Premium
Geriatric Patient Care by U.S. Pharmacists in Healthcare Teams: Systematic Review and Meta‐Analyses
Author(s) -
Lee Jeannie K.,
Slack Marion K.,
Martin Jennifer,
Ehrman Clara,
ChisholmBurns Marie
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
journal of the american geriatrics society
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.992
H-Index - 232
eISSN - 1532-5415
pISSN - 0002-8614
DOI - 10.1111/jgs.12323
Subject(s) - medicine , medline , pharmacist , meta analysis , data extraction , psychological intervention , health care , clinical pharmacy , pharmaceutical care , family medicine , ambulatory , systematic review , geriatrics , pharmacy , nursing , psychiatry , political science , law , economics , economic growth
Objectives To conduct a systematic review and meta‐analyses to examine the effects of pharmacists' care on geriatric patient‐oriented health outcomes in the U nited S tates (U.S.). Design Studies examining U.S. pharmacists' patient care services from inception of the databases through July 2012 were searched. The databases searched include Pub M ed/ MEDLINE , Ovid/ MEDLINE , ABI / INFORM , H ealth B usiness F ulltext E lite, A cademic S earch C omplete, I nternational P harmaceutical A bstracts, P syc INFO , C ochrane D atabase, and Clinical Trials.gov . Studies reporting pharmacists' intervention for geriatric patients, comparison groups, and patient‐oriented outcomes were assessed. Dual review for inclusion and data extraction were performed. Setting University of A rizona C ollege of P harmacy. Measurements Study and participant characteristics, pharmacist intervention, and outcomes with data for meta‐analyses were collected. A forest plot was constructed to obtain a pooled standardized mean difference using a random effects model. Results One hundred fifty‐two articles were reviewed, with 20 resulting studies included in the final meta‐analyses. Study sample size ranged from 36 to 4,218, with mean age of subjects being 65 and older. The studies were most frequently conducted in ambulatory care clinics, followed by inpatient settings; the majority focused on multiple diseases and conditions. Pharmacist activities varied widely, with technical interventions used most often. Favorable results were found in all outcome categories, and meta‐analyses conducted for therapeutic, safety, hospitalization, and adherence were significant ( P < .001), favoring pharmacist care over comparison. Some identifiable variability existed between included studies. Conclusion Pharmacist intervention has favorable effects on therapeutic, safety, hospitalization, and adherence outcomes in older adults. Pharmacists should be involved in team‐based care of older adults.