| Title |
Healthcare professionals’ agreement on clinical relevance of drug-related problems among elderly patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11096-017-0572-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christine Flagstad Bech, Tine Frederiksen, Christine Tilsted Villesen, Jette Højsted, Per Rotbøll Nielsen, Lene Juel Kjeldsen, Lotte Stig Nørgaard, Lona Louring Christrup |
| Abstract |
Background Disagreement among healthcare professionals on the clinical relevance of drug-related problems can lead to suboptimal treatment and increased healthcare costs. Elderly patients with chronic non-cancer pain and comorbidity are at increased risk of drug related problems compared to other patient groups due to complex medication regimes and transition of care. Objective To investigate the agreement among healthcare professionals on their classification of clinical relevance of drug-related problems in elderly patients with chronic non-cancer pain and comorbidity. Setting Multidisciplinary Pain Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. Method A pharmacist performed medication review on elderly patients with chronic non-cancer pain and comorbidity, identified their drug-related problems and classified these problems in accordance with an existing categorization system. A five-member clinical panel rated the drug-related problems' clinical relevance in accordance with a five-level rating scale, and their agreement was compared using Fleiss' κ. Main outcome measure Healthcare professionals' agreement on clinical relevance of drug related problems, using Fleiss' κ. Results Thirty patients were included in the study. A total of 162 drug related problems were identified, out of which 54% were of lower clinical relevance (level 0-2) and 46% of higher clinical relevance (level 3-4). Only slight agreement (κ = 0.12) was found between the panellists' classifications of clinical relevance using a five-level rating scale. Conclusion The clinical pharmacist identified drug related problems of lower and higher clinical relevance. Poor overall agreement on the severity of the drug related problems was found among the panelists. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 45 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 16% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 13% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 14 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 13 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 16 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 May 2018.
All research outputs
#15,524,695
of 23,073,835 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#807
of 1,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,668
of 440,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#15
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,073,835 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,108 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 440,354 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.