为旨在改善基层医疗机构中老年人合理使用多种药物的试验核心结果集选择结果测量工具:德尔菲共识研究。

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Mubarak N Alqahtani, Heather E Barry, Carmel M Hughes
{"title":"为旨在改善基层医疗机构中老年人合理使用多种药物的试验核心结果集选择结果测量工具:德尔菲共识研究。","authors":"Mubarak N Alqahtani, Heather E Barry, Carmel M Hughes","doi":"10.1007/s11096-024-01780-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite developing a polypharmacy core outcome set (COS) in primary care, it is not clear how these outcomes should be measured.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To select outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) for a COS targeting appropriate polypharmacy in older patients in primary care.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Following the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guideline, OMIs were identified from a Cochrane review focusing on appropriate polypharmacy. The quality of OMIs was assessed using a published checklist. Subsequently, two rounds of Delphi questionnaires were conducted via the SoGoSurvey<sup>®</sup> platform, engaging stakeholders (researchers, clinicians and journal editors specialising in geriatric primary care) to achieve consensus on OMIs using a scale encompassing \"agree\", \"disagree\", or \"unsure\". Consensus was achieved if 70% or more participants chose \"agree\" and 15% or fewer chose \"disagree.\"</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The quality of 20 OMIs identified from the Cochrane review was evaluated. Seven OMIs were selected based on meeting the COSMIN guideline's minimum requirements. Out of 188 potential participants, 57 (30.3%) consented to participate. Rounds 1 and 2 of Delphi exercises were completed by 50 respondents, achieving agreement on three OMIs: 'number of serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs)' (98%), 'number of deaths' (76%), and 'number of patients who fell' (70%) for measuring 'serious ADRs,' 'mortality,' and 'falls,' respectively. No agreement was reached for 'medication appropriateness,' 'medication side-effects,' 'quality of life,' and 'medication regimen complexity.'</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>OMIs were selected for a limited number of outcomes in the polypharmacy COS. Future research should identify suitable OMIs for the remaining four outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":13828,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","volume":" ","pages":"1391-1399"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576772/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Selection of outcome measurement instruments for a core outcome set for trials aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care: a Delphi consensus study.\",\"authors\":\"Mubarak N Alqahtani, Heather E Barry, Carmel M Hughes\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11096-024-01780-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite developing a polypharmacy core outcome set (COS) in primary care, it is not clear how these outcomes should be measured.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To select outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) for a COS targeting appropriate polypharmacy in older patients in primary care.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Following the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guideline, OMIs were identified from a Cochrane review focusing on appropriate polypharmacy. The quality of OMIs was assessed using a published checklist. Subsequently, two rounds of Delphi questionnaires were conducted via the SoGoSurvey<sup>®</sup> platform, engaging stakeholders (researchers, clinicians and journal editors specialising in geriatric primary care) to achieve consensus on OMIs using a scale encompassing \\\"agree\\\", \\\"disagree\\\", or \\\"unsure\\\". Consensus was achieved if 70% or more participants chose \\\"agree\\\" and 15% or fewer chose \\\"disagree.\\\"</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The quality of 20 OMIs identified from the Cochrane review was evaluated. Seven OMIs were selected based on meeting the COSMIN guideline's minimum requirements. Out of 188 potential participants, 57 (30.3%) consented to participate. Rounds 1 and 2 of Delphi exercises were completed by 50 respondents, achieving agreement on three OMIs: 'number of serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs)' (98%), 'number of deaths' (76%), and 'number of patients who fell' (70%) for measuring 'serious ADRs,' 'mortality,' and 'falls,' respectively. No agreement was reached for 'medication appropriateness,' 'medication side-effects,' 'quality of life,' and 'medication regimen complexity.'</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>OMIs were selected for a limited number of outcomes in the polypharmacy COS. Future research should identify suitable OMIs for the remaining four outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13828,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1391-1399\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576772/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-024-01780-4\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-024-01780-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目的:为针对初级医疗中老年患者适当使用多种药物的核心结果集(COS)选择结果测量工具(OMI):方法:根据基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准(COSMIN)指南,从以适当的多种药物治疗为重点的 Cochrane 综述中确定 OMI。使用已公布的检查表对 OMI 的质量进行了评估。随后,通过 SoGoSurvey® 平台进行了两轮德尔菲问卷调查,让利益相关者(研究人员、临床医生和老年初级保健专业期刊编辑)参与其中,使用包括 "同意"、"不同意 "或 "不确定 "的量表就 OMI 达成共识。如果70%或更多的参与者选择 "同意",15%或更少的参与者选择 "不同意",则达成共识:对科克伦综述中确定的 20 个 OMI 的质量进行了评估。根据 COSMIN 指南的最低要求,选出了 7 个 OMI。在 188 位潜在参与者中,有 57 位(30.3%)同意参与。50 名受访者完成了德尔菲练习的第一轮和第二轮,并就三个 OMI 达成了一致意见:"严重药物不良反应 (ADR) 的数量"(98%)、"死亡人数"(76%)和 "跌倒患者人数"(70%),分别用于衡量 "严重药物不良反应"、"死亡率 "和 "跌倒"。在 "用药适当性"、"药物副作用"、"生活质量 "和 "用药方案复杂性 "方面则未达成一致:在多重用药 COS 中,为有限的几项结果选择了 OMI。未来的研究应为其余四项结果确定合适的 OMI。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Selection of outcome measurement instruments for a core outcome set for trials aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care: a Delphi consensus study.

