Pharmacist-led cardiac risk reduction model

RxIALTA: evaluating the effect of a pharmacist-led intervention on CV risk in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases in a community pharmacy setting: a prospective pre-post intervention study

Patients with inflammatory conditions are at high risk for cardiovascular (CV) disease. Despite such elevated risk, their CV risk factors are suboptimally managed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of a pharmacist-led intervention on CV risk in patients with inflammatory conditions.

METHODS

DESIGN: Prospective pre-postintervention.

SETTING

17 community pharmacies across Alberta.

POPULATION

Adults with inflammatory conditions (rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, gout, systemic lupus erythematosus, psoriasis vulgaris) who had at least one uncontrolled risk factor (A1C, blood pressure, LDL-cholesterol or current tobacco users).

INTERVENTION

All patients enrolled in the study received: physical and laboratory assessment, individualised CV risk assessment and education regarding this risk, treatment recommendations, prescription adaptation and prescribing where necessary to meet treatment targets, regular communication with the patient's treating physician(s) and regular follow-up with all patients every month for 6 months.

OUTCOMES

Primary: change in estimated CV risk (risk of a major CV event in the next 10 years) after 6 months. Secondary: change in individual risk factors (blood pressure, LDL-cholesterol, A1C and tobacco cessation) over a 6-month period.

RESULTS

We enrolled 99 patients. The median age was 66.41 years (IQR 57.64-72.79), More than half of them (61%) were female and more than three-quarters (86%) were Caucasians. After adjusting for age, sex and ethnicity and centre effect, there was a reduction of 24.5% in CV risk (p<0.001); including a reduction of 0.3 mmol/L in LDL-c (p<0.001), 10.7 mm Hg in systolic blood pressure (p<0.001), 1.25% in A1C (p<0.001). There was a non-significant trend towards tobacco cessation.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study on CV risk reduction in patients with inflammatory conditions in a community pharmacy setting. RxIALTA provides evidence for the benefit of pharmacist care on global cardiovascular risk reduction as well as the individual cardiovascular risk factors in patients with inflammatory conditions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03152396.

Cluster-Randomized Trial to Evaluate a Centralized Clinical Pharmacy Service in Private Family Medicine Offices

BACKGROUND

The use of clinical pharmacists in primary care has improved the control of several chronic cardiovascular conditions. However, many private physician practices lack the resources to implement team-based care with pharmacists. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a centralized, remote, clinical pharmacy service could improve guideline adherence and secondary measures of cardiovascular risk in primary care offices in rural and small communities.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This study was a prospective trial in 12 family medicine offices cluster randomized to either the intervention or usual care. The intervention was delivered for 12 months, and subjects had research visits at baseline and 12 months. The primary outcome was adherence to guidelines, and secondary outcomes included changes in key cardiovascular risk factors and preventative health measures. We enrolled 302 subjects. There was no improvement in the Guideline Advantage score from baseline to 12 months in the control group (64.7% versus 63.1%, respectively; P=0.21). There was a statistically significant improvement in the intervention group from 63.3% at baseline to 67.8% at 12 months (P=0.02). The estimated benefit of the intervention was 5.0%±2.4% (95% confidence interval=-0.5% to 10.4%; P=0.07). Several criteria were significantly better for intervention subjects, including appropriate statin therapy (P<0.001), body mass index, screening (P<0.001), and alcohol screening (P<0.001). Only 13.7% of subjects with diabetes mellitus had hemoglobin A1c at goal at baseline, and this increased to 30.8% and 21.0% in the intervention and control group, respectively, at 12 months (P=0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

The centralized, remote pharmacist intervention was successfully implemented. The improvements in outcomes were modest, in part because of higher than expected baseline guideline adherence. Future studies of this model should focus on patients with uncontrolled conditions at high risk for cardiovascular events.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT 01983813.

Impact of pharmacist's intervention on reducing cardiovascular risk in obese patients

Background Obesity is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death. Health education, nutritional follow-up, and life style habits modification are key for cardiovascular risk reduction in obese patients. Objective To measure the impact of pharmacist's intervention on cardiovascular risk in obese patients. Setting A Spanish community pharmacy. Method Obese patients (BMI ≥ 30) with (group A, n = 30) and without (group B, n = 14) comorbidities were selected. Variables determined in first visit on-site: anthropometric values (weight, height, waist circumference), blood pressure, glycemic (glucose, HbA1c) and lipid parameters (total cholesterol, HDL-c, LDL-c, triglycerides). The PharmaFit Protocol consisted in a 24-month follow-up focusing (i) monthly on adherence to nutritional guidelines and modification of life style habits, and (ii) bi-monthly on anthropometric variables, blood pressure, and biochemical determinations. Feedback was provided to the primary care physician or specialist. Main ouitcome measure Cardiovascular risk estimated by REGICOR score. Results Anthropometric variables significantly decreased in all groups. Plasma glucose levels were significantly reduced in group A without changes in HbA1c. Lipid parameters significantly improved in group A, whereas HDL-c significantly raised in all groups. REGICOR score was significantly reduced in group A female (13.8 ± 1.6 vs. 5.8 ± 1, p < 0.0001) and male (12.7 ± 1.7 vs. 4.4. ± 0.6, p < 0.005) patients, and in group B female patients (3.5 ± 0.7 vs. 1.9 ± 0.4, p < 0.001). Conclusion Community pharmacist intervention, delivered as a 24-month follow-up and combining health and dietary education, has a highly positive impact on the reduction of cardiovascular risk in obese patients.

