Implications of a clinical medication review and a pharmaceutical care plan of polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder
Background A clinical medication review, including patient involvement, is expected to improve pharmaceutical care. Objective To determine whether a clinical medication review followed by a pharmaceutical care plan decreases the number of potential drug-related problems (DRPs) and pharmaceutical car...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of clinical pharmacy 2016-08, Vol.38 (4), p.808-815 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 815 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 808 |
| container_title | International journal of clinical pharmacy |
| container_volume | 38 |
| creator | Geurts, Marlies M. E. Stewart, Roy E. Brouwers, Jacobus R. B. J. de Graeff, Pieter A. de Gier, Johan J. |
| description | Background
A clinical medication review, including patient involvement, is expected to improve pharmaceutical care.
Objective
To determine whether a clinical medication review followed by a pharmaceutical care plan decreases the number of potential drug-related problems (DRPs) and pharmaceutical care issues (PCIs) and leads to a positive effect on relevant clinical and laboratory parameters for elderly cardiovascular patients with multiple drug use.
Setting
Randomized controlled trial in eight primary care settings in the Netherlands.
Method
Elderly polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder were randomized into two groups. Intervention patients received a clinical medication review, followed by a pharmaceutical care plan developed in cooperation between these patients’ pharmacists and general practitioners (GPs), and agreed to by the patients. Control patients received care as usual. Patient data were collected at the start of the study (t = 0) and after 1-year follow-up (t = 1).
Main outcome measure
Decrease in potential DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs, improvement of clinical and laboratory parameters.
Results
512 patients were included. An average of 2.2 potential DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs were defined per patient in the intervention group. After 1-year follow-up, 47.2 % of potential DRPs and PCIs were resolved. In total, 156 care interventions were proposed (0.9/patient), 108 of which were implemented after 1 year (69.2 %). For control-group patients, a total of 47 proposed care interventions were documented for 255 patients (0.2/patient); after 1 year, 43 had been implemented (91.5 %). The study intervention (
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11096-016-0281-x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4929171</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1808734633</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-937ab8b05318fbf33623a4c89ccbe516d7fd7dc98d69959bd5884232f658439b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1UU1rFDEYDqLY0vYHeJGAFy-j-ZwkF0GK1ULBSz2HTJLppmQmYzKz7Z79482461IFAyEhz0fehweANxh9wAiJjwVjpNoG4bqJxM3jC3BKCEaNEBi_PN4RPQEXpdyjulhLMGevwQkRiFecnIJf18MUgzVzSGOBqYcG2hjG-hLh4N0Bgdlvg3-AZnSVMG1MHoz1y_ybZk32cIpmXOVTirsDvoNTFftxLvAhzJvV2WQX0tYUu0SToQslZefzOXjVm1j8xeE8Az-uvtxefmtuvn-9vvx801iO6NwoKkwnO8Qpln3XU9oSapiVytrOc9w60TvhrJKuVYqrznEpGaGkb7lkVHX0DHza-05LV7PZOlo2UU85DCbvdDJB_42MYaPv0lYzRRQWuBq8Pxjk9HPxZdZDKNbHmt2npWgskRSUtZRW6rt_qPdpyWONt7JQixlnqyHes2xOpWTfH4fBSK8t633Luras15b1Y9W8fZ7iqPjTaSWQPaFUaLzz-dnX_3V9AqB8tW8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1800614541</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Implications of a clinical medication review and a pharmaceutical care plan of polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Geurts, Marlies M. E. ; Stewart, Roy E. ; Brouwers, Jacobus R. B. J. ; de Graeff, Pieter A. ; de Gier, Johan J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Geurts, Marlies M. E. ; Stewart, Roy E. ; Brouwers, Jacobus R. B. J. ; de Graeff, Pieter A. ; de Gier, Johan J.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
A clinical medication review, including patient involvement, is expected to improve pharmaceutical care.
Objective
To determine whether a clinical medication review followed by a pharmaceutical care plan decreases the number of potential drug-related problems (DRPs) and pharmaceutical care issues (PCIs) and leads to a positive effect on relevant clinical and laboratory parameters for elderly cardiovascular patients with multiple drug use.
Setting
Randomized controlled trial in eight primary care settings in the Netherlands.
Method
Elderly polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder were randomized into two groups. Intervention patients received a clinical medication review, followed by a pharmaceutical care plan developed in cooperation between these patients’ pharmacists and general practitioners (GPs), and agreed to by the patients. Control patients received care as usual. Patient data were collected at the start of the study (t = 0) and after 1-year follow-up (t = 1).
Main outcome measure
Decrease in potential DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs, improvement of clinical and laboratory parameters.
Results
512 patients were included. An average of 2.2 potential DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs were defined per patient in the intervention group. After 1-year follow-up, 47.2 % of potential DRPs and PCIs were resolved. In total, 156 care interventions were proposed (0.9/patient), 108 of which were implemented after 1 year (69.2 %). For control-group patients, a total of 47 proposed care interventions were documented for 255 patients (0.2/patient); after 1 year, 43 had been implemented (91.5 %). The study intervention (
p
< 0.001) and the number of medicines used (
p
= 0.030) had a significant effect on the number of interventions proposed. Small biochemical changes in cardiovascular risk factors did occur, but the differences were small and not considered clinically relevant.
