Trial reportBMJ open quality2023
Automatic medication refills to improve glycaemic control among patients with diabetes and low medication adherence.
Trial report in BMJ open quality, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedication adherence impacts health outcomes. Healthcare organisations implementing system-level interventions have potential for greater spread and sustainability than individual-level interventions. Within the integrated US Veterans Health Administration, a multidisciplinary team developed and evaluated a pilot quality improvement programme to assess the feasibility of automatic mailed prescription refills for patients with diabetes and low medication adherence (assessed by medication possession ratio <80%).
methodsPatients were randomised to usual care with self-initiated refills versus automatic mailed refills for 6 months. Process outcomes included glycaemic control measures (HgbA1C), medication possession ratios for both automatic and self-initiated (reference) refills of medications, patient satisfaction and workforce effort (pharmacist time).
resultsOverall, 199 patients were randomised to automatic refills (n=99; 40 of whom participated) versus usual care (n=100). In multivariable analysis adjusting for baseline differences, after 6 months there was no difference in the proportion of patients with follow-up HgbA1C <8% (60.8% automatic refills vs 60.5% usual care, p=0.96). In the automatic refill group, the medication possession ratio for reference medicines was significantly higher than usual care (63.9% vs 54.5%, 95% CI (for difference) 3.1% to 15.9%, p<0.01).
conclusionsImplications and lessons from this pilot programme include potential beneficial indirect effects from automatic medication refills on patient self-initiated refills of other medications; the importance of tailoring solutions to patient subgroups and specific adherence barriers; and recognition that the rapid deployment, iteration and evaluation of the project was facilitated by a multidisciplinary team embedded within an organisational learning health system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.