Olesen 2014.
| Methods | Randomised trial | |
| Participants | 630 participants ‐ elderly patients (intervention 315: control 315) 9 pharmacists Aarhus, Denmark Year of study: Not stated. |
|
| Interventions | Intervention‐group patients received a home visit by a pharmacist at the beginning of the project. The pharmacist examined the medicines list to consider possible side effects, interactions, and administration, then simplified the regimen, informed the patients about medication, listened to questions concerning medication, provided information leaflets, and motivated adherence. Participating pharmacists must have had some practical experience or courses in Medication Review. No further training or standardisation was arranged. At 3, 6 and 9 months the same pharmacists telephoned the patients to inquire about the patients’ condition and changes in the medicine, uncover problems and answer questions. Pharmacists could consult the project physician if required. If the physician agreed with the pharmacists concerns, the pharmacist contact the general practitioner. There were no standardised criteria for severity of medication problems. Frequency: Baseline home visit. 3,6,9 months telephone review |
|
| Outcomes | Number of hospitalisations | |
| Notes | Funding source: This study was supported by the Danish Ministry of Health and the Association of Danish Pharmacies. Conflict of interest: None stated |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | A total of 945 envelopes (315 per patient subgroup) was prepared with each containing a study inclusion code. At the first home visit by a project nurse, patients were asked to select one envelope. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | A total of 945 envelopes (315 per patient subgroup) was prepared with each containing a study inclusion code. At the first home visit by a project nurse, patients were asked to select one envelope. |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All Outcomes/Outcome 1 | Low risk | It was impossible to conceal the identity of patients in the pharmaceutical care group since the procedures were complex and involved the pharmacists and nurses. However, hospitalisations were deemed to be an objective measure. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All Outcomes/Outcome 1 | Low risk | Objective outcomes collected from electronic records, hence unlikely to be biased. Probably blinded assessment |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Between group attrition < 10% |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | All outcomes reported |
| Other bias | Low risk | None |