Management of pharmacotherapy-related problems in acute coronary syndrome: Role of clinical pharmacist in cardiac rehabilitation unit

Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide and negatively impacts healthcare costs, productivity and quality of life. Polymorbidity and polypharmacy predispose ACS patients to medication discrepancies between cardiologist-prescribed medication and drug use by the patient, drug-related problems (DRPs) and inadequate drug adherence. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of clinical pharmacist-provided services on the outcome of ACS patients. This was a prospective, randomized, controlled study on ACS patients participating in a cardiac rehabilitation programme. Forty ACS patients were randomly assigned to either control group, who received standard medical care, or intervention group, who received standard medical care plus clinical pharmacist-provided services. Services included DRP management, clinical assessment and enforcing the patient education and adherence. For both groups, the following were assessed at baseline and after 3 months: DRPs, adherence (assessed by 8-item Morisky Adherence Questionnaire), patient's knowledge (assessed by Coronary Artery Disease Questionnaire), 36-Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), total cholesterol (TC) and fasting blood glucose (FBG). After 3 months, there was a significant difference between the intervention and control groups in the per cent change of DRPs (median: -100 vs 5.882, P = 0.0001), patient's adherence score (median: 39.13 vs -14.58, P = 0.0001), knowledge score (median: 30.28 vs -5.196, P = 0.0001), SF-36 scores, heart rate (mean: -10.04 vs 6.791, P = 0.0001), diastolic blood pressure (mean: -17.87 vs 10.45, P = 0.0001), systolic blood pressure (mean: -16.22 vs 4.751, P = 0.0001), LDL (median: -25.73 vs -0.2538, P = 0.0071), TC (median: -14.62 vs 4.123, P = 0.0005) and FBG (median: -11.42 vs 5.422, P = 0.0098). Clinical pharmacists can play an important role as part of a cardiac rehabilitation team through patient education and interventions to minimize DRPs.

Pharmacist-led telehealth disease management program for patients with diabetes and depression

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to determine whether a pharmacist-led telehealth disease management program is superior to usual care of nurse-led telehealth in improving diabetes medication adherence, haemoglobin A1C (A1C), and depression scores in patients with concomitant diabetes and depression.

METHODS

Patients with diabetes and depression were randomized to pharmacist-led or nurse-led telehealth. Veterans with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, an A1C ≥ 7.5%, diagnosis of depression, and access to a landline phone were invited to participate. Patients were randomized to usual care of nurse-led telehealth or pharmacist-led telehealth. Patients were shown how to use the telehealth equipment by the nurse or pharmacist. In the pharmacist-led group, the patients received an in-depth medication review in addition to the instruction on the telehealth equipment.

RESULTS

After six months, the pharmacist-led telehealth arm showed significant improvements for cardiovascular medication adherence (14.0; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4 to 27.6), antidepressant medication adherence (26.0; 95% CI 0.9 to 51.2), and overall medication adherence combined (13.9; 95% CI 6.6 to 21.2) from baseline to six-month follow-up. There was a significant difference in A1C between each group at the six-month follow-up in the nurse-led telehealth group (6.9 ± 0.9) as compared to the pharmacist-led telehealth group (8.8 ± 2.0). There was no significance in the change in patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) from baseline to follow-up in both groups.

DISCUSSION

Pharmacist-led telehealth was efficacious in improving medication adherence for cardiovascular, antidepressants, and overall medications over a six-month period as compared to nurse-led telehealth. There was no significant improvement in overall depression scores.

Non-medical prescribing versus medical prescribing for acute and chronic disease management in primary and secondary care

BACKGROUND

A range of health workforce strategies are needed to address health service demands in low-, middle- and high-income countries. Non-medical prescribing involves nurses, pharmacists, allied health professionals, and physician assistants substituting for doctors in a prescribing role, and this is one approach to improve access to medicines.

