Pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care: The PIPPC study

Bruhn, Hanne; Blyth, Andrew; Elliott, Adam; Holland, Richard; Lee, A.; MacNamee, P.; Smith, Barbara J.; Watson, Maxwell J.; Wright, D.; Bond, Christine

doi:10.1136/jech.2011.143586.30

Cited by 8 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In total, 131 patients (12.7%) were lost to the first follow-up. Two trials included patients with chronic pain of various aetiologies, 21,23 another two involved patients with knee pain associated with osteoarthritis 19,22 and one involved chronic headache and migraine patients. 18 In four trials where gender was reported, the majority of the participants were females (61.8%).…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In three trials 18,19,21 the intervention was pharmacist-led medication review alone while in the other two [22][23] the intervention involved medication review as part of a multi-component intervention (Table 1). In the Marra et al study, 22 the intervention also comprised two components.…”

Section: Nature and Delivery Of Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of these 32 articles, nine reports of five studies met the inclusion criteria for review. [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] Figure 1 illustrates the search process and the reasons for exclusion. Two trials were conducted in the UK [19][20][21] and one each in Canada, 22 Germany, 18 and the USA.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] Figure 1 illustrates the search process and the reasons for exclusion. Two trials were conducted in the UK [19][20][21] and one each in Canada, 22 Germany, 18 and the USA. 23 The included studies comprised three individually randomized 19,21,23 and two cluster randomized controlled studies 18,22 randomizing 1035 patients in total.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two trials were conducted in the UK [19][20][21] and one each in Canada, 22 Germany, 18 and the USA. 23 The included studies comprised three individually randomized 19,21,23 and two cluster randomized controlled studies 18,22 randomizing 1035 patients in total. All followed up the patients for at least 3 months, three for 6 months and one for 12 months.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of Pharmacist-led Medication Review in Chronic Pain Management

Hadi

Alldred

Briggs

et al. 2014

The Clinical Journal of Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of pharmacist-led medication review in chronic pain management.Methods: Six electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, CINHAL, CENTRAL, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts) reference lists of retrieved articles and relevant websites were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in the English language involving adults with chronic pain. Studies were included if one of the intervention arms had received pharmacist-led medication review independently or as part of a multidisciplinary intervention. Risk of bias was assessed for all the included studies. Results:The search strategy yielded 583 unique articles with five RCTs included. Compared to control, meta-analysis showed that participants in the intervention group had: a 0.8 point reduction in pain intensity on a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale (NRS) at 3-months (95% CI, -1.28 to -0.36) and a 0.7 point reduction (95% CI -1.19 to -0.20) at 6-months; a 4.84 point (95% CI, -7.38 to -2.29) and -3.82 point (95% CI, -6.49 to -1.14) improvement in physical functioning on a 0 to 68 point function subscale of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) at 3-months and 6-months respectively; and a significant improvement in patient satisfaction equivalent to a 'small to moderate effect.' Discussion: Pharmacist-led medication review reduces pain intensity and improves physical functioning and patient satisfaction. However, the clinical significance of these findings remain uncertain due to small effect size and nature of reported data within clinical trials which limits recommendation of wider clinical role of pharmacist in chronic pain management.

show abstract

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Nature and Delivery Of Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of Pharmacist-led Medication Review in Chronic Pain Management

Hadi

Alldred

Briggs

et al. 2014

The Clinical Journal of Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Meeting the National Need for Expertise in Pain Management with Clinical Pharmacist Advanced Practice Providers

Seckel¹,

Jorgenson²,

McFarland³

2019

The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mixed-methods research in pharmacy practice: recommendations for quality reporting (part 2)

Hadi

Alldred

Closs

et al. 2013

International Journal of Pharmacy Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the second of two papers that explore the use of mixed-methods research in pharmacy practice. This paper discusses the rationale, applications, limitations and challenges of conducting mixed-methods research. As with other research methods, the choice of mixed-methods should always be justified because not all research questions require a mixed-methods approach. Mixed-methods research is particularly suitable when one dataset may be inadequate in answering the research question, an explanation of initial results is required, generalizability of qualitative findings is desired or broader and deeper understanding of a research problem is necessary. Mixed-methods research has its own challenges and limitations, which should be considered carefully while designing the study. There is a need to improve the quality of reporting of mixed-methods research. A framework for reporting mixed-methods research is proposed, for researchers and reviewers, with the intention of improving its quality. Pharmacy practice research can benefit from research that uses both 'numbers' (quantitative) and 'words' (qualitative) to develop a strong evidence base to support pharmacy-led services.

show abstract

Pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care: The PIPPC study

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Effectiveness of Pharmacist-led Medication Review in Chronic Pain Management

Effectiveness of Pharmacist-led Medication Review in Chronic Pain Management

Meeting the National Need for Expertise in Pain Management with Clinical Pharmacist Advanced Practice Providers

Mixed-methods research in pharmacy practice: recommendations for quality reporting (part 2)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About