ArticleBMC geriatrics2026
The impact of an intervention by a mobile geriatrics team including a pharmacist on potentially inappropriate drug prescription: results of the PharMoG study.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04151797 (Impact of a Mobile Geriatric Team With a Pharmacist on the Optimisation of Prescriptions in Elderly Inpatients), which is not on this 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.
Impact of a Mobile Geriatric Team With a Pharmacist on the Optimisation of Prescriptions in Elderly Inpatients
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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPolypharmacy and pharmacokinetic alterations expose elderly patients to an increased risk of iatrogenic events, hospitalisation, and healthcare costs. Therapeutic optimisation is based on identifying potentially inappropriate drug prescriptions (PIDPs) using an explicit approach based on standardised criteria such as STOPP & START and/or an implicit approach. Mobile Geriatric Teams (hereinafter MGT) and clinical pharmacists work together to reduce PIDPs, but pharmacists are not always part of these teams. The PharMoG study included a pharmacist in the MGT (PharMoG team) from a French institution to assess the impact of this collaboration on the acceptance rate of pharmaceutical interventions related to PIDPs.
methodsThe PharMoG study included elderly patients who were hospitalised. PIDPs were identified before the intervention, at discharge, and three months later using implicit and explicit approaches. The PharMoG team proposed therapeutic optimisation, the acceptance of which by the prescribers was monitored. The analyses used tests suitable for repeated measures and univariate and multivariate models to identify factors associated with acceptance of the proposals. Medication costs were assessed before, at discharge, and three months after the intervention.
resultsThe study included patients with an average age of 87.3 years, and with a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of ≥ 3 in 43.1% of cases. Prior to the intervention, patients were taking an average of 11.3 medicines and had 5.4 identified PIDPs. After the intervention, the average number of medications decreased significantly (p = 0.04), as did the number of PIDPs per patient (p < 0.01), while the proportion of patients exposed to at least one PIDP did not change significantly (p = 0.07). The acceptance rate of the PharMoG team’s proposed treatment optimisations related to PIDPs averaged 65.8% at discharge, with a slight decline three months later. The cost analyses indicate an absence of a significant and robust reduction in prescription costs.
conclusionThe PharMoG team’s intervention is associated with a reduction in the number of medicines and PIDPs. These results, although promising, require comparative studies and more comprehensive follow-up to confirm their clinical and economic impact. The study highlights the value of interprofessional cooperation in optimising medication prescriptions for elderly patients, both within hospitals and with community-based professionals.
trial registrationNCT04151797 https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04151797 .
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.