Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2008 Jun;14(3):446-52.
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2007.00900.x. Epub 2008 Mar 24.

Comparison of two methods for performing treatment reviews by pharmacists and general practitioners for home-dwelling elderly people

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of two methods for performing treatment reviews by pharmacists and general practitioners for home-dwelling elderly people

Wilma Denneboom et al. J Eval Clin Pract. 2008 Jun.

Abstract

Rationale, aims and objectives: There is room for improvement in pharmacotherapy for elderly outpatients. Studies have shown that collaborating health care professionals [e.g. pharmacists in cooperation with general practitioners (GPs)] are able to resolve prescription-related pharmaceutical care issues by means of treatment reviews. The aim of the study was to describe the feasibility of two methods for treatment review (results were given to the GP either in case conferences or in written feedback), and to determine if and how the process of treatment review can be improved.

Setting: Local pharmacists and GPs cooperated in performing treatment reviews for outpatients aged 75 years or more who were using five or more medicines chronically.

Method: Written questionnaires, structured telephone interviews and analysis of various features of the treatment reviews that were recorded during the intervention study were used.

Results: The pharmacists in the case conference group made more recommendations to the GPs (non-significant). Significantly more recommendations were identified by the pharmacists themselves in the case conference group. Health care professionals accepted an intervention with personal contact in case conferences better than an intervention with feedback in writing. They were more positive about the process of treatment review presented personally, although there were not always as many medication changes as they had hoped for. They also had concrete suggestions for improving the intervention, such as using a combination of written feedback and case conferences, and reserving the case conferences for the most complex cases.

Conclusions: Treatment reviews for the elderly in normal primary care are feasible. Health care professionals agree that the process for treatment review can be improved.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources