Clifford 2005.
| Methods | Randomised trial | |
| Participants | Patients: 180 (intervention 92; control 88)
Professional (delivering intervention): unclear
Practices: 1 University‐affiliated internal medicine clinic Australia Year of study: February 2001 to November 2002 |
|
| Interventions | Pharmacist assessed patients' drug regimen and clinical parameters, developed therapeutic plan, provided patient education about diet, exercise, compliance and home‐glucose monitoring, and forwarded patient information (medication lists, laboratory results, goals) to primary care pharmacists, vs usual care. Length of intervention: 5 to 30 minutes (average 15 minutes) Number of interventions: 8 in 12 months (face‐to‐face meetings at baseline, 6, and 12 months; 6‐weekly intervals by phone) | |
| Outcomes | HbA1c Fasting plasma glucose, blood pressure, serum lipids, urinary albumin‐to‐creatinine ratio |
|
| Notes | Funding source: The Raine Foundation, University of Western Australia, funded the FDS. R.M.C. was the recipient of a National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia PhD scholarship. Conflict of interest: Not stated |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | A subset of patients was randomised to the intervention or usual care by consecutive allocation |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | High risk | Quote: "randomised...by consecutive allocation" |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All Outcomes/Outcome 1 | Low risk | Personnel were not blinded but all differences in behaviour between control and intervention arm appear to be legitimate parts of the intervention. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All Outcomes/Outcome 1 | Low risk | Assessors unblinded, but the main outcome does not allow for significant detection bias. HbA1c is an objective measure. |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Between group attrition < 10%. Overall competion rate >90% |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Main outcomes reported |
| Other bias | Low risk | None |