their review as a box-ticking exercise. Some participants were unfamiliar with the role of the pharmacist and expressed a lack of confidence in their clinical skills and knowledge. Face-to-face consultation and relationship continuity were considered important for efficient and effective medication review. Results informed co-production of a patient information leaflet to facilitate greater patient engagement and involvement in medication review.
conclusionsA lack of understanding of the rationale for medication review can limit the value patients attach to these healthcare encounters. Improved prior communication and information around the intended purpose and potential benefits of medication review may enhance patient engagement and improve patient experience and outcomes.
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.