ArticleEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2025
Assessing the Impact of Pharmacist-Led Interventions in an Academic Pain Clinic: Clinical Outcomes and Interprofessional Insights.
Article in European journal of pain (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nationwide validation of the CLEO tool to evaluate the relevance of pharmacists' interventions in German hospitals.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Assessing the Impact of Pharmacist-Led Interventions in an Academic Pain Clinic: Clinical Outcomes and Interprofessional Insights.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPolypharmacy is common among people living with chronic pain. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of pharmacist-led medication reviews (MRs) in a pain clinic and to explore the perceptions of the interdisciplinary team regarding these interventions.
methodsWe analysed data from pharmacist-led MRs performed on patients admitted to day hospitals between November 2022 and April 2023. The clinical impact of MRs was assessed using validated scoring tools, and predictors of MR performance were identified through multivariate analysis. Additionally, focus groups were conducted to capture the interdisciplinary team's perception of integrating MR into clinical practice.
resultsAmong the 107 patients reviewed (88.8% over 40 years old; 67.3% female; 59.8% neuropathic pain), the most frequent pharmacist interventions included dosage adjustments (35%), treatment discontinuations (26%) or switches (22%), primarily targeting nervous system drugs (65%). These interventions were deemed clinically significant or very significant in 91% of cases based on the Hatoum Scale. Predictive factors influencing MR performance included the total number of medications, pain type and self-medication practices. Focus group discussions revealed three key themes: the value of interprofessional collaboration, the positive impact of pharmacist expertise on patient care and opportunities for practice evolution through pharmacist integration.
conclusionPharmacist-led MRs in a pain clinic have demonstrated significant clinical impact. By identifying predictors of effective interventions, this study provides insights for targeting patients who may benefit most. Furthermore, the recognition of pharmacists' expertise by the interdisciplinary team supports the integration of pharmacy-led initiatives to enhance collaborative care and improve pain management practices. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: We conducted an original study combining quantitative and qualitative aspects. This study illustrates the value of developing pharmacist-led interventions in a pain clinic and suggests easily accessible criteria for prioritising medication reviews in clinical daily practice. It demonstrated the benefits of a pharmacist involvement in a specialised care unit, with actionable insights for optimising interprofessional collaboration and targeting priority patients.
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.