Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36862254›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2023

Patient experiences and opinions on medication review: a qualitative study.

Anneleen Robberechts, Laura Van Loon, Stephane Steurbaut, Guido R Y De Meyer, Hans De Loof

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2023. 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
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anneleen RobberechtsRoyal Pharmacists Association of Antwerp (KAVA), Consciencestraat 41, B-2018, Antwerp, Belgium. anneleen.robberechts@uantwerpen.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3342-3870
Laura Van LoonLaboratory of Physiopharmacology, Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, B-2610, Antwerp, Belgium.
Stephane SteurbautResearch Group Clinical Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Centre for Pharmaceutical Research, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, B-1090, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4586-6919
Guido R Y De MeyerLaboratory of Physiopharmacology, Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, B-2610, Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3848-8702
Hans De LoofLaboratory of Physiopharmacology, Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, B-2610, Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4488-551X
University of Antwerp · BEVrije Universiteit Brussel · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedication reviews are a structured critical evaluation of a patient's pharmacotherapy, carried out by a healthcare professional, but are not yet a routine pharmaceutical service in Belgium. A pilot project to initiate an advanced medication review (= type 3 medication review) in community pharmacies was set up by the Royal Pharmacists' Association of Antwerp.

aimTo investigate the experiences and opinions of patients who participated in this pilot project.

methodQualitative study through semi-structured interviews with participating patients.

resultsSeventeen patients from six different pharmacies were interviewed. The medication review process with the pharmacist was perceived as positive and instructive by fifteen interviewees. The extra attention that the patient received was highly appreciated. However, the interviews revealed that patients did not fully understand the purpose and structure of this new service or were aware of the subsequent contact and feedback with the general practitioner. Medication reviews in the home setting put patients more at ease, were highly appreciated, and enabled also to address practical problems such as drug dosing or storage requirements.

conclusionThis qualitative study analysed patients' experiences during a pilot project on the implementation of type 3 medication review. Although most patients were enthusiastic about this new service, a lack of patients' understanding of the whole process was also observed. Therefore, better communication to patients by pharmacists and general practitioners about the goals and components of this type of medication review is needed, with the added benefit of increased efficiency.

Indexed as

Community Pharmacy ServicesMedication ReviewAttitude of Health PersonnelHumansPatient Outcome AssessmentPharmacistsPilot ProjectsProfessional RoleQualitative ResearchCommunity pharmacistCommunity pharmacy servicesMedication reviewsPatient carePharmaceutical servicesQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID36862254
OpenAlexW4322758243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.