Planas 2012.

Methods	Design: RT Groups: intervention group (diabetes management); control group (standard care)
Participants	Pharmacies: 5 Pharmacy worker: pharmacists ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user: 65 patients with diabetes and hypertension (38 intervention; 27 control) mean age: intervention 63.3 ± 10.8 years; control 63.5 ± 14.5 years % female: intervention 63.2%; control 51.9% Setting: urban Country: USA
Interventions	Pharmacy worker‐directed intervention: training on diabetes management, including the most recent treatment guidelines for diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidaemia, and on study procedures. Compensated by pharmacy chain Delivered by: investigators Type: education based on clinical practice guidelines, medication management, disease management Mode of delivery: (assumed to be) face‐to‐face TDF: knowledge Duration: 23.5 hours in total Pharmacy worker control: it appears the same pharmacists delivered treatment to both intervention and control groups. ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user‐directed intervention: patient education and diabetes management services Delivered by: pharmacists Type: self management, education based on clinical practice guidelines, medication management, other (disease management) Mode of delivery: individual face‐to‐face TDF: knowledge, skills, reinforcement, goals, environment, context, resources, behavioural regulation Duration: 9 x 1‐hour sessions held monthly Clinical outcomes collected at baseline, 3, 6, and 9 months Length of follow‐up: 9 months (end of intervention) Pharmacy user control: usual treatment
Outcomes	Pharmacy worker: not assessed ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user: Clinical: HbA1c, blood pressure, LDL cholesterol Psychological health: not assessed Behavioural: not assessed Quality of life: not assessed Process: Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) performance measures Costs: not assessed
Notes	Study/intervention name: none given Funding source: American Society of Health System Pharcists Research and Education Foundation
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomised by previously generated random number list
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Unclear if allocation was concealed
Baseline outcome measures similar	Low risk	No differences reported
Baseline characteristics similar	High risk	Difference in BMI
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Reported that used carry forward of missing data, but some exclusions if the 3 month visit was not attended, also significant dropout
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Variable use of objective primary outcome
Protection against contamination	Unclear risk	Individuals were allowed to choose what intervention to visit, it is possible that pharmacies offered both intervention and control
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Not noted
Other bias	Unclear risk	All pharmacies belonged to the same chain, which is a cause of potential bias. Each participant had to attend the initial 3 month visit to be included in analyses. Participants who dropped out of the study before the 3 month period were excluded from analyses because no effect of intervention on the outcome measures could be determined.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not mentioned ‐ not blinded