Process evaluation of the impact and acceptability of a polypill for prevention of cardiovascular disease

A Guide to Implementation Science for Phase 3 Clinical Trialists: Designing Trials for Evidence Uptake

The delayed and modest uptake of evidence-based treatments following cardiovascular clinical trials highlights the need for greater attention to implementation early in the development and testing of treatments. However, implementation science is not well understood and is often an afterthought following phase 3 trials. In this review, we describe the goals, frameworks, and methods of implementation science, along with common multilevel barriers and facilitators of implementation. We propose that some of the approaches used for implementation well after a trial has ended can be incorporated into the design of phase 3 trials to foster early post-trial implementation. Approaches include, but are not limited to, engaging broad stakeholders including patients, clinicians, and decision-makers in trial advisory boards; using less restrictive eligibility criteria that ensure both internal validity and generalizability; having trial protocols reviewed by regulators; integrating trial execution with the health care system; evaluating and addressing barriers and facilitators to deployment of the intervention; and undertaking cost-effectiveness and cost utility analyses across jurisdictions. We provide case examples to highlight concepts and to guide end-of-trial implementation.

Efficacy and safety of a four-drug, quarter-dose treatment for hypertension: the QUARTET USA randomized trial

New approaches are needed to lower blood pressure (BP) given persistently low control rates. QUARTET USA sought to evaluate the effect of four-drug, quarter-dose BP lowering combination in patients with hypertension. QUARTET USA was a randomized (1:1), double-blinded trial conducted in federally qualified health centers among adults with hypertension. Participants received either a quadpill of candesartan 2 mg, amlodipine 1.25 mg, indapamide 0.625 mg, and bisoprolol 2.5 mg or candesartan 8 mg for 12 weeks. If BP was >130/>80 mm Hg at 6 weeks in either arm, then participants received open label add-on amlodipine 5 mg. The primary outcome was mean change in systolic blood pressure (SBP) at 12 weeks, controlling for baseline BP. Secondary outcomes included mean change in diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and safety included serious adverse events, relevant adverse drug effects, and electrolyte abnormalities. Among 62 participants randomized between August 2019-May 2022 (n = 32 intervention, n = 30 control), mean (SD) age was 52 (11.5) years, 45% were female, 73% identified as Hispanic, and 18% identified as Black. Baseline mean (SD) SBP was 138.1 (11.2) mmHg, and baseline mean (SD) DBP was 84.3 (10.5) mmHg. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference in SBP (-4.8 mm Hg [95% CI: -10.8, 1.3, p = 0.123] and a -4.9 mmHg (95% CI: -8.6, -1.3, p = 0.009) greater mean DBP change in the intervention arm compared with the control arm at 12 weeks. Adverse events did not differ significantly between arms. The quadpill had a similar SBP and greater DBP lowering effect compared with candesartan 8 mg. Trial registration number: NCT03640312.

Participants' views of ultra-low dose combination therapy for high blood pressure: a mixed-methods study from the QUARTET trial

Single-pill combination therapy containing four quarter-dose medications for high blood pressure improves BP control compared to monotherapy, however patient-reported acceptance of the quadpill as a treatment strategy remains undescribed. We collected within-trial feedback and interviewed participants from the quadruple ultra-low-dose treatment for hypertension (QUARTET) trial to characterise patient attitudes to this intervention. All trial participants were asked about ease and preference for the quadpill and provided an opportunity to give further comments on the trial at 12 weeks (trial primary endpoint) and 52 weeks extended follow-up. Separately, we used purposive and quota sampling for the semi-structured telephone interviews, with the resultant verbatim transcripts analysed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. Themes were re-evaluated after each successive interview, and at suspected data saturation, an additional interview conducted for confirmation. At 12 weeks follow-up, 502 of 591 (85%) participants responded to acceptability questions, and 359 of 417 (86%) responded at week 52. Most reported the trial capsule easy or very easy to take. From eight sites, 16 participants were interviewed between 5 August 2020 and 19 November 2020. All described a positive experience, preferred once-daily morning dosing and found routine facilitated adherence. Participants valued individual responsibility for adherence, and involvement of the general practitioner in blood-pressure management. Most reported capsule size did not deter adherence but desired a smaller capsule. Participants described a preference for minimising number and dosage of medications, reduced capsule size, and once-daily morning dosing. These findings suggest a preference for single-pill combination therapy for blood pressure lowering.

