دورية أكاديمية
Exploring the heterogeneity in community pharmacist-led medication review studies - A systematic review.
| العنوان: | Exploring the heterogeneity in community pharmacist-led medication review studies - A systematic review. |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Vogt CJ; Heidelberg University, Medical Faculty Heidelberg/Heidelberg University Hospital, Internal Medicine IX - Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany; Cooperation Unit Clinical Pharmacy, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. Electronic address: Cathrin.Vogt@med.uni-heidelberg.de., Moecker R; Heidelberg University, Medical Faculty Heidelberg/Heidelberg University Hospital, Internal Medicine IX - Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany; Cooperation Unit Clinical Pharmacy, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. Electronic address: Robert.Moecker@med.uni-heidelberg.de., Jacke CO; Scientific Institute of Private Health Insurance (WIP), Gustav-Heinemann-Ufer 74c, 50968, Cologne, Germany. Electronic address: Christian.Jacke@wip-pkv.de., Haefeli WE; Heidelberg University, Medical Faculty Heidelberg/Heidelberg University Hospital, Internal Medicine IX - Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany; Cooperation Unit Clinical Pharmacy, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. Electronic address: Walter-Emil.Haefeli@med.uni-heidelberg.de., Seidling HM; Heidelberg University, Medical Faculty Heidelberg/Heidelberg University Hospital, Internal Medicine IX - Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany; Cooperation Unit Clinical Pharmacy, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. Electronic address: Hanna.Seidling@med.uni-heidelberg.de. |
| المصدر: | Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP [Res Social Adm Pharm] 2024 Aug; Vol. 20 (8), pp. 679-688. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Mar 28. |
| نوع المنشور: | Journal Article; Systematic Review; Review |
| اللغة: | English |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: Elsevier Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101231974 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1934-8150 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 15517411 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Res Social Adm Pharm Subsets: MEDLINE |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Original Publication: New York, NY : Elsevier |
| مواضيع طبية MeSH: | Community Pharmacy Services*/organization & administration , Pharmacists*/organization & administration, Humans ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Patient Selection ; Professional Role |
| مستخلص: | Background: Findings on the effectiveness of medication reviews led by community pharmacists (CPs) are often inconclusive. It has been hypothesized that studies are not sufficiently standardized, and thus, it is difficult to draw conclusions. Objective(s): To examine differences in the way CP-led medication review studies are set up. This was accomplished by investigating (1) patient selection criteria, (2) components of the medication review interventions, (3) types of outcomes, and (4) measurement instruments used. Methods: A systematic literature search of randomized controlled trials of CP-led medication reviews was carried out in PubMed and Cochrane Library. Information on patient selection, intervention components, and outcome measurements was extracted, and frequencies were analyzed. Where possible, outcomes were mapped to the Core Outcome Set (COS) for medication review studies. Finally, a network analysis was conducted to explore the influence of individual factors on outcome effects. Results: In total, 30 articles (26 studies) were included. Most articles had a drug class-specific or disease-specific patient selection criterion (n = 19). Half of the articles included patients aged ≥60 years (n = 15), and in 40% (n = 12/30) patients taking 4 drugs or more. In 24 of 30 articles, a medication review was comprised with additional interventions, such as distribution of educational material and training or follow-up visits. About 40 different outcomes were extracted. Within specific outcomes, the measurement instruments varied, and COS was rarely represented. Conclusion: The revealed differences in patient selection, intervention delivery, and outcome assessment highlight the need for more standardization in research on CP-led medication reviews. While intervention delivery should be more precisely described to capture potential differences between interventions, outcome assessment should be standardized in terms of outcome selection by application of the COS, and with regard to the selected core outcome measurement instruments to enable comparison of the results. (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.) |
| فهرسة مساهمة: | Keywords: Community pharmacy services; Medication review; Outcome assessment; Visual data analysis |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 20240529 Date Completed: 20240615 Latest Revision: 20240625 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20240625 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.sapharm.2024.03.012 |
| PMID: | 38811260 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
Full Text Finder | تدمد: | 1934-8150 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.sapharm.2024.03.012 |