Dataset Information

Patient-reported common symptoms as an assessment of interventions in medication reviews: a randomised, controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: Background A 'Patient-Reported Outcome Measure, Inquiry into Side Effects' (PROMISE) instrument was developed for patients to report common symptoms in clinical medication reviews. Objective To determine changes in patient-reported drug-associated symptoms collected by PROMISE before and after community pharmacist-led clinical medication reviews compared with usual care. Setting Community pharmacies in the Netherlands. Methods Patients were randomised into an intervention group (IG) and a control group (CG). PROMISE was used to collect symptoms experienced during the previous month, and any suspected drug-associated symptoms from both groups at baseline and at follow-up after 3 months. IG patients received a one-time clinical medication review, while CG patients received usual care. Main outcome measure Mean number of drug-associated symptoms at follow-up. Results Measurements were completed by 78 IG and 67 CG patients from 15 community pharmacies. Mean numbers of drug-associated symptoms per patient at follow-up were 4.0 in the IG and 5.0 in the CG, with an incident rate ratio between the groups of 0.90 (95% CI 0.62-1.33). Mean numbers of drug-associated symptoms per patient reported at follow-up and persisting since baseline were 2.1 in the IG and 2.6 in the CG, with an incident rate ratio of 0.85 (95% CI 0.43-1.42). The lowest percentages of persisting drug-associated symptoms detected in the IG were 'palpitations' and 'stomach pain, dyspepsia' while in the CG they were 'stomach pain, dyspepsia' and 'trembling, shivering'. Conclusion PROMISE provided meaningful information on drug-associated symptoms in clinical medication reviews, however the number of drug-associated symptoms was not reduced by performing clinical medication reviews compared with usual care.

SUBMITTER: Schoenmakers TWA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5840243 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient-reported common symptoms as an assessment of interventions in medication reviews: a randomised, controlled trial.

Schoenmakers Tim W A TWA Wensing Michel M De Smet Peter A G M PAGM Teichert Martina M

International journal of clinical pharmacy 20171205 1

Background A 'Patient-Reported Outcome Measure, Inquiry into Side Effects' (PROMISE) instrument was developed for patients to report common symptoms in clinical medication reviews. Objective To determine changes in patient-reported drug-associated symptoms collected by PROMISE before and after community pharmacist-led clinical medication reviews compared with usual care. Setting Community pharmacies in the Netherlands. Methods Patients were randomised into an intervention group (IG) and a contro ...[more]

PMID: 29209863

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionHealthcare professionals tend to consider common non-alarming drug-related symptoms to be of little clinical relevance. However, such symptoms can have a substantial impact on the individual patient. Insight into patient-reported symptoms could aid pharmacists to identify improvements in medication treatment, for instance in the patient interview at the start of a clinical medication review (CMR).ObjectiveThe objectives of this study were to describe the numbers and types of patient-reported symptoms assessed during a CMR and to elucidate their potential association with the drugs in use.MethodsThis observational study was performed using data from a clinical trial on patient-reported outcomes of CMRs. Patients taking at least five drugs and who were eligible for a CMR were selected by 15 community pharmacies. Patients were asked to fill in a structured instrument, the Patient Reported Outcome Measure, Inquiry into Side Effects (PROMISE). Among other domains, this instrument offers a list of 22 symptom categories to report symptoms and their relationship with the drugs in use. The results of the PROMISE instrument together with information on patients' actual drug use were available for analysis. Besides descriptive analysis, associations with side effects as listed in the summary of product characteristics (SPC) of the drugs in use were assessed with logistic regression analysis.ResultsOf the 180 patients included, 168 patients (93.3%) reported at least one symptom via the PROMISE instrument, which could be discussed with the pharmacist during the patient interview. In total, the patients reported 1102 symptoms in 22 symptom categories. Of these patients, 101 (56.1%) assumed that at one or more of the symptoms experienced were related to the drugs in use and 107 (59.4%) reported at least one symptom that corresponded to a 'very common' side effect listed in the SPC of a drug in use. Each additional drug in use with a specific symptom listed as a 'very common' side effect in its SPC statistically significantly increased the probability of a patient reporting the symptoms of 'dry mouth/thirst, mouth complaints', 'constipation', 'diarrhoea' and 'sweating'.ConclusionMany patient-reported symptoms and symptoms potentially related to drugs in use were identified by administering the PROMISE instrument to users of at least five drugs being taking long-term. This information can be used in CMRs to improve patients' drug therapy.

