Ali 2012.
| Methods | Randomised trial | |
| Participants | 46 participants with type 2 diabetes (intervention 23; control 23) 2 branches of a pharmacy chain in Hertfordshire United Kingdom Year of study: February 2008 and July 2009. |
|
| Interventions | Intervention group received a pharmaceutical care package with regular monitoring and consultations with the community pharmacist for 12 months. Pharmacists carried out a targeted medicine use review (if required) and lifestyle modification counselling with a referral to a general practitioner or other healthcare professional where appropriate. Patients were seen by the pharmacist every month for the first 2 months, and then every 3 months a total of 6 appointments. Duration 12 months |
|
| Outcomes | HbA1C Blood glucose Diabetes Quality of Life |
|
| Notes | Funding source: UK Department of Health. Equipment from Merek Sharp and Dohme Conflict of interest: No party had involvement in the design, conduct or analysis or preparation of the manuscript. However, Professor Robinson from Merck Sharp and Dohme Ltd helped in the analysis and manuscript preparation but received no consulting fee. |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Randomisation was conducted by a computer‐generated randomised list held by the researcher at the School of Pharmacy, eliminating the potential influence of pharmacists on the randomisation. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No relevant information provided |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All Outcomes/Outcome 1 | Low risk | Differences in implementation of the intervention are legitimate parts of the intervention. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All Outcomes/Outcome 1 | Low risk | Assessors (participants/self‐report) were not blind to intervention but HbA1c is an objective measure. |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | 2 participants missing. Between group attrition < 10%. |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | All main outcomes reported |
| Other bias | Low risk | None |