OBJECTIVES

To assess clinical, patient-reported, and resource use outcomes of non-medical prescribing for managing acute and chronic health conditions in primary and secondary care settings compared with medical prescribing (usual care).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and five other databases on 19 July 2016. We also searched the grey literature and handsearched bibliographies of relevant papers and publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs, controlled before-and-after (CBA) studies (with at least two intervention and two control sites) and interrupted time series analysis (with at least three observations before and after the intervention) comparing: 1. non-medical prescribing versus medical prescribing in acute care; 2. non-medical prescribing versus medical prescribing in chronic care; 3. non-medical prescribing versus medical prescribing in secondary care; 4 non-medical prescribing versus medical prescribing in primary care; 5. comparisons between different non-medical prescriber groups; and 6. non-medical healthcare providers with formal prescribing training versus those without formal prescribing training.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently reviewed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed study quality with discrepancies resolved by discussion. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias for the included studies according to EPOC criteria. We undertook meta-analyses using the fixed-effect model where studies were examining the same treatment effect and to account for small sample sizes. We compared outcomes to a random-effects model where clinical or statistical heterogeneity existed.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 46 studies (37,337 participants); non-medical prescribing was undertaken by nurses in 26 studies and pharmacists in 20 studies. In 45 studies non-medical prescribing as a component of care was compared with usual care medical prescribing. A further study compared nurse prescribing supported by guidelines with usual nurse prescribing care. No studies were found with non-medical prescribing being undertaken by other health professionals. The education requirement for non-medical prescribing varied with country and location.A meta-analysis of surrogate markers of chronic disease (systolic blood pressure, glycated haemoglobin, and low-density lipoprotein) showed positive intervention group effects. There was a moderate-certainty of evidence for studies of blood pressure at 12 months (mean difference (MD) -5.31 mmHg, 95% confidence interval (CI) -6.46 to -4.16; 12 studies, 4229 participants) and low-density lipoprotein (MD -0.21, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.14; 7 studies, 1469 participants); we downgraded the certainty of evidence from high due to considerations of serious inconsistency (considerable heterogeneity), multifaceted interventions, and variable prescribing autonomy. A high-certainty of evidence existed for comparative studies of glycated haemoglobin management at 12 months (MD -0.62, 95% CI -0.85 to -0.38; 6 studies, 775 participants). While there appeared little difference in medication adherence across studies, a meta-analysis of continuous outcome data from four studies showed an effect favouring patient adherence in the non-medical prescribing group (MD 0.15, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.30; 4 studies, 700 participants). We downgraded the certainty of evidence for adherence to moderate due to the serious risk of performance bias. While little difference was seen in patient-related adverse events between treatment groups, we downgraded the certainty of evidence to low due to indirectness, as the range of adverse events may not be related to the intervention and selective reporting failed to adequately report adverse events in many studies.Patients were generally satisfied with non-medical prescriber care (14 studies, 7514 participants). We downgraded the certainty of evidence from high to moderate due to indirectness, in that satisfaction with the prescribing component of care was only addressed in one study, and there was variability of satisfaction measures with little use of validated tools. A meta-analysis of health-related quality of life scores (SF-12 and SF-36) found a difference favouring usual care for the physical component score (MD 1.17, 95% CI 0.16 to 2.17), but not the mental component score (MD 0.58, 95% CI -0.40 to 1.55). However, the quality of life measurement may more appropriately reflect composite care rather than the prescribing component of care, and for this reason we downgraded the certainty of evidence to moderate due to indirectness of the measure of effect. A wide variety of resource use measures were reported across studies with little difference between groups for hospitalisations, emergency department visits, and outpatient visits. In the majority of studies reporting medication use, non-medical prescribers prescribed more drugs, intensified drug doses, and used a greater variety of drugs compared to usual care medical prescribers.The risk of bias across studies was generally low for selection bias (random sequence generation), detection bias (blinding of outcome assessment), attrition bias (incomplete outcome data), and reporting bias (selective reporting). There was an unclear risk of selection bias (allocation concealment) and for other biases. A high risk of performance bias (blinding of participants and personnel) existed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that non-medical prescribers, practising with varying but high levels of prescribing autonomy, in a range of settings, were as effective as usual care medical prescribers. Non-medical prescribers can deliver comparable outcomes for systolic blood pressure, glycated haemoglobin, low-density lipoprotein, medication adherence, patient satisfaction, and health-related quality of life. It was difficult to determine the impact of non-medical prescribing compared to medical prescribing for adverse events and resource use outcomes due to the inconsistency and variability in reporting across studies. Future efforts should be directed towards more rigorous studies that can clearly identify the clinical, patient-reported, resource use, and economic outcomes of non-medical prescribing, in both high-income and low-income countries.

Maintenance of Clinical Endpoints After Discharge from a Pharmacist-Managed Risk Reduction Clinic at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center

BACKGROUND

Diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension are complex chronic disease states that often require close monitoring and frequent follow-up to achieve and maintain therapeutic control as determined by hemoglobin A1c (A1c), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and blood pressure (BP). At the Charles George Veterans Affairs Medical Center (CGVAMC), physicians may refer their patients to the on-site pharmacist-managed Risk Reduction Clinic (RRC). Patients are discharged from the RRC once patient-specific therapeutic goals have been met for diabetes, dyslipidemia, and/or hypertension. This study investigated the change in A1c, LDL, and systolic blood pressure (SBP) after discharge from the CGVAMC RRC.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate (a) how clinical endpoints for diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension change after discharge from the pharmacist-managed RRC at the CGVAMC; (b) the factors associated with worsening of monitoring parameters; and (c) the frequency of reconsultation to the RRC.

