Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38635115›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2024

Assessing feasibility of conducting medication review with follow-up among older adults at community pharmacy: a pilot randomised controlled trial.

Christina Malini Christopher, Ali Qais Blebil, K C Bhuvan, Deepa Alex, Mohamed Izham Mohamed Ibrahim, Norhasimah Ismail, Mark Wing Loong Cheong

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05297461 (Impact of Community Pharmacists' Medication Review on Medication Use Related Problems Among Older Adults in Penang), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05297461 nacompletednot on this map

Impact of Community Pharmacists' Medication Review on Medication Use Related Problems Among Older Adults in Penang: A Pilot Randomised Controlled Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorMonash University MalaysiaRan2022 to 2023Enrolled27ConditionsAgingArmsMedication review
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Christina Malini ChristopherSchool of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, Jalan Lagoon Selatan, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia. christina.christopher@monash.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0272-2117
Ali Qais BlebilSchool of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, Jalan Lagoon Selatan, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
K C BhuvanSchool of Clinical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Deepa AlexJeffrey Cheah School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Monash University Malaysia, Jalan Lagoon Selatan, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
Mohamed Izham Mohamed IbrahimClinical Pharmacy and Practice Department, College of Pharmacy, QU Health, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar.
Norhasimah IsmailBayan Lepas Health Clinic, Ministry of Health, Bayan Lepas, Penang, Malaysia.
Mark Wing Loong CheongSchool of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, Jalan Lagoon Selatan, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
Monash University Malaysia · MYMinistry of Health · MYQatar University · QAQueensland University of Technology · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedication review with follow-up is essential for optimising medication utilisation among the older adult population in primary healthcare.

aimThis study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of implementing medication reviews with follow-up for older adults in community pharmacies and examined potential outcomes on medication use.

methodA pilot randomised controlled trial was conducted with 4 cluster-randomised community pharmacies to assess the feasibility of the intervention. Two community pharmacies served as intervention and control groups. Both groups recruited older adults over 60 who were followed over 6 months. The translated Medication use Questionnaire (MedUseQ) was administered at baseline and 6 months for both groups. The outcomes were to assess the feasibility of conducting medication review with follow-up and the probable medication use outcomes from the intervention.

resultsThe intervention and control groups comprised 14 and 13 older adults. A total of 35 recommendations were made by pharmacists in the intervention group and 8 in the control group. MedUseQ was easily administered, providing some evidence the feasibility of the intervention. However, there were feasibility challenges such as a lack of pharmacists, collaborative practice, difficulties with the tool language, time constraints, and limited funds. Questionnaire results provided a signal of improvement in medication administration, adherence, and polypharmacy among intervention participants. The incidence of drug related problems was significantly higher in the control group (median = 1) after 6 months, U = 15, z = - 2.98, p = 0.01.

conclusionMedication review with follow-up is potentialy practical in community pharmacies, but there are feasibility issues. While these challenges can be addressed, it is essential to study larger sample sizes to establish more robust evidence regarding outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT05297461.

Indexed as

Community Pharmacy ServicesPharmacistsAgedAged, 80 and overDrug MonitoringFeasibility StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMedication ReconciliationMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsPolypharmacySurveys and QuestionnairesCommunity pharmacyFeasibilityMedication reviewOlder adultsPilot RCT

Identifiers

PMID38635115
PMCPMC11286689
OpenAlexW4394920839

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.