Volume 2001.
| Methods | Randomised trial | |
| Participants | 363 elderly participants (group numbers not stated) Ambulatory elderly (≥ 65 years of age) patients who were concurrently using 3+ medications according to pharmacy profile. 16 community pharmacies Alberta, Canada Year of study: June 1997 to not stated. |
|
| Interventions | Pharmaceutical care Treatment pharmacists were enrolled in an intensive education programme designed to give them the necessary skill sets to provide care to study patients. Treatment pharmacists used an initial interview and frequent follow‐up communication with the patient and other caregivers. In addition, pharmaceutical care interventions were often due to an in‐depth review of the information collected by establishing a therapeutic relationship with the patient as opposed to being triggered by the receipt of a prescription, as was the case in the control pharmacies. The frequency, number and duration of interventions was unclear. Duration of study: 16 months. |
|
| Outcomes | None available | |
| Notes | Funding source: Hoechst Marion Roussel provided an unconditional grant Conflict of interest: None stated |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | The study statistician did not know the identity of the pharmacies and randomly assigned pharmacies from 6 of the 8 pairs to either the treatment or the control group. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | The study statistician did not know the identity of the pharmacies and randomly assigned pharmacies from 6 of the 8 pairs to either the treatment or the control group. |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All Outcomes/Outcome 1 | Unclear risk | Quote: "Treatment pharmacists were enrolled in an intensive education program designed to give them the necessary skills..." Personnel were not blinded. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All Outcomes/Outcome 1 | High risk | Quote: "It was not possible to blind patients to the intervention" and adherence to medication regimens and patient satisfaction were measured with "self‐report measures". Hence unblinded assessors |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | Only 5 of 8 intervention pharmacists and 7 of 8 control pharmacists provided data. Reasons for lack of data provision included lack of owner commitment. |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Outcomes unavailable |
| Other bias | Unclear risk | Unclear |