ArticleDrug, healthcare and patient safety2025
Establishing Interprofessional Medication Reviews in Home Care Patients - A Feasibility Study.
Article in Drug, healthcare and patient safety, 2025. 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.
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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Medication-related problems are especially frequent among home-care patients, who are predominantly older, multimorbid, polymedicated and interact with multiple professionals, necessitating timely, complete and accurate drug information communication. Aim: To pilot a standardised approach to interprofessional home-care medication management focusing on deprescribing. Methods: Home-care patients, cared for in their own homes by one professional nursing agency in the city of Bern, Switzerland, aged ≥64 and taking ≥4 prescribed medications were assessed for medication-related risk with the interprofessional, 10-item doMESTIC RISK tool. Community pharmacists performed structured medication reviews for at-risk patients, communicating with primary care physicians via standardised form. Results: Nurses initiated 106 risk analyses (as defined in the process) in consenting patients, with 76 (72%) completed by pharmacists; 30 analyses could not be completed due to missing information. Out of 76 patients with a completed risk assessment, 26 patients did not need a medication review; one score was missing. The 49 patients qualifying for a medication review were on average 84.0 ± 7.7 years old and took a mean of 11.2 ± 4.5 prescribed medications regularly and 2.8 ± 3.5 prescribed as-needed medications. Pharmacists identified a median of two problems per patient, suggesting 64 potential interventions. Forty-three priority interventions for 18 patients were communicated to physicians, mostly dose reduction (27%) and therapy cessation (23%). Despite providing comprehensive information in the requests, physicians only reacted to 50% of pharmacists' recommendations (9/18 patients), accepting 57% of pharmacists suggestions in nine patients, predominantly deprescribing (nine medications). Conclusion: While pharmacists identified medication improvements through structured medication reviews, limited access to clinical information and insufficient communication between health care professionals were key barriers. Strengthening interprofessional collaboration and structured communication through shared platforms allowing clinical data exchange is essential to optimizing medication management in home-care. Clarification of the roles of the team members must be improved.
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.