↓ Skip to main content

Design of the POINT study: Pharmacotherapy Optimisation through Integration of a Non-dispensing pharmacist in a primary care Team (POINT)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
18 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
171 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Design of the POINT study: Pharmacotherapy Optimisation through Integration of a Non-dispensing pharmacist in a primary care Team (POINT)
Published in
BMC Primary Care, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12875-015-0296-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ankie C.M. Hazen, Vivianne M. Sloeserwij, Dorien L.M. Zwart, Antoinette A. de Bont, Marcel L. Bouvy, Johan J. de Gier, Niek J. de Wit, Anne J. Leendertse

Abstract

In the Netherlands, 5.6 % of acute hospital admissions are medication-related. Almost half of these admissions are potentially preventable. Reviewing medication in patients at risk in primary care might prevent these hospital admissions. At present, implementation of medication reviews in primary care is suboptimal: pharmacists lack access to patient information, pharmacists are short of clinical knowledge and skills, and working processes of pharmacists (focus on dispensing) and general practitioners (focus on clinical practice) match poorly. Integration of the pharmacist in the primary health care team might improve pharmaceutical care outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of integration of a non-dispensing pharmacist in general practice on the safety of pharmacotherapy in the Netherlands. The POINT study is a non-randomised controlled intervention study with pre-post comparison in an integrated primary care setting. We compare three different models of pharmaceutical care provision in primary care: 1) a non-dispensing pharmacist as an integral member of a primary care team, 2) a pharmacist in a community pharmacy with a predefined training in performing medication reviews and 3) a pharmacist in a community pharmacy (care as usual). In all models, GPs remain accountable for individual medication prescription. In the first model, ten non-dispensing clinical pharmacists are posted in ten primary care practices (including 5 - 10 000 patients each) for a period of 15 months. These non-dispensing pharmacists perform patient consultations, including medication reviews, and share responsibility for the pharmaceutical care provided in the practice. The two other groups consist of ten primary care practices with collaborating pharmacists. The main outcome measurement is the number of medication-related hospital admissions during follow-up. Secondary outcome measurements are potential medication errors, drug burden index and costs. Parallel to this study, a qualitative study is conducted to evaluate the feasibility of introducing a NDP in general practice. As the POINT study is a large-scale intervention study, it should provide evidence as to whether integration of a non-dispensing clinical pharmacist in primary care will result in safer pharmacotherapy. The qualitative study also generates knowledge on the optimal implementation of this model in primary care. Results are expected in 2016. NTR4389 , The Netherlands National Trial Register, 07-01-2014.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 168 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 17%
Researcher 22 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 12%
Student > Bachelor 18 11%
Student > Postgraduate 9 5%
Other 18 11%
Unknown 54 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 36 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 32 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 6%
Psychology 7 4%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Other 22 13%
Unknown 57 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 02 January 2019.
All research outputs
#1,784,661
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#186
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,883
of 277,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#3
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
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 277,580 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.