ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2026
Codesigning a pharmacist-led transition of care program in the emergency department: a qualitative participatory study.
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.
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.
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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionTransitions from the emergency department (ED) to home are high-risk periods for medication-related harm. Pharmacist-led interventions may improve medication safety and care continuity, however, co-designed approaches to developing such interventions remain limited.
aimThis study aimed to co-design a pharmacist-led transition-of-care (ToC) program to improve medication management for adults discharged from the ED, with the intention of subsequently evaluating it in a pilot randomized controlled trial.
methodA two-phase qualitative study was undertaken at a general teaching hospital in Qatar within a Participatory Health Research (PHR) framework. Phase I involved one-to-one interviews and focus groups with patients, pharmacists, physicians, and nurses. Phase II consisted of a co-design workshop with decision makers, including departmental leaders and hospital administrators, followed by structured refinement through additional stakeholder meetings and an electronic prioritization survey. Data were analyzed using an inductive-deductive approach, guided by two theoretical frameworks, the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Care Transitions Framework. Five proposed interventions were evaluated against the APEASE (Acceptability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Affordability, Safety, Equity) criteria, and identified barriers were mapped to corresponding intervention functions and implementation strategies.
resultsPhase I, comprising three focus groups with physicians (n = 6), nurses (n = 7), and clinical pharmacists (n = 6), and four interviews with two patients and two Patient and Family Advisory Council (PFAC) representatives, identified barriers, enablers, and stakeholder priorities related to medicines management that informed the Phase II co-design workshop. Stakeholders rated the five proposed interventions: discharge medication reconciliation, prescription review, patient counseling and education, pharmacist-to-pharmacist handover, and post-discharge follow-up with medication review, as highly feasible (mean 83%). All intervention components were retained due to their interdependence. Eligibility criteria for this intervention were decided as: patients discharged with new chronic diagnoses, newly prescribed high-risk medications, polypharmacy (i.e., taking ≥ 5 regular medications), and chronic disease exacerbations. A standardized workflow was co-developed, outlining patient identification and communication. Stakeholders prioritized key intervention functions and implementation strategies via structured voting.
conclusionThe pharmacist-led transition-of-care program blueprint was co-designed using a participatory, theory-informed process. The finalized program will undergo feasibility testing through a pilot randomized controlled trial and a process evaluation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42599561What 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.