Conclusion
The integrated use of a clinical medication review with a pharmaceutical care plan in a primary care setting supports the detection of and decrease in DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs in almost half of the patients. Its benefit in terms of control of cardiovascular risk factors and safety parameters was relatively low. Risk stratification might be necessary to decide which patients might benefit most from this type of intervention.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2210-7703</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2210-7711</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11096-016-0281-x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27052212</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Aged ; Cardiovascular disease ; Cardiovascular Diseases - drug therapy ; Clinical trials ; Community Pharmacy Services - statistics & numerical data ; Drug Utilization Review - statistics & numerical data ; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions - prevention & control ; Female ; Humans ; Internal Medicine ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Netherlands ; Pharmaceutical Services - statistics & numerical data ; Pharmaceuticals ; Pharmacy ; Polypharmacy ; Primary Health Care - methods ; Research Article ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2016-08, Vol.38 (4), p.808-815</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2016</rights><rights>Springer International Publishing 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-937ab8b05318fbf33623a4c89ccbe516d7fd7dc98d69959bd5884232f658439b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-937ab8b05318fbf33623a4c89ccbe516d7fd7dc98d69959bd5884232f658439b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11096-016-0281-x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11096-016-0281-x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27052212$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Geurts, Marlies M. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stewart, Roy E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brouwers, Jacobus R. B. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Graeff, Pieter A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Gier, Johan J.</creatorcontrib><title>Implications of a clinical medication review and a pharmaceutical care plan of polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder</title><title>International journal of clinical pharmacy</title><addtitle>Int J Clin Pharm</addtitle><addtitle>Int J Clin Pharm</addtitle><description>Background
A clinical medication review, including patient involvement, is expected to improve pharmaceutical care.
Objective
To determine whether a clinical medication review followed by a pharmaceutical care plan decreases the number of potential drug-related problems (DRPs) and pharmaceutical care issues (PCIs) and leads to a positive effect on relevant clinical and laboratory parameters for elderly cardiovascular patients with multiple drug use.
Setting
Randomized controlled trial in eight primary care settings in the Netherlands.
Method
Elderly polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder were randomized into two groups. Intervention patients received a clinical medication review, followed by a pharmaceutical care plan developed in cooperation between these patients’ pharmacists and general practitioners (GPs), and agreed to by the patients. Control patients received care as usual. Patient data were collected at the start of the study (t = 0) and after 1-year follow-up (t = 1).
Main outcome measure
Decrease in potential DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs, improvement of clinical and laboratory parameters.
Results
512 patients were included. An average of 2.2 potential DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs were defined per patient in the intervention group. After 1-year follow-up, 47.2 % of potential DRPs and PCIs were resolved. In total, 156 care interventions were proposed (0.9/patient), 108 of which were implemented after 1 year (69.2 %). For control-group patients, a total of 47 proposed care interventions were documented for 255 patients (0.2/patient); after 1 year, 43 had been implemented (91.5 %). The study intervention (
p
< 0.001) and the number of medicines used (
p
= 0.030) had a significant effect on the number of interventions proposed. Small biochemical changes in cardiovascular risk factors did occur, but the differences were small and not considered clinically relevant.
Conclusion
The integrated use of a clinical medication review with a pharmaceutical care plan in a primary care setting supports the detection of and decrease in DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs in almost half of the patients. Its benefit in terms of control of cardiovascular risk factors and safety parameters was relatively low. Risk stratification might be necessary to decide which patients might benefit most from this type of intervention.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Cardiovascular disease</subject><subject>Cardiovascular Diseases - drug therapy</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Community Pharmacy Services - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Drug Utilization Review - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions - prevention & control</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Netherlands</subject><subject>Pharmaceutical Services - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Pharmaceuticals</subject><subject>Pharmacy</subject><subject>Polypharmacy</subject><subject>Primary Health Care - methods</subject><subject>Research Article</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>2210-7703</issn><issn>2210-7711</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1UU1rFDEYDqLY0vYHeJGAFy-j-ZwkF0GK1ULBSz2HTJLppmQmYzKz7Z79482461IFAyEhz0fehweANxh9wAiJjwVjpNoG4bqJxM3jC3BKCEaNEBi_PN4RPQEXpdyjulhLMGevwQkRiFecnIJf18MUgzVzSGOBqYcG2hjG-hLh4N0Bgdlvg3-AZnSVMG1MHoz1y_ybZk32cIpmXOVTirsDvoNTFftxLvAhzJvV2WQX0tYUu0SToQslZefzOXjVm1j8xeE8Az-uvtxefmtuvn-9vvx801iO6NwoKkwnO8Qpln3XU9oSapiVytrOc9w60TvhrJKuVYqrznEpGaGkb7lkVHX0DHza-05LV7PZOlo2UU85DCbvdDJB_42MYaPv0lYzRRQWuBq8Pxjk9HPxZdZDKNbHmt2npWgskRSUtZRW6rt_qPdpyWONt7JQixlnqyHes2xOpWTfH4fBSK8t633Luras15b1Y9W8fZ7iqPjTaSWQPaFUaLzz-dnX_3V9AqB8tW8</recordid><startdate>20160801</startdate><enddate>20160801</enddate><creator>Geurts, Marlies M. E.</creator><creator>Stewart, Roy E.</creator><creator>Brouwers, Jacobus R. B. J.</creator><creator>de Graeff, Pieter A.