Pharmacists have been contributing to the care of residents in nursing homes and play a significant role in ensuring quality use of medicine. However, the changing role of pharmacist in nursing homes and their impact on residents is relatively unknown.Methods: Six electronic databases were searched from inception until November 2018 for articles published in English examining the services offered by pharmacists in nursing homes. Studies were included if it examined the impact of interventions by pharmacists to improve the quality use of medicine in nursing homes.Results: Fifty-two studies (30 376 residents) were included in the current review. Thirteen studies were randomised controlled studies, while the remainder were either prepost, retrospective or case-control studies where pharmacists provided services such as clinical medication review in collaboration with other healthcare professionals as well as staff education. Pooled analysis found that pharmacist-led services reduced the mean number of falls (−0.50; 95% confidence interval: −0.79 to −0.21) among residents in nursing homes. Mixed results were noted on the impact of pharmacists' services on mortality, hospitalisation and admission rates among residents. The potential financial savings of such services have not been formally evaluated by any studies thus far. The strength of evidence was moderate for the outcomes of mortality and number of fallers. Conclusion:Pharmacists contribute substantially to patient care in nursing homes, ensuring quality use of medication, resulting in reduced fall rates. Further studies with rigorous design are needed to measure the impact of pharmacist services on the economic benefits and other patient health outcomes.

Aim To summarize and evaluate the existing evidence on the effectiveness of distal technology with regard to multiple health outcomes in people with diabetes. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from database inception to 31 August 2018 for systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses of studies that examined the impact of distal technology and reported any clinical or patient-related outcomes among people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Results The umbrella review identified 95 reviews, including 162 meta-analyses with 46 unique outcomes. Evidence from meta-analyses of randomized controlled studies supports the use of distal technology, especially telehealth and mHealth (healthcare delivered by mobile technology), in people with diabetes for improving HbA 1c values by 2-4 mmol/ mol (0.2-0.4%). For other health outcomes, such as changes in fasting plasma glucose levels, risk of diabetic ketoacidosis or frequency of severe hypoglycaemia, the evidence was weaker. No evidence was reported for most patient-reported outcomes including quality of life, self-efficacy and medication-taking. The evidence base was poor, with most studies rated as low to very low quality. Conclusion Distal technologies were associated with a modest improvement in glycaemic control, but it was unclear if they improved major clinical outcomes or were cost-effective in people with diabetes. More robust research to improve wider outcomes in people with diabetes is needed before such technologies can be recommended as part of routine care for any patient group.

No abstract