Skowron 2011.
Methods | Design: cluster‐RT Groups: intervention group (pharmaceutical care for hypertension); control group (standard care) |
|
Participants | Pharmacies: 55 (28 intervention; 27 control) Pharmacy worker: 95 pharmacists (44 intervention; 51 control) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user: 193 patients with hypertension (70 intervention; 123 control)
Setting: urban, Krakow Country: Poland |
|
Interventions |
Pharmacy worker‐directed intervention: training on detection, classification and monitoring of drug‐related problems, pathophysiology of hypertension, risk factors and life‐style factors influencing the disease, and rules of pharmacotherapy of hypertension
Pharmacy worker control: wait list; received the same training as the intervention group after final study visit ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user‐directed intervention: patients received pharmaceutical care and were educated about pathophysiology, risk factors, treatment and style of life with hypertension, as well as blood pressure measurement, and self‐measurement of blood pressure.
Pharmacy user control: usual treatment |
|
Outcomes |
Pharmacy worker:
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user:
|
|
Notes | Study/intervention name: none given Funding source: no specific grant |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Randomization of community pharmacies to control and study group was done by generation of random numbers by computer software." |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Randomization of community pharmacies to control and study group was done by generation of random numbers by computer software." |
Baseline outcome measures similar | Unclear risk | Differences in baseline for education, age and place of residence. Unclear if this was accounted for in the analysis. |
Baseline characteristics similar | High risk | Differences in education, age and residence |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | Significant number of dropouts from both groups |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | High risk | No information on blinding |
Protection against contamination | Low risk | Randomisation by pharmacies |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | High risk | No numerical reporting of quality of life |
Other bias | High risk | High number of control pharmacies withdrew |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | No information about blinding provided |