Project description:Objectives: Patient medication safety can affect their clinical outcomes and plays an important role in patient safety management. However, few tools have been developed to assess patient medication safety. This study aimed to develop and validate the self-reported patient medication safety scale (SR-PMSS). Methods: We developed SR-PMSS guided by the Donabedian Structure-Process-Outcome framework and used psychometric methods to test its validity and reliability. Results: A total of 501 patients with an average age of 56.81 ± 14.47 were enrolled in this study. The SR-PMSS consisted of 21 items and 5 factors. The content validity was good with item-level content validity index (CVI) > 0.78, average scale-level CVI (S-CVI) > 0.9, and universal agreement S-CVI > 0.8. Exploratory factor analysis extracted a five-factor solution with eigenvalues > 0.1, explaining 67.766% of the variance. Confirmatory factor analysis showed good model fit, acceptable convergent validity, and discriminant validity. The Cronbach’s α coefficient for SR-PMSS was 0.929, the split-half reliability coefficient was 0.855, and the test–retest reliability coefficient was 0.978. Conclusions: The SR-PMSS was a valid and reliable instrument with good reliability and validity to evaluate the level of patient medication safety. The target users of the SR-PMSS are all people who are taking or have used prescription medications. The SR-PMSS can be used by healthcare providers in clinical practice and research to identify patients at risk for medication use and intervene with them to reduce adverse medication events and provide support for patient safety management. Plain Language Summary SR-PMSS – a self-reported tool to assess patient medication safety Medication therapy was the most common and frequent treatment method to prevent and cure diseases. Medication safety issues may occur in the process of medication use. Patient medication safety can affect their clinical outcomes and plays an important role in patient safety management. However, there are few tools to assess patient medication safety currently, and most of them focused on medication safety related to hospitals or healthcare workers. We developed the self-reported patient medication safety scale (SR-PMSS) guided by the Donabedian Structure-Process-Outcome framework. Then, we conducted a two-round expert consultation, clarity verification, and item simplification to determine the final version of the scale. The SR-PMSS consisted of 21 items and 5 factors and it had good validity and reliability. The target users of the SR-PMSS are all people who are taking or have used prescription medications. Healthcare providers can use the SR-PMSS in clinical practice and research to identify patients at risk for medication use and intervene with them to reduce adverse medication events and provide support for patient safety management.

Project description:PurposeTo systematically summarize evidence from multiple systematic reviews (SRs) examining interventions addressing medication nonadherence and to discern differences in effectiveness by intervention, patient, and study characteristics.SummaryMEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched for papers published from January 2004 to February 2017. English-language SRs examining benefits of medication adherence interventions were eligible. Inclusion was limited to adult patients prescribed medication for 1 of the following disease conditions: diabetes and prediabetes, heart conditions, hypertension and prehypertension, stroke, and cognitive impairment. Non-disease-specific SRs that considered medication adherence interventions for older adults, adults with chronic illness, and adults with known medication adherence problems were also included. Two researchers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. They then extracted key variables from eligible SRs, reconciling discrepancies via discussion. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) was used to assess SRs; those with scores below 8 were excluded. Conclusions regarding intervention effectiveness were extracted. Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was applied to assess evidence quality.ResultsOf 390 SRs, 25 met the inclusion criteria and assessed adherence as a primary outcome. Intervention types most consistently found to be effective were dose simplification, patient education, electronic reminders to patients, and reduced patient cost sharing or incentives. Of 50 conclusions drawn by the SRs, the underlying evidence was low or very low quality for 45 SRs.ConclusionDespite an abundance of primary studies and despite only examining high-quality SRs, the vast majority of primary studies supporting SR authors' conclusions were of low or very low quality. Nonetheless, health system leaders seeking to improve medication adherence should prioritize interventions that have been studied and found to be effective at improving patient adherence, including dose simplification, education, reminders, and financial incentives.

Project description:IntroductionSurgery is one of the primary treatments for lung cancer. The postoperative symptom burden experienced by patients with lung cancer is substantial, seriously delaying their recovery from surgery and impairing their quality of life. Patient-reported outcome (PRO)-based symptom management is increasingly regarded as an optimal model for patient-centred care. Currently, clinical trial-based evidence involving early-phase (immediately after surgery for up to 1?month) symptom management of lung cancer is lacking. We propose a randomised trial to evaluate the effect of a PRO-based symptom-monitoring programme with overthreshold alerts and responses for postoperative recovery in patients with lung cancer.Methods and analysisThe study will recruit 160 patients with lung cancer from six hospitals. The patients will be randomly allocated to the intervention group or control group in a ratio of 1:1. Patients in the intervention group will receive PRO-based symptom management from the specialists when their reported target symptom (pain, coughing, fatigue, disturbed sleep and shortness of breath) scores reach the preset threshold (score ?4). Patients in the control group will not generate alerts and will follow the standard procedures for symptom management. All patients will receive symptom assessments via the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-lung cancer module on the day before surgery, daily after surgery and twice a week after discharge until 4 weeks or the start of postoperative oncological treatment. The primary outcome-mean symptom threshold events-will be compared between the intervention and control group via independent sample Student's t-test.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Sichuan Cancer Hospital on 22 November 2018 (No. SCCHEC-02-2018-045). This manuscript is based on V.2.0, 9 May 2019 of the protocol. The study results will be disseminated in publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at academic conferences.Trials registration numberChiCTR1900020846.