Process Evaluation of a Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of a Quadruple Ultra-Low-Dose Treatment for Hypertension Within a Federally Qualified Health Center Network (QUARTET USA)

BACKGROUND

This convergent parallel-design mixed-methods process evaluation of the QUARTET USA (Quadruple Ultra-Low-Dose Treatment for Hypertension USA) clinical trial (NCT03640312) explores patient and health care professional perceptions about the use of low-dose quadruple therapy (LDQT) as a novel strategy for hypertension management.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A survey of all 62 patients enrolled in the QUARTET USA trial was conducted. A subsample of 13 patients and 11 health care professionals, recruited via purposive sampling, took part in semistructured interviews. At enrollment, 68% of participants (mean [SD] age, 51.7 [11.5] years; 56% self-identified as Hispanic: Mexican ethnicity, 16% as Hispanic: other ethnicity, 16% as Black race, 8% as White race, and 1.6% as South Asian race) reported that their current health depended on blood pressure medications, and 48% were concerned about blood pressure medications. At trial completion, 80% were satisfied with LDQT, 96% were certain the benefits of taking LDQT outweighed the disadvantages, and 96% reported that LDQT was convenient to take. Both patients and health care professionals found LDQT acceptable because it reduced patients' perceived pill burden and facilitated medication adherence. Health care professionals stated that a perceived limitation of LDQT was the inability to titrate doses. Steps to facilitate LDQT implementation include introducing stepped-care combinations and treatment protocols, inclusion in clinical practice guidelines, and eliminating patient cost barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

LDQT was an acceptable strategy for hypertension treatment among patients and health care professionals involved in the QUARTET USA clinical trial. Although LDQT was generally perceived as beneficial for maintaining patients' blood pressure control and facilitating adherence, some clinicians perceived limitations in titration inflexibility, adverse effects, and costs.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03640312.

Modular Titratable Polypills for Personalized Medicine and Simplification of Complex Medication Regimens

Simplification of complex medication regimens in polypharmacy positively contributes to treatment adherence and cost-effective improved health outcomes. Even though fixed dose combination (FDC) drug products are the only currently available single dose poly-pill regimens, the lack of flexibility in dose adjustment of a single drug in the combination limits their efficacy. To fill the existing gap in drug dose personalization and simplification of complex medication regimens commonly encountered in the treatment of cardiovascular disease, tuberculosis, and tapering of corticosteroid therapy, a modular titratable polypill approach that simultaneously addresses both aspects is proposed. The polypill consists of modular units that contain different drugs at incremental or decremental doses to be assembled in a single titratable polypill at the required dose for each drug through a stacking or interlocking process. The variable dose (VD) modular tablets are subjected to quality control tests and found to comply to pharmacopeia's acceptance criteria and requirements specified in the respective drug monographs. A cost-effectiveness analysis is conducted supporting the VD strategy as cost-effective compared to the FDC strategy and more effective and less expensive than standard of care. The VD approach stands to enable pill burden reduction, ease of administration, enhancement of treatment adherence, and potential cost-saving benefits.

Fixed-Dose Combination (Polypill) for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention: A Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

This meta-analysis was performed to assess the efficacy of fixed-dose combination (polypill) in reducing the risk of mortality and cardiovascular events.