METHODS

In this single-center retrospective quality management study, patients were included if they had a completed consultation to the CGVAMC RRC between August 11, 2008, and January 1, 2011, for the management of type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, and/or hypertension. Patients were included if they were discharged from the RRC prior to October 1, 2011, due to goal attainment. Furthermore, it was required that patients have A1c, LDL, and SBP measurements, as applicable based on diagnoses, at least yearly during the first 2 years following discharge. Patients were excluded if they were discharged for any reason other than goal attainment or if they were followed by a specialty clinic related to the RRC, including the Diabetes PharmD, Diabetes MD, MIDAS (group diabetes), or MAGIC (group dyslipidemia) clinics. Data collection included patient demographics; date of and indication for consultation to the RRC; date of first RRC visit; date of discharge from the RRC; number of visits to the RRC; A1c, LDL, SBP, and weight at consultation to the RRC, at discharge, and during the 2 years following discharge from the RRC; and date of and indication for reconsultation to the RRC, as applicable. Two-tailed paired t-tests were used to compare A1c, LDL, and SBP at discharge from the RRC to A1c, LDL, and SBP during the follow-up period. Two-tailed unpaired t-tests were performed to determine which variables were associated with changes in the monitoring parameters after discharge from the RRC.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-nine patients were included in this study. For all patients with a diagnosis of diabetes (N = 82), A1c rose from 6.49% to 6.79% (P < 0.001) during the first year and to 7.04% (P < 0.001) during the second year following discharge. For patients diagnosed with dyslipidemia (N = 137), LDL rose after discharge from 81.5 mg/dL to 90.8 mg/dL (P < 0.001) and to 90.9 mg/dL (P < 0.001), respectively. For patients diagnosed with hypertension (N = 132), SBP rose from 126.2 mm Hg to 131.5 mm Hg (P < 0.001) and to 133.9 mm Hg (P < 0.001), respectively. An increase in A1c after discharge was associated with lower discharge A1c (P = 0.014), higher consultation weight (P = 0.009), and higher discharge weight (P = 0.042). A rise in LDL was correlated to higher consultation LDL (P = 0.006), while higher SBP was associated with lower discharge SBP (P < 0.001). Twelve percent of patients were reconsulted to the RRC.

CONCLUSIONS

A1c, LDL, and SBP rose after discharge from the pharmacist-managed risk reduction clinic, but these changes may not have been clinically significant based on the low reconsultation rate and values remaining close to generally accepted therapeutic goals. Patients likely to benefit from extending RRC services past goal attainment include those with higher A1c and LDL at the time of consultation and those with higher weight. As a result of this study, recommendations have been made to consider following up every 3-4 months for 2-3 additional visits for patients with baseline A1c > 8% and LDL > 115 mg/dL and those with weight > 220 pounds prior to discharging them from the CGVAMC RRC. Furthermore, we believe that all patients could benefit from extending follow-up to 6 months for 1-2 additional visits or as needed after their therapeutic goals have been reached.

Maintenance of Goal Blood Pressure, Cholesterol, and A1C Levels in Veterans With Type 2 Diabetes After Discharge From a Pharmacist-Managed Ambulatory Care Clinic

Objective. This study evaluated the ability of patients with type 2 diabetes to maintain systolic blood pressure (SBP), LDL cholesterol, and A1C at goal levels after being discharged from a pharmacist-managed ambulatory care clinic. The goals of this study were to 1) document the length of time to failure of maintenance of each goal and 2) characterize risk factors that may be associated with a shorter time to failure. Methods. Researchers reviewed the medical records of veterans with diabetes who were discharged from the clinical pharmacy ambulatory care clinic between 1 July 2007 and 30 June 2009 after attaining their goal SBP, LDL cholesterol, or A1C. The time to goal failure, medical history, laboratory data, medications, demographic information, and clinic appointment attendance were documented. Results. A total of 69 patients who were discharged from the clinic after meeting their SBP, LDL cholesterol, or A1C goal subsequently failed to maintain that goal. The mean time to failure was 9.4 months (SD 8.75 months) for SBP, 25.8 months (27.45 months) for LDL cholesterol, and 20.4 months (15.1 months) for A1C. Multiple risk factors were associated with a shorter time to failure of maintenance of SBP and A1C goals. Conclusion. Veterans with type 2 diabetes in this study demonstrated durable maintenance of their goal LDL cholesterol and A1C levels after being discharged from a pharmacist-managed ambulatory care clinic. However, maintenance of xSBP goals did not demonstrate the same durability. Patients who meet their SBP goal may benefit from receiving continued disease state management services from a pharmacist-managed ambulatory care clinic instead of being discharged to receive their usual care.

A Cluster-Randomized Trial of a Centralized Clinical Pharmacy Cardiovascular Risk Service to Improve Guideline Adherence

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies have demonstrated the value of including pharmacists in team-based care to improve adherence to cardiovascular (CV) guidelines, medication adherence, and risk factor control. However, there is limited information on whether these models can be successfully implemented more widely in diverse settings and populations. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether a centralized, web-based cardiovascular risk service (CVRS) managed by clinical pharmacists will improve guideline adherence in multiple primary care medical offices with diverse geographic and patient characteristics.

