Using Meta-Analysis to Explore the Factors Affecting the Potency of Pharmacists’ Patient Interventions

Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/614198
Title:
Using Meta-Analysis to Explore the Factors Affecting the Potency of Pharmacists’ Patient Interventions
Author:
Chau, Bach-Truc; Vo, Trang; Yuan-Lee, Ling; Lee, Jeannie; Martin, Jennifer; Slack, Marion
Affiliation:
College of Pharmacy, The University of Arizona
Issue Date:
2014
Rights:
Copyright © is held by the author.
Collection Information:
This item is part of the Pharmacy Student Research Projects collection, made available by the College of Pharmacy and the University Libraries at the University of Arizona. For more information about items in this collection, please contact Jennifer Martin, Associate Librarian and Clinical Instructor, Pharmacy Practice and Science, jenmartin@email.arizona.edu.
Publisher:
The University of Arizona.
Abstract:
Specific Aims: To identify the factors that affects the potency of pharmacists’ interventions. Methods: Literature search was based on keywords and Mesh terms in eight different databases. The inclusion criteria were evidence of pharmacist involvement in direct patient care, patient-related therapeutic outcomes, studies done in the United States, randomized controlled trials, studies with reported number of subjects in the intervention and control group and reported means and standard deviations of therapeutic outcomes. For the study selection and data extraction, two students independently reviewed each study and met to resolve any discrepancies. In addition, each study was assigned a potency score using the potency tool. Data extraction included: pharmacists’ interventions (technical, behavioral, educational, and affective), patient characteristics, and therapeutic outcomes. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated; studies with SMD ≥ -0.3 formed the low impact group (controls) and studies with SMD  -0.8 formed the high impact group (cases). Main Results: The included randomized control trials (N=11) were conducted in a variety of settings from ambulatory clinics to hospital. The high impact group was favored in the educational category (ES=0.88, p=0.18) while the low impact group was favored in the behavioral category (ES=-0.19, p=0.81). In general, there was a difference between the high impact and low impact (ES=0.82, p=0.37) groups with the high impact group being favored. Conclusion: There is a difference between the low impact and high impact groups, but it is unclear which pharmacist interventions have a significant impact on therapeutic outcomes.
Description:
Class of 2014 Abstract
Keywords:
meta-analysis; interventions; pharmacists’; Mesh
Advisor:
Lee, Jeannie; Martin, Jennifer; Slack, Marion

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.advisorLee, Jeannieen
dc.contributor.advisorMartin, Jenniferen
dc.contributor.advisorSlack, Marionen
dc.contributor.authorChau, Bach-Trucen
dc.contributor.authorVo, Trangen
dc.contributor.authorYuan-Lee, Lingen
dc.contributor.authorLee, Jeannieen
dc.contributor.authorMartin, Jenniferen
dc.contributor.authorSlack, Marionen
dc.date.accessioned2016-06-22T18:56:20Z-
dc.date.available2016-06-22T18:56:20Z-
dc.date.issued2014-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/614198-
dc.descriptionClass of 2014 Abstracten
dc.description.abstractSpecific Aims: To identify the factors that affects the potency of pharmacists’ interventions. Methods: Literature search was based on keywords and Mesh terms in eight different databases. The inclusion criteria were evidence of pharmacist involvement in direct patient care, patient-related therapeutic outcomes, studies done in the United States, randomized controlled trials, studies with reported number of subjects in the intervention and control group and reported means and standard deviations of therapeutic outcomes. For the study selection and data extraction, two students independently reviewed each study and met to resolve any discrepancies. In addition, each study was assigned a potency score using the potency tool. Data extraction included: pharmacists’ interventions (technical, behavioral, educational, and affective), patient characteristics, and therapeutic outcomes. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated; studies with SMD ≥ -0.3 formed the low impact group (controls) and studies with SMD  -0.8 formed the high impact group (cases). Main Results: The included randomized control trials (N=11) were conducted in a variety of settings from ambulatory clinics to hospital. The high impact group was favored in the educational category (ES=0.88, p=0.18) while the low impact group was favored in the behavioral category (ES=-0.19, p=0.81). In general, there was a difference between the high impact and low impact (ES=0.82, p=0.37) groups with the high impact group being favored. Conclusion: There is a difference between the low impact and high impact groups, but it is unclear which pharmacist interventions have a significant impact on therapeutic outcomes.en
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author.en
dc.subjectmeta-analysisen
dc.subjectinterventionsen
dc.subjectpharmacists’en
dc.subjectMeshen
dc.titleUsing Meta-Analysis to Explore the Factors Affecting the Potency of Pharmacists’ Patient Interventionsen_US
dc.typetexten
dc.typeElectronic Reporten
dc.contributor.departmentCollege of Pharmacy, The University of Arizonaen
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item is part of the Pharmacy Student Research Projects collection, made available by the College of Pharmacy and the University Libraries at the University of Arizona. For more information about items in this collection, please contact Jennifer Martin, Associate Librarian and Clinical Instructor, Pharmacy Practice and Science, jenmartin@email.arizona.edu.en
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.