METHODS

Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central were searched during May 2021. All randomized trials investigating the efficacy of antihypertensive and lipid-lowering ± antiplatelet drug combinations in patients at cardiovascular risk were included. Outcomes were presented as risk ratios or standardized mean differences with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

A total of 16 trials (N = 26,567 participants) were included. The risk reduction for all-cause mortality (risk ratio = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.79, 1.01; I² = 0%; moderate certainty) and major adverse cardiac events (risk ratio=0.84; 95% CI=0.68, 1.04; I²=51%; very low certainty) did not reach statistical significance in comparison with those of the control group. Subgroup analysis of studies that used an active control yielded similar results. However, significant reductions in major adverse cardiac event risk were observed in studies that exclusively targeted primary prevention, followed patients for ≥4 years, and had a low risk of bias. The polypill group had significantly higher adherence (risk ratio=1.18; 95% CI=1.06, 1.32; I²=96%; very low certainty) and comprable rates of adverse side effects (risk ratio=1.10; 95% CI=0.98, 1.23; I²=58%; moderate certainty) with those of the control group. Patients randomized to the polypill had significant reductions in systolic and diastolic blood pressure as well as in total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

DISCUSSION

Despite reductions in cardiovascular risk factors, the observed mortality benefit for the polypill did not reach statistical significance. Further studies are needed to validate its clinical benefits and determine the patient populations likely to achieve such benefits.

The Era of Polypills in the Management of Cardiovascular Diseases: Are We There Yet?

Cardiovascular Diseases (CVD) are the leading cause of mortality globally. Wald and Law proposed the idea of a 'polypill'; a fixed dose combination therapy (FDC) in the form of a single pill to curb the CVD epidemic. Such a drug would include the combination of a broad spectrum of drugs including cholesterol lowering drugs, antihypertensive drugs, anti-platelet drugs, anti-coagulation drugs, anti-arrhythmic drugs, which are frequently integrated to combat specific CVDs. This 'polypill' holds the potential to pose several advantages like increased compliance, improved quality of life, risk factor control, psychological relief, and cost effectiveness along with minimal side effects. Several trials (like TIPS, UMPIRE, PolyIran etc.) have tested different treatment strategies to test the hypothesis of Wald and Law. Unlike the past physicians are now highly aware of this new strategy.The future of polypill in the management of CVD lies in a strategy where polypills are treated supplementary to the already existing preventive care, which includes lifestyle modifications and efforts to reduce tobacco use.

Patient and provider's perspective on barriers and facilitators for medication adherence among adult patients with cardiovascular diseases and diabetes mellitus in India: a qualitative evidence synthesis

OBJECTIVE

To explore the various stakeholders' perspectives on barriers and facilitators for medication adherence among patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and diabetes mellitus (DM)in India.

DESIGN

Systematic review of qualitative studies.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive systematic search was conducted in Medline, Cochrane Library, Science Direct and Google Scholar from January 2010 to July 2020. We included all qualitative peer-reviewed studies, reporting barriers and facilitators of medication adherence, from India, for our current review.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction was performed by two independent authors who also assessed the quality of included studies using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme criteria. This qualitative evidence synthesis adhered to the enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research checklist RESULTS: In total, 18 studies were included. Major barriers reported were lack of understanding about the disease, complications related to non-adherence, followed by forgetfulness, lack of family support and risk communication. Health system-related barriers such as accessibility, affordability and acceptability were also reported by majority of the studies. Creation of peer support groups, digital reminder systems, integration of native Indian systems of India, physiotherapy and geriatric clinics at the primary healthcare level and innovations in patient care were suggested to counter these barriers in medication adherence.

CONCLUSION

Such patient-specific targeted interventions need to be developed to achieve better control among patients with CVD and DM.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020199529.

The Attitude towards Polypills Questionnaire (APPQ): a phase I-III development and validation study in patients with cerebrovascular disease

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The polypill approach has been proposed to reduce patients' pill burden, increase medication adherence and lower stroke incidence. However, little is known about patients' attitudes towards polypills for cerebrovascular medication.