METHODS

This study is a prospective trial in 20 primary care offices stratified by the percent of under-represented minorities and then randomized to either the CVRS intervention or usual care. The intervention will last for 12 months and all subjects will have research visits at baseline and 12 months. The primary outcome is the difference in guideline adherence between groups. Data will also be abstracted from the medical record at 24 months to determine if the intervention effect is sustained after it is discontinued.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient enrollment will continue through 2016, with results expected in 2019. This study will provide information on whether a distant, centralized CVRS can be implemented in large numbers of medical offices, if it is effective in diverse populations, and if there is a long-term sustained effect.

A pharmacist-led follow-up program for patients with established coronary heart disease in North Norway - a randomized controlled trial

Objectives:

The aim of the study was twofold; 1) to develop a clinical pharmacist-led 12 month lasting follow-up program for patients with established coronary heart disease (CHD) discharged from the University Hospital of North Norway, and 2) to explore the impact of the program with regards to adherence to a medication assessment tool for secondary prevention of CHD and change in biomedical risk factors.

Methods:

A total of 102 patients aged 18-82 years were enrolled in a non-blinded randomized controlled trial with an intervention group and a control group. The intervention comprised medication reconciliation, medication review and patient education during three meetings; at discharge, after three months and after twelve months. The control group received standard care from their general practitioner. Primary outcomes were adherence to clinical guideline recommendations concerning prescription, therapy goal achievement and lifestyle education defined in the medication assessment tool for secondary prevention of CHD (MAT-CHDSP). Secondary outcomes included changes in the biomedical risk factors cholesterol, blood pressure and blood glucose.

Results:

Ninety-four patients completed the trial, 48 intervention group patients and 46 controls. Appropriate prescribing was high, but therapy goal achievement was low in both groups. Overall adherence to MAT-CHDSP criteria increased in both groups and was significantly higher in the intervention group at study end, 78.4% vs. 62.0%, p<0.001. The difference was statistically significant for the documented lifestyle advices in intervention group patients. No significant improvements in biomedical risk factors were observed in favor of the intervention group.

Conclusions:

The study showed an increased guideline adherence in both study groups. This indicates that attention to clinical practice guideline recommendations in itself increases adherence – which may be a clinical pharmacist task. A larger adequately powered study is needed to show a significant difference in biomedical risk factor improvements in favor of the intervention.

Amendments to the follow-up program are suggested before implementation in standard patient care can be recommended.

A centralized cardiovascular risk service to improve guideline adherence in private primary care offices

BACKGROUND

Many large health systems now employ clinical pharmacists in team-based care to assist patients and physicians with management of cardiovascular (CV) diseases. However, small private offices often lack the resources to hire a clinical pharmacist for their office. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether a centralized, web-based CV risk service (CVRS) managed by clinical pharmacists will improve guideline adherence in primary care medical offices in rural and small communities.

METHODS

This study is a cluster randomized prospective trial in 12 primary care offices. Medical offices were randomized to either the CVRS intervention or usual care. The intervention will last for 12 months and all subjects will have research visits at baseline and 12 months. Primary outcomes will include adherence to treatment guidelines and control of key CV risk factors. Data will also be abstracted from the medical record at 30 months to determine if the intervention effect is sustained after it is discontinued.

CONCLUSIONS

This study will enroll subjects through 2015 and results will be available in 2018. This study will provide information on whether a distant, centralized CV risk service can improve guideline adherence in medical offices that lack the resources to employ clinical pharmacists.

Interventions to maintain cardiac risk control after discharge from a cardiovascular risk reduction clinic: a randomized controlled trial

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy of two maintenance strategies compared to usual care after discharge from a pharmacist-led cardiovascular risk reduction clinic (CRRC).

METHODS

Open-label, randomized-controlled trial of 200 consecutive CRRC patients that met clinic discharge criteria (HbA1c ≤7% (53 mmol/mol); blood pressure ≤140/80 mmHg for those with diabetes and ≤140/90 mmHg for those without diabetes; and an LDL-cholesterol ≤2.59 mmol/l). Participants were randomized to either quarterly group medical visits or quarterly CRRC individual clinic visits, or a usual care control arm with the standard primary care alone first in a 1:1:1 ratio, followed by a 2:2:1 ratio after first 100 patients. Primary outcome measures were time to failure for guideline recommended goals of HbA1c and blood pressure over 12-months.

RESULTS

Of the 200 participants randomized, 89% had diabetes and were similar in other cardiovascular risk factors. After 1-year, the HbA1c failure rate was 0.36 [95% CI, 0.28-0.47] per quarter for the group medical visit arm, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.18-0.33] per quarter for the quarterly CRRC individual arm and, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.69-0.96] per quarter for the usual care control arm, p<0.001. The rate of failure for blood pressure was 0.31 [95% CI, 0.23-0.41] per quarter for the group medical visit arm, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.16-0.30] per quarter for the CRRC individual arm and, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.40-0.71] per quarter the control arm, p<0.001.

CONCLUSION

After discharge from a CRRC program, both individual and group interventions are more effective in maintaining glycemia and blood pressure control for patients with diabetes than usual care after 1-year of follow-up.

