Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41739408›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2026

ESCP best practice: development, implementation and evaluation of sick day guidance in primary care in the Netherlands.

Tristan Coppes, Ellen S Koster, Daphne Philbert, Teun van Gelder, Marcel L Bouvy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Tristan CoppesDepartment of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Faculty of Science, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, PO Box 80082, 3508 TB, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2817-139X
Ellen S KosterEducation Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Daphne PhilbertDepartment of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Faculty of Science, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, PO Box 80082, 3508 TB, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Teun van GelderDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Toxicology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5980-6947
Marcel L BouvyDepartment of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Faculty of Science, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, PO Box 80082, 3508 TB, Utrecht, The Netherlands. m.l.bouvy@uu.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4596-0684

Funding

ZonMw GGG - 10140021910503
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo prevent acute kidney injury, guidelines recommend temporary adjustment of high-risk medications in patients with impaired renal function during so-called 'sick days'. Sick days are periods with increased risk of dehydration, such as diarrhoea, fever or vomiting. Currently, awareness of sick day guidance among patients and healthcare professionals is low, which hampers implementation in daily practice.

aimTo develop, implement and evaluate sick day guidance for patients with pre-existing impaired renal function on maintenance treatment with high-risk medication.

settingOver a 12 month study period, community pharmacies collaborated with at least one affiliated general practitioner (GP) to implement sick day guidance in primary care. DEVELOPMENT: Training materials, including an E-learning module for healthcare professionals and patient information materials were developed. IMPLEMENTATION: In total, 21 community pharmacies completed the 12 month study period, in which 373 patients received oral and written instructions to report sick days to the GP or pharmacist. The median age of included patients was 78 years (IQR 73-83), 42% were male, and 68% used ≥ 2 high-risk medications. The implementation process of sick day guidance was evaluated with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), including a start interview in every pharmacy, registration of agreements, monthly telephone evaluations and an end-evaluation interview. EVALUATION: Successful implementation was facilitated by adequate training, strong team engagement and support, and making pharmacy technicians responsible for information provision as well as providing in-person counselling to patients. Implementation barriers related to a lack of support from the information system, a lack of reimbursement and a low number of reported sick days. Patients reported 8 sick days, although a telephone survey amongst 188 patients showed that 12 more sick days had occurred.

conclusionWhile training healthcare professionals supports appropriate medication adjustments when sick days are reported, patient education alone does not consistently lead to reporting. Additional implementation efforts, such as involving informal caregivers, may be needed to support patients in signalling and managing sick days.

Indexed as

Community Pharmacy ServicesPractice Guidelines as TopicPrimary Health CareSick LeaveAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleNetherlandsPatient Education as TopicPharmacistsGeneral practitionerImplementationMedication managementPharmacyPharmacy technicianPrimary careSick day guidance

Identifiers

PMID41739408
PMCPMC12992379

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.