MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W387544720 · doi:10.1002/jppr2002322133

A Randomised Controlled Trial of Medication Liaison Services—Patient Outcomes

2002· article· en· W387544720 on OpenAlexaff
Danielle A Stowasser, David Collins, Michael Stowasser

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy Practice and Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePharmacistPsychological interventionClinical pharmacyEmergency medicineAdverse effectRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyFamily medicinePharmacyInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: To evaluate the effects of a Medication Liaison Service (MLS) on quality of medication‐related information associated with hospital admission, risk of drug misadventure and other patient outcomes, and health resource utilisation. Method: Patients were randomly selected from eight acute wards (servicing 12 medical and five surgical units) and an orthopaedic pre‐admission clinic at two major hospitals. Subjects were randomly assigned to an intervention (MLS) or control group. For each patient in the MLS group a clinical pharmacist attached to the MLS contacted the general practitioner and community pharmacist in order to prepare a comprehensive medication history. Prior to discharge, the MLS clinical pharmacist, in consultation with the hospital medical staff, prepared a discharge communication which included a list of medications on admission and discharge, corresponding therapy changes, intended duration of therapy, sources of supply, allergies and adverse drug reactions, new therapeutic devices, medication‐related problems and actions required by the general practitioner. This information was forwarded to the patient's general practitioner and community pharmacist within 24 hours of discharge. Patient outcomes were evaluated 30 days after discharge using a mailed questionnaire and review of medical files. Results: Of 240 patients recruited, 113 were randomised to the MLS group and 127 to the control group. During hospital admission a significantly greater proportion of MLS subjects experienced a clinical pharmacist intervention (MLS 68% vs control 44%) and more subjects had at least one change to their therapy (MLS 97% vs control 90%), with more interventions (mean MLS 1.43 [SD 1.5] vs control 0.77 [SD 1.1]) and more medication changes per subject (mean MLS 3.75 [SD 2.6] vs control 3.10 [SD 2.3]). There was no significant effect on length of stay or mortality. In the 30 days following discharge there were fewer réadmissions per subject in the MLS group (mean 0.12 [SD 0.4] vs 0.46 [SD 1.9]) but this difference did not quite reach statistical significance (p = 0.055). The MLS group had significantly fewer healthcare professional visits per subject (mean MLS 7.54 [SD 7.4] vs control 9.94 [SD 10]). In an assessment of functional health status, MLS subjects improved for 7 of 8 factors (significantly so for two), and tended to improve more than controls in all factors except vitality. Conclusion: MLS was associated with improved patient outcomes and a greater number of inpatient clinical pharmacy interventions and medication changes intended to optimise therapy. There was also a tendency for reduced readmissions, a significant decrease in community healthcare professional visits, and significant improvements in functional health status score.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.766

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.236
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations100
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmacy Practice and ResearchSame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207