Improving blood pressure control through pharmacist interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Control of blood pressure (BP) remains a major challenge in primary care. Innovative interventions to improve BP control are therefore needed. By updating and combining data from 2 previous systematic reviews, we assess the effect of pharmacist interventions on BP and identify potential determinants of heterogeneity.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of pharmacist interventions on BP among outpatients with or without diabetes were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL databases. Weighted mean differences in BP were estimated using random effect models. Prediction intervals (PI) were computed to better express uncertainties in the effect estimates. Thirty-nine RCTs were included with 14 224 patients. Pharmacist interventions mainly included patient education, feedback to physician, and medication management. Compared with usual care, pharmacist interventions showed greater reduction in systolic BP (-7.6 mm Hg, 95% CI: -9.0 to -6.3; I(2)=67%) and diastolic BP (-3.9 mm Hg, 95% CI: -5.1 to -2.8; I(2)=83%). The 95% PI ranged from -13.9 to -1.4 mm Hg for systolic BP and from -9.9 to +2.0 mm Hg for diastolic BP. The effect tended to be larger if the intervention was led by the pharmacist and was done at least monthly.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacist interventions - alone or in collaboration with other healthcare professionals - improved BP management. Nevertheless, pharmacist interventions had differential effects on BP, from very large to modest or no effect; and determinants of heterogeneity could not be identified. Determining the most efficient, cost-effective, and least time-consuming intervention should be addressed with further research.

A pharmacist-led follow-up program for patients with coronary heart disease in North Norway--a qualitative study exploring patient experiences

BACKGROUND

Coronary heart disease (CHD) is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Scientific literature shows that prevention of CHD is inadequate. The clinical pharmacist's role in patient-centred care has been shown favourable in a large amount of studies, also in relation to reduction of risk factors related to CHD. We developed and piloted a pharmacist-led follow-up program for patients with established CHD after hospital discharge from a hospital in North Norway. The aim of the present study was to explore how participants in the follow-up program experienced the program with regard to four main topics; medication knowledge, feeling of safety and comfort with medications, the functionality of the program and the clinical pharmacist's role in the interdisciplinary team.

METHODS

We performed semi-structured thematic interviews with four patients included in the program. After verbatim transcribing, we analysed the interviews using "qualitative content analyses" by Graneheim and Lundman. Trial registration http://www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01131715.

RESULTS

All participants appreciated the follow-up program because their medication knowledge had increased, participation had made them feel safe, they were reassured about the appropriateness of their medications, and they had become more involved in their own medication. The participants reported that the program was well structured and the clinical pharmacist was said to be an important caretaker in the health-care system. The importance of collaboration between pharmacists and physicians, both in hospital and primary care, was emphasized.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that the follow-up program was highly appreciated among the four participants included in this study. The results must be interpreted in the context of the health care system in Norway today. Here, few pharmacists are working in hospitals or in close relation to the general practitioners. In addition, physicians are short of time in order to supply appropriate medication information, both in hospital and primary care. Involving pharmacists in follow-up of patients with CHD seems to be highly appreciated among patients and may be a step towards improving patient care. The study is limited by the low number of participants.

Collaborative Cardiovascular Risk Reduction in Primary Care II (CCARP II): Implementation of a systematic case-finding process for patients with uncontrolled risk factors

BACKGROUND

Previous pharmacist interventions to reduce cardiovascular (CV) risk have been limited by low patient enrolment. The primary aim of this study was to implement a collaborative pharmacist intervention that used a systematic case-finding procedure to identify and manage patients with uncontrolled CV risk factors.

METHODS

This was an uncontrolled, program implementation study. We implemented a collaborative pharmacist intervention in a primary care clinic. All adults presenting for an appointment with a participating physician were systematically screened and assessed for CV risk factor control by the pharmacist. Recommendations for risk factor management were communicated on a standardized form, and the level of pharmacist follow-up was determined on a case-by-case basis. We recorded the proportion of adults exhibiting a moderate to high Framingham risk score and at least 1 uncontrolled risk factor. In addition, we assessed before-after changes in CV risk factors.

RESULTS

Of the 566 patients who were screened prior to visiting a participating physician, 186 (32.9%) exhibited moderate or high CV risk along with at least 1 uncontrolled risk factor. Physicians requested pharmacist follow-up for 60.8% (113/186) of these patients. Of the patients receiving the pharmacist intervention, 65.5% (74/113) were at least 50% closer to 1 or more of their risk factor targets by the end of the study period. Significant risk factor improvements from baseline were also observed.

DISCUSSION

Through implementation of a systematic case-finding approach that was carried out by the pharmacist on behalf of the clinic team, a large number of patients with uncontrolled risk factors were identified, assessed and managed with a collaborative intervention.

CONCLUSION

Systematic case finding appears to be an important part of a successful intervention to identify and manage individuals exhibiting uncontrolled CV risk factors in a primary care setting.

