2017
DOI: 10.1186/s13012-016-0535-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact of a tailored program on the implementation of evidence-based recommendations for multimorbid patients with polypharmacy in primary care practices—results of a cluster-randomized controlled trial

Abstract: BackgroundMultimorbid patients receiving polypharmacy represent a growing population at high risk for negative health outcomes. Tailoring is an approach of systematic intervention development taking account of previously identified determinants of practice. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of a tailored program to improve the implementation of three important processes of care for this patient group: (a) structured medication counseling including brown bag reviews, (b) the use of medication lists… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
30
0
2

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
0
30
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Our iterative searches returned 82 background papers (S3 File). Among retrieved papers, we deemed eligible and relevant 21 systematic reviews [3353], 14 randomised controlled trials [5467], 11 non-randomised controlled studies [68–78], 11 qualitative studies [7989], and one mixed methods study [90] (S4 File). The systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials, cohort and controlled before-and-after studies each described and evaluated the processes or techniques QCs used.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our iterative searches returned 82 background papers (S3 File). Among retrieved papers, we deemed eligible and relevant 21 systematic reviews [3353], 14 randomised controlled trials [5467], 11 non-randomised controlled studies [68–78], 11 qualitative studies [7989], and one mixed methods study [90] (S4 File). The systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials, cohort and controlled before-and-after studies each described and evaluated the processes or techniques QCs used.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is often the starting point for mutual learning [23, 96, 99]. Depending on the country’s tradition, QCs might not be limited to GPs but involve other professionals in PHC, including practice assistants (in the Netherlands and Germany) or practice teams (in Scotland), who add perspectives to the QC process [59, 67, 82, 100102]. Interprofessional collaboration and mutual learning may also involve practice nurses [103] or specialists invited to QCs to share expertise on a specific topic, e.g., pharmacists who contribute to a discussion on prescription patterns [75, 104, 105].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this analysis, 25% of study participants had no medication list or the medication list was outdated according to the assessment of the study nurse. We cannot estimate if this rate of PwD is high or low because in German studies, the rate of elderly patients with polypharmacy who do not have a medication list differs greatly between 10% and 75% (Jäger et al , 2017 ). Nevertheless, these findings are relevant because the study participants took six prescribed drugs on average.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although many of the lessons from the SIMPATHY case studies have been discussed in the context of quality improvement, these principles have not previously been systematically applied to published polypharmacy management interventions. To date, interventions and recommendations to address polypharmacy have been primarily focused at the clinical level looking, for example, at strategies to improve prescribing or patient adherence [ 48 50 ]. Many interventions either fail to take into account, or do not report on, broader systems level issues, such as the need to change reimbursement models or employ a change management strategy to speed implementation as was highlighted in this analysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%