METHODS

Based on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Group questionnaire development guidelines, a questionnaire to measure patients' attitudes towards polypills for the secondary prevention of stroke (phase I-III) was developed. In phase I, issues were generated via literature review and interviews with patients and healthcare professionals. The issues were operationalized into items in phase II. In phase III the questionnaire was validated in a large single-centre sample, and test-retest and internal validity were evaluated.

RESULTS

In phase I, 34 relevant issues were identified through literature search and interviews. Pre-testing the questionnaire indicated high applicability and comprehensibility. The final Attitudes towards Polypills Questionnaire was tested in N = 260 patients and showed a two-factor structure. The factors were labelled 'concerns' and 'benefits'. The scales showed acceptable and good internal validity (concerns, Cronbach's α = 0.85; benefits, α = 0.93), but the scales' test-retest validity was ambiguous. On a 0 to 3 rating scale, concerns were rated lower than benefits (mean 1.07, SD 0.69 vs. mean 1.87, SD 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

The Attitudes towards Polypills Questionnaire showed high comprehensibility and content validity to assess German language patients' attitudes towards a polypill medication. Our data and questionnaire may aid the implementation of polypill treatments in clinical practice and can be used in the design of future clinical trials on polypill therapy. Further validation of the questionnaire is advised.

The role of single pill combination therapy in the prevention of ischaemic stroke

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The role of single pill combination therapy for stroke prevention remains to be established. We explored the perspectives of stroke survivors and healthcare professionals on single pill combination therapy for stroke prevention.

METHODS

We conducted focus groups involving stroke survivors and healthcare professionals.

RESULTS

We recruited six stroke survivors: four (67%) were female and mean age was 70 ± 12 years; and eight healthcare professionals (three Stroke Consultants, two Nurse Specialists, three General Practitioners). Improved adherence is the main perceived benefit of single pill combination therapy, although concerns exist surrounding less individualised care, unsuitability for use in the acute setting, reduced ability to titrate doses and difficulty identifying the cause of side effects. The clinical stability of patients, alongside single pill combination therapy efficacy, cost, side effect profile and evidence base for impact on risk factors and clinical outcomes are key factors influencing acceptability. Stroke survivors and healthcare professionals feel single pill combination therapy is most suitable for stable patients, although there is no evidence base for its use in this context.

CONCLUSION

Stroke healthcare professionals and stroke survivors are most amenable to using single pill combination therapy for stable patients, although its role in this context should be evaluated in studies with risk factor targets and clinical outcomes as endpoints.

Barriers and Facilitators to the Use of Cardiovascular Fixed-Dose Combination Medication (Polypills) in Andhra Pradesh, India: A Mixed-Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Polypills, fixed-dose combinations of blood pressure-lowering drug(s), and statin, with or without aspirin, improve the use of these recommended drugs in patients with or at high risk of cardiovascular disease. However, in India, there has been poor uptake of polypills despite market availability.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to assess availability and cost of polypills and explore barriers and facilitators to their use in the state of Andhra Pradesh in India.

METHODS

A mixed-methods study was conducted. Availability and cost of polypills as well as individual component drugs was assessed through a survey of pharmacies across urban, urban slum, and rural regions in state of Andhra Pradesh in India. In-depth interviews with stakeholders at each level of the health system explored barriers and facilitators to use of polypills.

RESULTS

Overall, 30 pharmacies were surveyed (10 in each of urban, urban slum, and rural region). In urban region, 2 pharmacies stocked polypills (without aspirin) costing 121 Indian rupees (INR) per 10 pills, and 1 other pharmacy stocked a polypill (with aspirin) costing 24 INR per 10 pills. All pharmacies stocked a wide range of component drugs as separate pills with combined cost of the cheapest angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, statin, and aspirin INR 124 per 10 pills. Patients were willing to use polypills if prescribed by their doctor, and pharmacies were willing to stock polypills if there was market demand. For prescribers, key barriers included perceptions that current polypills contained outdated drugs and inadequate flexibility in prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

In a market in which polypill use is licensed, their availability and use is very low. Lack of prescription of polypills was the predominant barrier to polypill use; therefore, making polypills with drugs that are more acceptable and at different available strengths, in conjunction with broader prescriber education and training, may improve their use.

