International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy ( IF 2.6 ) Pub Date : 2022-11-21 , DOI: 10.1007/s11096-022-01494-5 Mohammed Alharthi 1, 2 , David Wright 1 , Sion Scott 1 , Jeanette Blacklock 1
|
Background
Medication review (MR) is the systematic assessment of a patient’s medications by a healthcare practitioner. It is necessary to compare such MR interventions to rationalise differences between them and assess their impact. The development of an international taxonomy for terms used to describe activities undertaken within the MR process would facilitate quality of reporting, and the comparison of different interventions.
Aim
To identify overarching and individual MR activity terms and definitions reported within studies where MR was the main intervention.
Method
A systematic review of the literature was performed using search terms for ‘Intervention’ and ‘Outcome’. Papers with empirical data reporting and describing MR activities in English were included. The Mixed Method Appraisal Tool was used to assess research quality. Two researchers reviewed all included literature independently. Data extraction was performed using Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care to report study characteristics, and terms and definitions used to describe MR activities.
Results
Twenty-one papers were included: eight quantitative non-randomised trials (38%), eight randomised controlled trials (38%), and five quantitative descriptive studies (24%). Overarching interventions such as ‘Clinical’, ‘Education’ and ‘Technical’ were identified with no standardised definitions. Terms used to describe the medication review activities, such as stop, start and change, varied with significant potential for ambiguity.
Conclusion
The literature reports a variety of overlapping, ambiguous and undefined MR terms. As a result, comparing process evaluations from MR interventions may be difficult. A standardised taxonomy to describe, define and report MR activities is required.
中文翻译：
用于描述和定义药物审查过程所采取的活动的术语：它们是否需要标准化？系统回顾
背景
药物审查 (MR) 是医疗保健从业者对患者的药物进行的系统评估。有必要对此类 MR 干预措施进行比较，以合理化它们之间的差异并评估其影响。制定用于描述 MR 流程中开展的活动的术语的国际分类法将提高报告质量以及不同干预措施的比较。
目的
确定以 MR 为主要干预措施的研究中报告的总体和个人 MR 活动术语和定义。
方法
使用“干预”和“结果”搜索词对文献进行了系统回顾。包含用英语报告和描述 MR 活动的实证数据的论文。混合方法评估工具用于评估研究质量。两名研究人员独立审查了所有纳入的文献。使用 Cochrane 有效实践和护理组织进行数据提取，以报告研究特征以及用于描述 MR 活动的术语和定义。
结果
纳入 21 篇论文：8 篇定量非随机试验 (38%)、8 篇随机对照试验 (38%) 和 5 篇定量描述性研究 (24%)。“临床”、“教育”和“技术”等总体干预措施没有标准化定义。用于描述药物审查活动的术语（例如停止、开始和改变）各不相同，很可能存在歧义。
结论
文献报道了各种重叠、模糊和未定义的 MR 术语。因此，比较 MR 干预的过程评估可能很困难。需要一个标准化的分类法来描述、定义和报告 MR 活动。
京公网安备 11010802027423号