Selection of outcome measurement instruments for a core outcome set for trials aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care: a Delphi consensus study.

Background: Despite developing a polypharmacy core outcome set (COS) in primary care, it is not clear how these outcomes should be measured.

Aim: To select outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) for a COS targeting appropriate polypharmacy in older patients in primary care.

Method: Following the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guideline, OMIs were identified from a Cochrane review focusing on appropriate polypharmacy. The quality of OMIs was assessed using a published checklist. Subsequently, two rounds of Delphi questionnaires were conducted via the SoGoSurvey® platform, engaging stakeholders (researchers, clinicians and journal editors specialising in geriatric primary care) to achieve consensus on OMIs using a scale encompassing "agree", "disagree", or "unsure". Consensus was achieved if 70% or more participants chose "agree" and 15% or fewer chose "disagree."

Results: The quality of 20 OMIs identified from the Cochrane review was evaluated. Seven OMIs were selected based on meeting the COSMIN guideline's minimum requirements. Out of 188 potential participants, 57 (30.3%) consented to participate. Rounds 1 and 2 of Delphi exercises were completed by 50 respondents, achieving agreement on three OMIs: 'number of serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs)' (98%), 'number of deaths' (76%), and 'number of patients who fell' (70%) for measuring 'serious ADRs,' 'mortality,' and 'falls,' respectively. No agreement was reached for 'medication appropriateness,' 'medication side-effects,' 'quality of life,' and 'medication regimen complexity.'

Conclusion: OMIs were selected for a limited number of outcomes in the polypharmacy COS. Future research should identify suitable OMIs for the remaining four outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
131
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy (IJCP) offers a platform for articles on research in Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Care and related practice-oriented subjects in the pharmaceutical sciences. IJCP is a bi-monthly, international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research data, new ideas and discussions on pharmacotherapy and outcome research, clinical pharmacy, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacoeconomics, the clinical use of medicines, medical devices and laboratory tests, information on medicines and medical devices information, pharmacy services research, medication management, other clinical aspects of pharmacy. IJCP publishes original Research articles, Review articles , Short research reports, Commentaries, book reviews, and Letters to the Editor. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy is affiliated with the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy (ESCP). ESCP promotes practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy, especially in Europe. The general aim of the society is to advance education, practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy . Until 2010 the journal was called Pharmacy World & Science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信