Process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial of a pharmacological strategy to improve hypertension control: protocol for a qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Globally, the prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension is high, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. There is a critical need for strategies to improve hypertension control. The early use of a fixed low-dose combination of three antihypertensive drugs (triple pill) has the potential to significantly improve hypertension control. The TRI ple Pill vs. U sual care M anagement for P atients with mild-to- moderate H ypertension (TRIUMPH) randomised controlled trial (RCT) is designed to test the effects of this strategy compared with usual care in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. This paper reports the protocol of a process evaluation of the TRIUMPH RCT. The objectives are to understand factors related to implementation of the intervention, mechanisms of effect, contextual factors that underpin the effectiveness of the triple pill strategy and the potential barriers and facilitators to implementing the strategy in clinical practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Face-to-face semistructured in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of TRIUMPH RCT participants and healthcare professionals in Sri Lanka will be conducted. Healthcare professionals will include physicians and their staff who were involved in conducting the TRIUMPH RCT. Interviewees will be recruited sequentially until thematic saturation is achieved. Interviews will be audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed in NVivo using framework analysis methods.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The TRIUMPH RCT and process evaluation have received approval from the relevant Ethics Review Committee. All participants will be asked to provide written consent before participation. Findings from the study will be disseminated through publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12612001120864 , SLCTR/2015/020 ; Pre-results.

Polypill Variants (Quarter Pill Trials)

The cardiovascular polypill or fixed-dose combination pill, consisting of 3, 4, or more drugs in a single tablet (or capsule), has been proposed as an effective and convenient therapy in both secondary and primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Each of the drugs in the combination has a documented ability to prevent CVD events. The combined effect has been estimated to reduce risk by 75% to 80%. Since the concept was introduced 15 years ago, several polypills are available and their effects on risk factors evaluated. Their effects on individual risk factors, such as hypertension and elevated low-density lipoprotein levels, are similar to the individual drugs separately. Enhancement of adherence of the polypill has also been shown compared to individual drugs given separately. Based on the reductions on the individual risk factors, the reductions in risk are estimated to be substantial. A few large long-term randomized controlled trials are ongoing and will be completed in the next 2 years. If the effects on CVD outcomes are as predicted, this would help the many millions of individuals who are currently not adequately treated or not treated at all. There are however considerable challenges in development and acceptance of the polypill. These include regulatory issues; intellectual property; perception by the public, patients, and physicians; and the role of health systems and societal approach to disease prevention. For the polypill to be accepted and achieve even a part of its potential, multiple barriers outlined in this review have to be overcome.

Implications of prescribing a fixed-dose combination in clinical cardiology practice: a retrospective observational study using a single medical centre database in Korea

Objective

Fixed-dose combination (FDC) prescribing enhances adherence to medication. However, there are limited data regarding the usefulness of FDC drugs across different risk groups. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between FDC discontinuation and clinical outcomes.

Methods

From January 2008 to December 2014, patients with FDC prescriptions who visited a cardiology outpatient clinic at a tertiary university hospital in Daegu, Republic of Korea were retrospectively identified. The 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk score and 20 conventional cardiovascular (CV) risk factors were assessed. Patients were classified according to FDC continuation, together with a tertile of 20 risks. CV events were defined as the composite of admission for worsening heart failure or diabetes, stroke, ischaemic heart disease, and CV death.