The role of home blood pressure telemonitoring in managing hypertensive populations

Hypertension is a common chronic disease affecting nearly one-third of the United States population. Many interventions have been designed to help patients manage their hypertension. With the evolving climate of healthcare, rapidly developing technology, and emphasis on delivering patient-centered care, home-based blood pressure telemonitoring is a promising tool to help patients achieve optimal blood pressure (BP) control. Home-based blood pressure telemonitoring is associated with reductions in blood pressure values and increased patient satisfaction. However, additional research is needed to understand cost-effectiveness and long-term clinical outcomes of home-based BP monitoring. We review key interventional trials involving home based BP monitoring, with special emphasis placed on studies involving additionally behavioral modification and/or medication management. Furthermore, we discuss the role of home-based blood pressure telemonitoring within the context of the patient-centered medical home and the evolving role of technology.

Adding pharmacists to primary care teams reduces predicted long-term risk of cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetic patients without established cardiovascular disease: results from a randomized trial

AIM

To determine the impact of adding pharmacists to primary care teams on predicted 10-year risk of cardiovascular events in patients with Type 2 diabetes without established cardiovascular disease.

METHODS

This was a pre-specified secondary analysis of randomized trial data. The main study found that, compared with usual care, addition of a pharmacist resulted in improvements in blood pressure, dyslipidaemia, and hyperglycaemia for primary care patients with Type 2 diabetes. In this sub-study, predicted 10-year risk of cardiovascular events at baseline and 1 year were calculated for patients free of cardiovascular disease at enrolment. The primary outcome was change in UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) risk score; change in Framingham risk score was a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar between the 102 intervention patients and 93 control subjects: 59% women, median (interquartile range) age 57 (50-64) years, diabetes duration 3 (1-6.5) years, systolic blood pressure 128 (120-140) mmHg, total cholesterol 4.34 (3.75-5.04) mmol/l and HbA(1c) 54 mmol/mol (48-64 mmol/mol) [7.1% (6.5-8.0%)]. Median baseline UKPDS risk score was 10.2% (6.0-16.7%) for intervention patients and 9.5% (5.8-15.1%) for control subjects (P = 0.80). One-year post-randomization, the median absolute reduction in UKPDS risk score was 1.0% greater for intervention patients compared with control subjects (P = 0.032). Similar changes were seen with the Framingham risk score (median reduction 1.2% greater for intervention patients compared with control subjects, P = 0.048). The two risk scores were highly correlated (rho = 0.83; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Adding pharmacists to primary care teams for 1 year significantly reduced the predicted 10-year risk of cardiovascular events for patients with Type 2 diabetes without established cardiovascular disease.

Pharmacist-Led Shared Medical Appointments for Multiple Cardiovascular Risk Reduction in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

Purpose

To assess whether VA MEDIC-E (Veterans Affairs Multi-disciplinary Education and Diabetes Intervention for Cardiac risk reduction[EM DASH] Extended for 6 months), a pharmacist-led shared medical appointments program, could improve attainment of target goals for hypertension, hyperglycemia, hyperlipidemia, and tobacco use in patients with type 2 diabetes compared to standard primary care after 6 months of intervention.

Methods

A randomized, controlled trial of VA MEDIC-E (n = 50) versus standard primary care (n = 49) in veterans with type 2 diabetes, hemoglobin A1c (A1C) > 7%, blood pressure (BP) > 130/80 mmHg, and low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) > 100mg/dl (2.59 mmol/l) in the previous 6 months was conducted. The VA MEDIC-E intervention consisted of 4 weekly group sessions followed by 5 monthly booster group sessions. Each 2-hour session included 1 hour of multidisciplinary diabetes specific healthy lifestyle education and 1 hour of pharmacotherapeutic interventions performed by a clinical pharmacist. Evaluation measures included lab values of A1C, LDL cholesterol, BP, and goal attainment of these values, and diabetes self-care behavior questionnaires at 6 months.

Results

The randomization groups were similar at baseline in all cardiovascular risk factors except for LDL, which was significantly lower in the MEDIC-E arm. At 6 months, significant improvements from baseline were found in the intervention arm for exercise, foot care, and goal attainment of A1C, LDL-C, and BP but not in the control arm.

Conclusions

The results of this study demonstrate that the pharmacist-led group intervention program for 6 months was an efficacious and sustainable collaborative care approach to managing diabetes and reducing associated cardiovascular risk.

The association between C-reactive protein levels and insulin therapy in obese vs nonobese veterans with type 2 diabetes mellitus

The authors studied the association between insulin use and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels in obese (body mass index > or = 30 kg/m(2)) and nonobese (body mass index <30 kg/m(2)) patients with type 2 diabetes at the Providence Veterans Affairs Medical Center. There were 64 nonobese participants (insulin use and average daily dose, 23.4% and 7.0+/-18.2 units at baseline and 27.1% and 9.3+/-21.0 units at follow-up, respectively) and 106 obese participants (insulin use and daily dose, 39.6% and 28.2+/-47.3 units at baseline and 43.0% and 28.7+/-47.7 units at follow-up, respectively). Both use and daily dose of insulin were modeled with CRP levels of participants upon discharge from an intensive cardiac risk management clinic and at a 1-year follow-up visit using a linear mixed effects model for repeated measures. There was a significant direct association between log CRP and both insulin use and daily dose for nonobese participants (beta=0.3, P=.03 and beta=0.01, P=.02, respectively) but not for obese participants (P=.8 and P=.5, respectively). Due to the association between insulin therapy and CRP in nonobese patients, these results may aid clinicians in deciding on the initiation of insulin therapy for nonobese diabetic patients when noninsulin alternatives are available.