Project description:ObjectiveThis study assesses the effectiveness of different interventions of knowledge transfer and behaviour modification to improve type 2 diabetes mellitus patients' (T2DM) reported outcomes measures (PROMs) in the long-term. Design: open, community-based pragmatic, multicentre, controlled trial with random allocation by clusters to usual care (UC) or to one of the three interventions.ParticipantsA total of 2334 patients with uncomplicated T2DM and 211 healthcare professionals were included of 32 primary care centres.SettingPrimary Care Centers in Canary Islands (Spain).InterventionThe intervention for patients (PTI) included an educational group programme, logs and a web-based platform for monitoring and automated short message service (SMS). The intervention for professionals (PFI) included an educational programme, a decision support tool embedded into the electronic clinical record and periodic feedback about patients' results. A third group received both PTI and PFI (combined intervention, CBI).Outcome measureCognitive-attitudinal, behavioural, affective and health-related quality of life (HQoL) variables.ResultsCompared with UC at 24 months, the PTI group significantly improved knowledge (p=0.005), self-empowerment (p=0.002), adherence to dietary recommendations (p<0.001) and distress (p=0.01). The PFI group improved at 24 months in distress (p=0.03) and at 12 months there were improvements in depression (p=0.003), anxiety (p=0.05), HQoL (p=0.005) and self-empowerment (p<0.001). The CBI group improved at 24 months in self-empowerment (p=0.008) and adherence to dietary recommendations (p=0.004) and at 12 months in knowledge (p=0.008), depression (p=0.006), anxiety (p=0.003), distress (p=0.01), HQoL (p<0.001) and neuropathic symptoms (p=0.02). Statistically significant improvements were also observed at 24 months in the proportion of patients who quit smoking for PTI and CBI (41.5% in PTI and 42.3% in CBI vs 21.2% in the UC group).ConclusionsAssessed interventions to improve PROMs in T2DM attain effectiveness for knowledge, self-empowerment, distress, diet adherence and tobacco cessation. PTI produced the most lasting benefits.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov NCT01657227 (6 August 2012) https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01657227.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence regarding clinically relevant effects of interventions aiming at reducing polypharmacy is weak, especially for the primary care setting. This study was initiated with the objective to achieve clinical benefits for older patients (aged 75+) by means of evidence-based reduction of polypharmacy (defined as ≥8 prescribed drugs) and inappropriate prescribing in general practice.MethodsThe cluster-randomised controlled trial involved general practitioners and patients in a northern-Italian region. The intervention consisted of a review of patient's medication regimens by three experts who gave specific recommendations for drug discontinuation. Main outcome measures were non-elective hospital admissions or death within 24 months (composite primary endpoint). Secondary outcomes were drug numbers, hospital admissions, mortality, falls, fractures, quality of life, affective status, cognitive function.ResultsTwenty-two GPs/307 patients participated in the intervention group, 21 GPs/272 patients in the control group. One hundred twenty-five patients (40.7%) experienced the primary outcome in the intervention group, 87 patients (32.0%) in the control group. The adjusted rates of occurrence of the primary outcome did not differ significantly between the study groups (intention-to-treat analysis: adjusted odds ratio 1.46, 95%CI 0.99-2.18, p = 0.06; per-protocol analysis: adjusted OR 1.33, 95%CI 0.87-2.04, p = 0.2). Hospitalisations as single endpoint occurred more frequently in the intervention group according to the unadjusted analysis (OR 1.61, 95%CI 1.03-2.51, p = 0.04) but not in the adjusted analysis (OR 1.39, 95%CI 0.95-2.03, p = 0.09). Falls occurred less frequently in the intervention group (adjusted OR 0.55, 95%CI 0.31-0.98; p = 0.04). No significant differences were found regarding the other outcomes. Definitive discontinuation was obtained for 67 (16.0%) of 419 drugs rated as inappropriate. About 6% of the prescribed drugs were PIMs.ConclusionsNo conclusive effects were found regarding mortality and non-elective hospitalisations as composite respectively single endpoints. Falls were significantly reduced in the intervention group, although definitive discontinuation was achieved for only one out of six inappropriate drugs. These results indicate that (1) even a modest reduction of inappropriate medications may entail positive clinical effects, and that (2) focusing on evidence-based new drug prescriptions and prevention of polypharmacy may be more effective than deprescribing.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials (ID ISRCTN: 38449870), date: 11/09/2013.

Dataset Information

Patient-reported common symptoms as an assessment of interventions in medication reviews: a randomised, controlled trial.

Publications

Patient-reported common symptoms as an assessment of interventions in medication reviews: a randomised, controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets