Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT06451692

Prioritising Patient Medication Review: Hospitals Reaching Out

To examine the effect of a cross-sectoral medication review intervention to admitted multi-morbid, polypharmacy patients aged 65+ at SHS in two settings; an acute admission unit (typical admission time < 48 hours) and a medical outpatient setting (patients routinely visits for follow-up, diagnosis or treatment, but do require a bed or overnight care).

Recruiting

Interested in participating?

Request Info

Key information

Age range

65 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Sygehus Sønderjylland

Aabenraa, Southern Denmark, 6200, Denmark

Location status: Recruiting

About this study

Lack of medication treatment coordination among especially multi-morbid patient's results in suboptimal medication treatment, adverse effects, increased use of resources, hospital admissions and premature death. Further, an aging population is a challenge to healthcare systems worldwide as older adults are vulnerable to non-communicable diseases and multi-morbidity. The age distribution varies across Denmark creating demographic inequality with a higher proportion of elderly in several municipalities in Southern Jutland and on a national level, the population aged 70+ already accounts for more than a third of all hospital days.

As the population ages, the concept of frailty becomes increasing in the provision of health care to an ageing population, and the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) can be used as a judgement-based frailty tool to evaluate specific domains including comorbidity, function, and cognition to generate a frailty score. In addition, an attempt to detect patients at high risk of medication errors is the Medicine Risk Score (MERIS) where acutely admitted patients are allocated into low and high risk of potential ADEs by predefined detection limits. Further, These components will be used to determine

In addition, an understudied patient group within polypharmacy and PIPs, are patients with dementia creating inequality among patient groups. The use of polypharmacy and Potential Inappropriate Prescribing are widespread in this patient group, and dementia is well-known to have a negative effect on overall mortality, which demonstrates the need for interventions to improve medication treatment in people with dementia. Intervention studies have examined the effects of pharmacist-led medication reviews in different hospital settings with various outcomes, but no exact model for prioritising patient medication review exists. Thus, there is a need to identify patients who will benefit most from a medication review in terms of outcomes, such as readmission, emergency department and general practitioner contacts. The aim of this project is to examine the effect of a cross-sectoral medication review between a clinical pharmacist and a medical specialist in coordination with the General Practitioner (GP), including patients from Hospital Sønderjylland, University Hospital of Southern Denmark (SHS).

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • all hospitalized patients who are prescribed at least seven medications specified in the Electronic Patient Journal (EPJ) at admission

Exclusion criteria

  • terminal patients or patients with a short life expectancy, patients residing in another region, patients who are discharged on the day of inclusion, and finally patients who do not speak Danish.

Treatment and study plan

Clinical pharmacist

Other

The clinical pharmacist calls the patients' GP 90 days after discharge for follow-up

Primary outcomes

  1. Readmission and emergency department rate.

    Time frame: Up to thirty days after discharge

    The number of acute readmissions and emergency department visits between 4 hours and 30 days after discharge from the index hospital stay in the intervention group compared with the control group. As a "yes" or "no" and a time-to-event. Potential readmissions are assessed through the electronic patient journal.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Acute admission

    Time frame: Up to 90 days after discharge

    Time to first acute admission after discharge from index hospital stay for the intervention and control group (up to 90 days follow-up). As a "yes" or "no" and a time-to-event. Potential acute admissions are assessed through the electronic patient journal.

  2. Mortality

    Time frame: 30 and 90 days after discharge

    The mortality rate after 30 and 90 days respectively after discharge will be evaluated. As a "yes" or "no" and a time-to-event. The mortality will be identified from patient journals.

  3. GP contacts

    Time frame: Up to 90 days after discharge

    The GP visit rate (number) will be identified at a follow-up telephone contact with the GP 90 days after discharge. As a "yes" or "no" to GP contact within the time frame and a time-to-event related to "yes".

  4. Implementation rate

    Time frame: Up to 90 days after discharge

    The implementation rate (number) of pharmacist recommendations and potential medication changes from the medication review made by the GP will be identified, 30 and 90 days respectively after index hospital stay. Each recommendation will be evaluated as a "yes", "no", "partly" or "unsure", where "partly" or "unsure" requires additional free text information to support the evaluation. The information will be obtained from the patients' shared medication record

  5. Compliance with medical treatment

    Time frame: Up to 90 days after discharge

    Patient compliance with their medical treatment will be obtained from the patients' shared medication record with information on all patient purchases of prescribed medications. As a "yes", "no", "partly" or "unsure".

Other outcomes

  1. Patient satisfaction with the intervention

    Time frame: 7 to 10 days after discharge

    Patients' satisfaction and experience with the medication review and intervention are explored through a smaller sample of intervention patients (approx. 25%, 50 patients) using an evaluation survey and a 5-likert scale. The evaluation will be conducting through telephone by the project manager, who will follow a structured evaluation survey and register the patients reply continuously in an online survey form in RedCap.

  2. Evaluation of the collaboration among clinical pharmacists, medical specialists, and GPs

    Time frame: 10 months after the randomization of the first participant in each setting an online survey link will be sent clinical pharmacists, medical specialists, and GPs

    The evaluation of the collaboration will be explored through a survey to clinical pharmacists, medical specialists, and GPs. The main focus are the collaboration with the GP and medical doctors; potential barriers to a fruitful collaboration in the team of clinical pharmacist, medical specialist and the GP; the feasibility of the intervention with pharmacist-led medication review to admitted patients, and the experience with the optimized discharge summary containing pharmacist interventions from medication reviews. A 5-likert scale will be used.

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Joo Hanne Poulsen Revell

CONTACT

[email protected]

+45 79974906

Lene Juel Kjeldsen

CONTACT

[email protected]

+45 79974932

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

University of Southern Denmark

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Prioritising Patient Medication Review: Hospitals Reaching Out (PriPMed)

Acronym: PriPMed

Important dates

Study start
2024
Primary completion
2027
Study completion
2027
First posted
Jun 11, 2024
Registry last updated
Apr 13, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.