↓ Skip to main content

Outcome prioritisation tool for medication review in older patients with multimorbidity: a pilot study in general practice

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Outcome prioritisation tool for medication review in older patients with multimorbidity: a pilot study in general practice
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, March 2017
DOI 10.3399/bjgp17x690485
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jojanneke JGT van Summeren, Jan Schuling, Flora M Haaijer-Ruskamp, Petra Denig

Abstract

Several methods have been developed to conduct and support medication reviews in older persons with multimorbidity. Assessing the patient's priorities for achieving specific health outcomes can guide the medication review process. Little is known about the impact of conducting such assessments. This pilot study aimed to determine proposed and observed medication changes when using an outcome prioritisation tool (OPT) during a medication review in general practice. Participants were older patients with multimorbidity (aged ≥69 years) with polypharmacy (five or more chronic medications) from the practices of 14 GPs. Patients were asked to prioritise four universal health outcomes - remaining alive, maintaining independence, reducing pain, and reducing other symptoms - using an OPT. GPs used this prioritisation to review the medication and to propose and discuss medication changes with the patient. The outcomes included the proposed medication change as documented by the GP, and the observed medication change in the electronic health record at follow-up. Descriptive analyses were conducted to determine medication changes according to the prioritised health outcomes. A total of 59 patients using 486 medications prioritised the four health outcomes. GPs proposed 34 changes of medication, mainly stopping, for 20 patients. At follow-up, 14 medication changes were observed for 10 patients. The stopping of medication (mostly preventive) was particularly observed in patients who prioritised 'reducing other symptoms' as most important. Using an OPT leads mainly to the stopping of medication. Medication changes appeared to be easiest for patients who prioritised 'reducing other symptoms' as most important.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 107 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 20%
Student > Master 14 13%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Other 6 6%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 25 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 28%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Philosophy 2 2%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 33 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 September 2017.
All research outputs
#3,913,426
of 24,605,383 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#1,585
of 4,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,435
of 313,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#42
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,605,383 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,525 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.