• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The International journal of pharmacy practice >The General Practitioner-Pharmacist Collaboration (GPPC) study: a randomised controlled trial of clinical medication reviews in community pharmacy.
【24h】

The General Practitioner-Pharmacist Collaboration (GPPC) study: a randomised controlled trial of clinical medication reviews in community pharmacy.

机译：全科医生与药师合作组织（GPPC）的研究：社区药房临床药物评价的随机对照试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

OBJECTIVES: There are conflicting results in studies of pharmacists undertaking medication reviews for older people. With increasing promotion and funding for 'medication reviews' there is a need for them to be standardised, and to determine their effectiveness and the feasibility of providing them from a community pharmacy. The objective was to determine whether involvement of community pharmacists undertaking clinical medication reviews, working with general practitioners, improved medicine-related therapeutic outcomes for patients. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial was carried out in people 65 years and older on five or more prescribed medicines. Community pharmacists undertook a clinical medication review (Comprehensive Pharmaceutical Care) and met with the patient's general practitioner to discuss recommendations about possible medicine changes. The patients were followed-up 3-monthly. The control group received usual care. The main outcome measures were Quality of Life (SF-36) and Medication Appropriateness Index. KEY FINDINGS: A total of 498 patients were enrolled in the study. The quality-of-life domains of emotional role and social functioning were significantly reduced in the intervention group compared to the control group. The Medication Appropriateness Index was significantly improved in the intervention group. Only 39% of the 44 pharmacists who agreed to participate in the study provided adequate data, which was a limitation of the study and indicated potential barriers to the generalisability of the study. CONCLUSION: Clinical medication reviews in collaboration with general practitioners can have a positive effect on the Medication Appropriateness Index. However, pharmacist withdrawal from the study suggests that community pharmacy may not be an appropriate environment from which to expand clinical medication reviews in primary care.
机译：目的：在对老年人进行药物审查的药剂师的研究中有相互矛盾的结果。随着“药物审查”的促销和资金的增加，有必要对其进行标准化，并确定其有效性以及从社区药房提供它们的可行性。目的是确定社区药师参与临床药物审查，与全科医生合作是否改善了患者的药物相关治疗效果。方法：对年龄在65岁及以上的人群进行了五种或更多种处方药的随机对照试验。社区药师进行了临床药物审查（综合药物护理），并与患者的全科医生会面，讨论了有关可能的药物变化的建议。对患者进行3个月的随访。对照组接受常规护理。主要结局指标为生活质量（SF-36）和用药适当性指数。主要发现：共有498名患者参加了研究。与对照组相比，干预组的情感角色和社交功能生活质量域显着降低。干预组的药物适当性指数显着改善。同意参加该研究的44位药剂师中，只有39％提供了足够的数据，这是该研究的局限性，并表明了该研究的普遍性的潜在障碍。结论：与全科医生合作进行临床药物审查可对药物适宜性指数产生积极影响。但是，药剂师退出研究表明，社区药房可能不是扩展基层医疗临床药物审查的合适环境。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号