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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2016 Jun 2;11(6):e0156304.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0156304. eCollection 2016.

Priority Setting and Influential Factors on Acceptance of Pharmaceutical Recommendations in Collaborative Medication Reviews in an Ambulatory Care Setting - Analysis of a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial (WestGem-Study)

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Priority Setting and Influential Factors on Acceptance of Pharmaceutical Recommendations in Collaborative Medication Reviews in an Ambulatory Care Setting - Analysis of a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial (WestGem-Study)

Olaf Rose et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: Medication reviews are recognized services to increase quality of therapy and reduce medication risks. The selection of eligible patients with potential to receive a major benefit is based on assumptions rather than on factual data. Acceptance of interprofessional collaboration is crucial to increase the quality of medication therapy.

Objective: The research question was to identify and prioritize eligible patients for a medication review and to provide evidence-based criteria for patient selection. Acceptance of the prescribing general practitioner to implement pharmaceutical recommendations was measured and factors influencing physicians' acceptance were explored to obtain an impression on the extent of collaboration in medication review in an ambulatory care setting.

Methods: Based on data of a cluster-randomized controlled study (WestGem-study), the correlation between patient parameters and the individual performance in a medication review was calculated in a multiple logistic regression model. Physician's acceptance of the suggested intervention was assessed using feedback forms. Influential factors were analyzed.

Results: The number of drugs in use (p = 0.001), discrepancies between prescribed and used medicines (p = 0.014), the baseline Medication Appropriateness Index score (p<0.001) and the duration of the intervention (p = 0.006) could be identified as influential factors for a major benefit from a medication review, whereas morbidity (p>0.05) and a low kidney function (p>0.05) do not predetermine the outcome. Longitudinal patient care with repeated reviews showed higher interprofessional acceptance and superior patient benefit. A total of 54.9% of the recommendations in a medication review on drug therapy were accepted for implementation.

Conclusions: The number of drugs in use and medication reconciliation could be a first rational step in patient selection for a medication review. Most elderly, multimorbid patients with polymedication experience a similar chance of receiving a benefit from a medication review. Longitudinal patient care should be preferred over confined medication reviews. The acceptance of medication reviews by physicians supports further implementation into health care systems.

Trial registration: ISRCTN ISRCTN41595373.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have the following interests: Olaf Rose, Carina John, Marcus Lautenschläger, Damaris Mertens-Keller, Katharina Richling and Isabel Waltering are/were employed by Elefanten-Apotheke during the course of the study. Olaf Rose has received lecture fees and reimbursement of conference fees and travel expenses by Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medac and MSD. Ina Richling has received lecture fees and reimbursement of conference fees and travel expenses by Medac, MSD, AstraZeneca, Berlin-Chemie, Boehringer Ingelheim. Lilly Deutschland, Novartis Pharma, Dr. Wilmar Schwabe, GEHE and Noweda and is a member of the advisory board of Univadis (MSD). Isabel Waltering has received lecture fees and reimbursement of conference fees and travel expenses by Medac, MSD and HRA-Pharma. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products to declare. This does not alter the authors' adherence to all the PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. CONSORT flow diagram of the WestGem-study.
Fig 2
Fig 2. ROC curve for the baseline MAI score.

References

    1. World Health Organization and International Pharmaceutical Federation 2006 (2006) Developing pharmacy practice-A focus on patient care, Handbook 2006 Edition. Available: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/new/2006/nw05/en/. Accessed 29 October 2015.
    1. Bulajeva A, Labberton L, Leikola S, Pohjanoksa-Mäntylä M, Geurts MME, de Gier JJ, et al. (2014) Medication review practices in European countries. Research in social & administrative pharmacy: RSAP 10 (5): 731–740. - PubMed
    1. Pharmaceutical care Network Europe (2016) Medication review definition approved. Available: http://www.pcne.org/news/35/medication-review-definition-approved. Accessed 5 April 2016.
    1. Patterson SM, Hughes C, Kerse N, Cardwell CR, Bradley MC (2012) Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy for older people. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 5: CD008165 10.1002/14651858.CD008165.pub2 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Isetts BJ, Schondelmeyer SW, Artz MB, Lenarz LA, Heaton AH, Wadd WB, et al. (2008) Clinical and economic outcomes of medication therapy management services: the Minnesota experience. Journal of the American Pharmacists Association: JAPhA 48 (2): 203 10.1331/JAPhA.2008.07108 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types