Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37297685›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2023

The Development of Recommendations for Healthcare Providers to Support Patients Experiencing Medication Self-Management Problems.

Laura Mortelmans, Eva Goossens, Anne-Marie De Cock, Mirko Petrovic, Patricia van den Bemt, Tinne Dilles

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Laura MortelmansCentre for Research and Innovation in Care (CRIC), Nurse and Pharmaceutical Care (NuPhaC), Department of Nursing Science and Midwifery, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, 2610 Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-1720-5478
Eva GoossensCentre for Research and Innovation in Care (CRIC), Nurse and Pharmaceutical Care (NuPhaC), Department of Nursing Science and Midwifery, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, 2610 Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-3421-5256
Anne-Marie De CockDepartment of Geriatrics, ZNA, 2020 Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-5505-0249
Mirko PetrovicDepartment of Geriatrics, Ghent University Hospital, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-7506-8646
Patricia van den BemtDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University Medical Center Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1418-5520
Tinne DillesCentre for Research and Innovation in Care (CRIC), Nurse and Pharmaceutical Care (NuPhaC), Department of Nursing Science and Midwifery, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, 2610 Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-2817-0944

Funding

Arega NAResearch Foundation Flanders 11L0522N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Medication self-management problems such as the inability to correctly obtain, understand, organize, administer or monitor medication can result in negative patient outcomes. However, supportive tools for healthcare providers to assist patients with medication self-management problems are lacking. This study aimed to develop recommendations for healthcare providers to support patients with polypharmacy who experience medication self-management problems. A three-phase study was conducted starting with (1) the mapping of medication self-management problems, followed by (2) a scoping review providing a list of relevant interventions and actions for each respective problem and (3) a three-round modified e-Delphi study with experts to reach consensus on the relevance and clarity of the recommended interventions and actions. The cut-off for consensus on the relevance and clarity of the recommendations was set at 80% expert agreement. Experts could propose additional recommendations based on their professional experience and expertise. The experts (n = 23) involved were healthcare professionals (i.e., nurses, pharmacists, and physicians) with specific expertise in medication management of patients with polypharmacy. Simultaneous with the second e-Delphi round, a panel of patients with polypharmacy (n = 8) evaluated the usefulness of recommendations. Results obtained from the patient panel were fed back to the panel of healthcare providers in the third e-Delphi round. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. Twenty medication self-management problems were identified. Based on the scoping review, a list of 66 recommendations for healthcare providers to support patients with the identified medication self-management problems was composed. At the end of the three-round e-Delphi study, the expert panel reached consensus on the relevance and clarity of 67 recommendations, clustered according to the six phases of the medication self-management model by Bailey et al. In conclusion, this study resulted in a guidance document including recommendations that can serve as a resource for healthcare providers to support patients with polypharmacy in case of medication self-management problems. Future research should focus on the evaluation of the feasibility and user-friendliness of the guide with recommendations in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Delphi techniquemedication therapy managementpolypharmacyself-management

Identifiers

PMID37297685
PMCPMC10253050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.