ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2024
Expanding Access to Patient Care in Community Pharmacies for Minor Illnesses in Washington State.
Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of the Effectiveness of Pharmaceutical Advice in Selected Digestive Disorders: Perspectives of Patients and Pharmacists as Part of a Pilot "Minor Ailments" Service.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Qualitative Analysis of Test-to-Treat Benefits and Barriers for Pharmacists in Rural Washington State.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Implications Derived from Global Experiences of Barriers to Integrating Community Pharmacists into Primary Healthcare: A Scoping Review.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: As the shortage of primary care providers widens nationwide, access to care utilizing non-physician providers is one strategy to ensure equitable access to care. This study aimed to compare community pharmacist-provided care for minor ailments to care provided at three traditional sites of care: primary care, urgent care, and emergency department, to determine if care provided by pharmacists improved access with comparable quality and reduced financial strain on the healthcare system. Methods: Pharmacy data was provided from 46 pharmacies and 175 pharmacists who participated across five pharmacy corporations over a 3-year period (2016-2019). Data for non-pharmacy sites of care was provided by a large health plan, matching episodes of care for conditions seen in the community pharmacy. Cost-of-care analysis was conducted using superiority study design and revisit data analysis was conducted using noninferiority study design. Results: Median cost-of-care across traditional sites of care was $277.78 higher than care provided at the pharmacies, showing superiority. Noninferiority was demonstrated for revisit care when the initial visit was conducted by a pharmacist compared to traditional sites. Discussion: The authors conclude community pharmacist-provided care for minor ailments improved cost-effective access for patients with comparable quality and reduced financial strains on the healthcare system.
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.