</creator><creator>de Gier, Johan J.</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160801</creationdate><title>Implications of a clinical medication review and a pharmaceutical care plan of polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder</title><author>Geurts, Marlies M. E. ; Stewart, Roy E. ; Brouwers, Jacobus R. B. J. ; de Graeff, Pieter A. ; de Gier, Johan J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-937ab8b05318fbf33623a4c89ccbe516d7fd7dc98d69959bd5884232f658439b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Cardiovascular disease</topic><topic>Cardiovascular Diseases - drug therapy</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Community Pharmacy Services - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Drug Utilization Review - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions - prevention & control</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Netherlands</topic><topic>Pharmaceutical Services - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Pharmaceuticals</topic><topic>Pharmacy</topic><topic>Polypharmacy</topic><topic>Primary Health Care - methods</topic><topic>Research Article</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Geurts, Marlies M. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stewart, Roy E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brouwers, Jacobus R. B. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Graeff, Pieter A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Gier, Johan J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>International journal of clinical pharmacy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Geurts, Marlies M. E.</au><au>Stewart, Roy E.</au><au>Brouwers, Jacobus R. B. J.</au><au>de Graeff, Pieter A.</au><au>de Gier, Johan J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Implications of a clinical medication review and a pharmaceutical care plan of polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder</atitle><jtitle>International journal of clinical pharmacy</jtitle><stitle>Int J Clin Pharm</stitle><addtitle>Int J Clin Pharm</addtitle><date>2016-08-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>808</spage><epage>815</epage><pages>808-815</pages><issn>2210-7703</issn><eissn>2210-7711</eissn><abstract>Background
A clinical medication review, including patient involvement, is expected to improve pharmaceutical care.
Objective
To determine whether a clinical medication review followed by a pharmaceutical care plan decreases the number of potential drug-related problems (DRPs) and pharmaceutical care issues (PCIs) and leads to a positive effect on relevant clinical and laboratory parameters for elderly cardiovascular patients with multiple drug use.
Setting
Randomized controlled trial in eight primary care settings in the Netherlands.
Method
Elderly polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder were randomized into two groups. Intervention patients received a clinical medication review, followed by a pharmaceutical care plan developed in cooperation between these patients’ pharmacists and general practitioners (GPs), and agreed to by the patients. Control patients received care as usual. Patient data were collected at the start of the study (t = 0) and after 1-year follow-up (t = 1).
Main outcome measure
Decrease in potential DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs, improvement of clinical and laboratory parameters.
Results
512 patients were included. An average of 2.2 potential DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs were defined per patient in the intervention group. After 1-year follow-up, 47.2 % of potential DRPs and PCIs were resolved. In total, 156 care interventions were proposed (0.9/patient), 108 of which were implemented after 1 year (69.2 %). For control-group patients, a total of 47 proposed care interventions were documented for 255 patients (0.2/patient); after 1 year, 43 had been implemented (91.5 %). The study intervention (
p
< 0.001) and the number of medicines used (
p
= 0.030) had a significant effect on the number of interventions proposed. Small biochemical changes in cardiovascular risk factors did occur, but the differences were small and not considered clinically relevant.
Conclusion
The integrated use of a clinical medication review with a pharmaceutical care plan in a primary care setting supports the detection of and decrease in DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs in almost half of the patients. Its benefit in terms of control of cardiovascular risk factors and safety parameters was relatively low. Risk stratification might be necessary to decide which patients might benefit most from this type of intervention.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>27052212</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11096-016-0281-x</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 2210-7703 |
| ispartof | International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2016-08, Vol.38 (4), p.808-815 |
| issn | 2210-7703 2210-7711 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4929171 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals |
| subjects | Aged Cardiovascular disease Cardiovascular Diseases - drug therapy Clinical trials Community Pharmacy Services - statistics & numerical data Drug Utilization Review - statistics & numerical data Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions - prevention & control Female Humans Internal Medicine Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Netherlands Pharmaceutical Services - statistics & numerical data Pharmaceuticals Pharmacy Polypharmacy Primary Health Care - methods Research Article Treatment Outcome |
| title | Implications of a clinical medication review and a pharmaceutical care plan of polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-10T02%3A56%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Implications%20of%20a%20clinical%20medication%20review%20and%20a%20pharmaceutical%20care%20plan%20of%20polypharmacy%20patients%20with%20a%20cardiovascular%20disorder&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20clinical%20pharmacy&rft.au=Geurts,%20Marlies%20M.%20E.&rft.date=2016-08-01&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=808&rft.epage=815&rft.pages=808-815&rft.issn=2210-7703&rft.eissn=2210-7711&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11096-016-0281-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1808734633%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1800614541&rft_id=info:pmid/27052212&rfr_iscdi=true |