Maintenance of Risk Factor Control in Diabetic Patients with and Without Mental Health Conditions After Discharge from a Cardiovascular Risk Reduction Clinic

Background:

Diabetes and hypertension can be challenging to manage in patients with mental health conditions. While the effectiveness of a cardiovascular risk reduction clinic (CRRC) has been shown not to differ between those with and without mental health conditions, it is unknown whether patients with mental health conditions would differ in durability of success following discharge from the CRRC.

Objective:

To determine the effect of mental health conditions on the maintenance of glycemic control and blood pressure control in patients with diabetes following successful completion of a CRRC program.

Methods:

Patients were discharged from the CRRC when therapeutic goals of hemoglobin A1c (A1C) <7% and blood pressure <130/80 mm Hg were achieved. We performed a retrospective chart review of a cohort of 231 patients by quarterly intervals for A1C and systolic blood pressure (SBP), providing up to 3 years of data following discharge from the CRRC. We assessed the time to failure to maintain goal A1C and SBP following CRRC discharge for patients with diagnosed mental health conditions versus patients without mental health conditions.

Results:

For patients with and without mental health conditions, 50% of those who had been discharged from the CRRC with an SBP goal of <130 mm Hg failed to maintain SBP by 1 quarter. The hazard ratio for failure to maintain SBP, with those without mental health conditions as the reference group, was 0.96 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.35). Overall, for patients with an A1C goal of <7%, the combined median time to failure was 3 quarters. Among patients without mental health conditions, 25% failed in 3 quarters, and of those with mental health conditions, 25% failed in 4 quarters (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.50 to 1.66).

Conclusions:

There was no significant difference between diabetic patients with and without mental health conditions in maintenance of A1C and SBP after discharge from a CRRC. This provides further evidence that a CRRC is a viable approach to cardiovascular risk reduction in individuals with mental health conditions.

Collaborative drug therapy management for initiating and adjusting insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

PURPOSE

Collaborative drug therapy management (CDTM) by pharmacists for initiating and adjusting insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in a Veterans Affairs Health Care System (VAHCS) is described.

SUMMARY

During 2003-04, the Veterans Affairs Maryland Health Care System (VAMHCS) at Baltimore reported that 24% of its patients with diabetes had a glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) value of >9% or no recently documented HbA(1c) and that 91% of its patients with an HbA(1c) value of >9% were treated with oral antihyperglycemic agents alone. To address this issue, clinical pharmacists at VAMHCS at Baltimore developed the insulin initiation clinic. The primary goal of VAMHCS at Baltimore insulin initiation clinic was to provide an appropriate infrastructure to address the needs of patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes who required insulin therapy. Patients could be referred to the clinic if they had an HbA(1c) value of >9% on two occasions at least three months apart and were taking two oral antidiabetic medications whose dose was at least 50% of the maximal dose. The participating pharmacists mutually agreed to follow an insulin dosing protocol to help guide their therapeutic decision-making. Patients received comprehensive education during the initial visit regarding self-management skills, self-monitoring of blood glucose levels, treatment of hypoglycemia, insulin injection administration, and lifestyle modifications. Patients were discharged to their primary care provider if they attained an HbA(1c) value of <7.5% or after six months, whichever came first, during January 2005 and July 2008.

CONCLUSION

Use of a preplanned insulin initiation and titration protocol by pharmacists resulted in the successful implementation of an insulin initiation clinic through CDTM and improved patients' glycemic control.

Pharmacist-Led Group Medical Appointment Model in Type 2 Diabetes

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to assess whether the VA-MEDIC (Veterans Affairs Multi-disciplinary Education and Diabetes Intervention for Cardiac risk reduction), a pharmacist-led group medical visit program, could improve achievement of target goals in hypertension, hyperglycemia, hyperlipidemia, and tobacco use in patients with type 2 diabetes compared to usual care.

Methods

This was a randomized controlled trial of VA-MEDIC intervention in addition to usual care versus usual care alone in diabetic patients to reduce cardiac risk factors. VA-MEDIC consisted of a 40- to 60-minute educational component by nurse, nutritionist, physical therapist, or pharmacist followed by pharmacist-led behavioral and pharmacological interventions over 4 weekly sessions.

Measures

The attainment of target goals in hemoglobin A1C (A1C), blood pressure, fasting lipids, and tobacco use recommended by the American Diabetes Association.

Results

Of 118 participants, 109 completed the study. VA-MEDIC (n = 58) participants were younger and had greater tobacco use at baseline than usual care but were similar in other cardiovascular risk factors. After 4 months, a greater proportion of VA-MEDIC participants versus controls achieved an A1C of less than 7% and a systolic blood pressure less than 130 mm Hg. No significant change was found in lipid control or tobacco use between the 2 study arms.

Conclusion

Pharmacist-led group medical visits are feasible and efficacious for improving cardiac risk factors.