ArticleInnovations in pharmacy2022
Evaluating the Efficacy of 3 Recruitment Methods for Enrolling Patients in Chronic Care Management Services: A Pilot Study.
Article in Innovations in pharmacy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic Care Management (CCM) is a billable service that pharmacists can provide either in person or via telephone in ambulatory clinics or community pharmacies. Pharmacists may use this service to expand current roles in patient care and add billable services to an ambulatory care practice. The number of clinics employing CCM is steadily increasing, and to date, there has been limited information published to aid pharmacists who are considering implementing these services. The purpose of this study is to compare enrollment success in a clinic-based, pharmacist-led CCM service using three recruitment strategies to enroll patients: in person, telephone, and provider referred recruitment. This pilot study examined the success of three recruitment strategies using 94 patients eligible for CCM services in a rural health clinic. The primary outcome was successful enrollment in the CCM program with differences in recruitment strategy enrollment success examined using a Chi-square test. Overall, 42 of 94 patients (45%) were successfully enrolled in the CCM program with no statistical difference appreciated between telephone, in person, and provider referred recruitment. Nearly 33% (14/42) of patients enrolled in person, 40% (17/42) enrolled via telephone, and 26% (11/42) enrolled when referred from a provider. Ten patients (11%) declined enrollment outright. The remaining 42 patients were hesitant to enroll and requested follow up. In conclusion, there was no statistical difference in CCM enrollment success with in person, telephone, or provider referred recruitment, although more patients were enrolled via telephone than with the other two strategies. Pharmacists implementing new CCM programs may tailor their recruitment and enrollment strategy to suit their specific needs.
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.