一种基于证据的干预措施的发展,旨在改善处方和减少初级保健中患有多种疾病和明显多种用药的老年人的多种用药(SPPiRE)。

Journal of comorbidity Pub Date : 2020-09-14 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1177/2235042X20946243
Caroline McCarthy, Frank Moriarty, Emma Wallace, Susan M Smith
{"title":"一种基于证据的干预措施的发展,旨在改善处方和减少初级保健中患有多种疾病和明显多种用药的老年人的多种用药(SPPiRE)。","authors":"Caroline McCarthy, Frank Moriarty, Emma Wallace, Susan M Smith","doi":"10.1177/2235042X20946243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: By the time an intervention is ready for evaluation in a definitive RCT the context of the evidence base may have evolved. To avoid research waste, it is imperative that intervention design and evaluation is an adaptive process incorporating emerging evidence and novel concepts. The aim of this study is to describe changes that were made to an evidence based intervention at the protocol stage of the definitive RCT to incorporate emerging evidence. Methods: The original evidence based intervention, a GP delivered web guided medication review, was modified in a five step process: Identification of core components of the original intervention. Literature review. Modification of the intervention. Pilot study. Final refinements. A framework, developed in public health research, was utilised to describe the modification process. Results: The population under investigation changed from older people with a potentially inappropriate prescription (PIP) to older people with significant polypharmacy, a proxy marker for complex multimorbidity. An assessment of treatment priorities and brown bag medication review, with a focus on deprescribing were incorporated into the original intervention. The number of repeat medicines was added as a primary outcome measure as were additional secondary patient reported outcome measures to assess treatment burden and attitudes towards deprescribing. Conclusions: A framework was used to systematically describe how and why the original intervention was modified, allowing the new intervention to build upon an effective and robustly developed intervention but also to be relevant in the context of the current evidence base.","PeriodicalId":92071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of comorbidity","volume":"10 ","pages":"2235042X20946243"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2235042X20946243","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The evolution of an evidence based intervention designed to improve prescribing and reduce polypharmacy in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in primary care (SPPiRE).\",\"authors\":\"Caroline McCarthy, Frank Moriarty, Emma Wallace, Susan M Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/2235042X20946243\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: By the time an intervention is ready for evaluation in a definitive RCT the context of the evidence base may have evolved. To avoid research waste, it is imperative that intervention design and evaluation is an adaptive process incorporating emerging evidence and novel concepts. The aim of this study is to describe changes that were made to an evidence based intervention at the protocol stage of the definitive RCT to incorporate emerging evidence. Methods: The original evidence based intervention, a GP delivered web guided medication review, was modified in a five step process: Identification of core components of the original intervention. Literature review. Modification of the intervention. Pilot study. Final refinements. A framework, developed in public health research, was utilised to describe the modification process. Results: The population under investigation changed from older people with a potentially inappropriate prescription (PIP) to older people with significant polypharmacy, a proxy marker for complex multimorbidity. An assessment of treatment priorities and brown bag medication review, with a focus on deprescribing were incorporated into the original intervention. The number of repeat medicines was added as a primary outcome measure as were additional secondary patient reported outcome measures to assess treatment burden and attitudes towards deprescribing. Conclusions: A framework was used to systematically describe how and why the original intervention was modified, allowing the new intervention to build upon an effective and robustly developed intervention but also to be relevant in the context of the current evidence base.\",\"PeriodicalId\":92071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of comorbidity\",\"volume\":\"10 \",\"pages\":\"2235042X20946243\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2235042X20946243\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of comorbidity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/2235042X20946243\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of comorbidity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2235042X20946243","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

导言:当一项干预措施准备好在确定的随机对照试验中进行评估时,证据基础的背景可能已经发生了变化。为了避免研究浪费,干预措施的设计和评估必须是一个纳入新证据和新概念的适应性过程。本研究的目的是描述在最终随机对照试验的方案阶段对基于证据的干预所做的改变,以纳入新出现的证据。方法:最初的循证干预,即全科医生提供的网络指导用药审查,在五个步骤的过程中进行修改:识别原始干预的核心成分。文献综述。干预措施的修改。试点研究。最后的细化。在公共卫生研究中制定的一个框架被用来描述修改过程。结果:调查人群从具有潜在不适当处方(PIP)的老年人转变为具有明显多药的老年人,多药是复杂多病的代理标志。最初的干预措施包括治疗优先级评估和棕色袋药物审查,重点是减少处方。重复使用药物的数量作为主要结果测量,同时增加了额外的次要患者报告的结果测量,以评估治疗负担和对处方减少的态度。结论:使用了一个框架系统地描述了如何以及为什么修改了原始干预措施,允许新的干预措施建立在有效和稳健发展的干预措施的基础上,同时也与当前的证据基础相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The evolution of an evidence based intervention designed to improve prescribing and reduce polypharmacy in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in primary care (SPPiRE).

The evolution of an evidence based intervention designed to improve prescribing and reduce polypharmacy in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in primary care (SPPiRE).

The evolution of an evidence based intervention designed to improve prescribing and reduce polypharmacy in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in primary care (SPPiRE).

The evolution of an evidence based intervention designed to improve prescribing and reduce polypharmacy in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in primary care (SPPiRE).
Introduction: By the time an intervention is ready for evaluation in a definitive RCT the context of the evidence base may have evolved. To avoid research waste, it is imperative that intervention design and evaluation is an adaptive process incorporating emerging evidence and novel concepts. The aim of this study is to describe changes that were made to an evidence based intervention at the protocol stage of the definitive RCT to incorporate emerging evidence. Methods: The original evidence based intervention, a GP delivered web guided medication review, was modified in a five step process: Identification of core components of the original intervention. Literature review. Modification of the intervention. Pilot study. Final refinements. A framework, developed in public health research, was utilised to describe the modification process. Results: The population under investigation changed from older people with a potentially inappropriate prescription (PIP) to older people with significant polypharmacy, a proxy marker for complex multimorbidity. An assessment of treatment priorities and brown bag medication review, with a focus on deprescribing were incorporated into the original intervention. The number of repeat medicines was added as a primary outcome measure as were additional secondary patient reported outcome measures to assess treatment burden and attitudes towards deprescribing. Conclusions: A framework was used to systematically describe how and why the original intervention was modified, allowing the new intervention to build upon an effective and robustly developed intervention but also to be relevant in the context of the current evidence base.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
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