Results

502 patients were prescribed with one of the following FDC products: calcium channel blocker (CCB) plus angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), CCB plus statins, and ARB plus diuretics. During follow-up (mean 2.8±2.4 years), 203 discontinuations (40.4%) occurred. FDC-discontinued patients had lower ASCVD risk scores (24.8% vs. 28.8%, p<0.001), and patients with <6 risk factors discontinued FDC frequently. During follow-up, 57 events (11.4%) were reported: 30 (14.8%) in FDC-discontinued patients and 27 (9.1%) in FDC-continued patients (p=0.062). In multivariate models accounting for events, FDC discontinuation (p<0.001) and high ASCVD risk score (p=0.017) were associated with CV events.

Conclusions

FDC discontinuation was common among patients attending the cardiology outpatient clinic. Our analyses suggest that FDC discontinuation in patients at high ASCVD risk may have an impact on CV event rates.

Putting polypills into practice: challenges and lessons learned

Regulatory approvals for cardiovascular polypills are increasing rapidly across more than 30 countries. The evidence clearly shows polypills improve adherence and cardiovascular disease risk factors for patients with indications for use of polypill components-ie, those with established cardiovascular disease or at high risk. However, the implementation of polypills into clinical practice has many challenges. The clinical trials literature provides insights into the clinical impact of a polypill strategy, including cost-effectiveness, safety of use, substantial improvement in adherence, and better risk factor control than usual care. Despite the clear need for such a strategy and the available clinical data backing up the use of the polypill in different patient populations, challenges to widespread implementation, such as an absence of government reimbursement and poor physician uptake (identified from on the ground experience in countries following commercial rollout), have greatly obstructed real-world implementation. Obtaining the full public health benefit of polypills will require education, advocacy, endorsement, and implementation by key global agencies such as WHO and national clinical bodies, as well as endorsement from governments.

Fixed-dose combination therapy for the prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases

BACKGROUND

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is the leading cause of death and disability worldwide, yet ASCVD risk factor control and secondary prevention rates remain low. A fixed-dose combination of blood pressure- and cholesterol-lowering and antiplatelet treatments into a single pill, or polypill, has been proposed as one strategy to reduce the global burden of ASCVD.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of fixed-dose combination therapy on all-cause mortality, fatal and non-fatal ASCVD events, and adverse events. We also sought to determine the effect of fixed-dose combination therapy on blood pressure, lipids, adherence, discontinuation rates, health-related quality of life, and costs.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our previous searches in September 2016 of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ISI Web of Science, and DARE, HTA, and HEED. We also searched two clinical trials registers in September 2016. We used no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of a fixed-dose combination therapy including at least one blood pressure-lowering and one lipid-lowering component versus usual care, placebo, or an active drug comparator for any treatment duration in adults 18 years old or older, with no restrictions on presence or absence of pre-existing ASCVD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted the data for this update. We evaluated risk of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' assessment tool. We calculated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using fixed-effect models when heterogeneity was low (I2 < 50%) and random-effects models when heterogeneity was high (I2 ≥ 50%). We used the GRADE approach to evaluate the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

In the initial review, we identified nine randomised controlled trials with a total of 7047 participants and four additional trials (n = 2012 participants; mean age range 62 to 63 years; 30% to 37% women) were included in this update. Eight of the 13 trials evaluated the effects of fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy in populations without prevalent ASCVD, and the median follow-up ranged from six weeks to 23 months. More recent trials were generally larger with longer follow-up and lower risk of bias. The main risk of bias was related to lack of blinding of participants and personnel, which was inherent to the intervention. Compared with the comparator groups (placebo, usual care, or active drug comparator), the effects of the fixed-dose combination treatment on mortality (FDC = 1.0% versus control = 1.0%, RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.89,  I2 = 0%, 5 studies, N = 5300) and fatal and non-fatal ASCVD events (FDC = 4.7% versus control = 3.7%, RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.66, I2 = 0%, 6 studies, N = 4517) were uncertain (low-quality evidence). The low event rates for these outcomes and indirectness of evidence for comparing fixed-dose combination to usual care versus individual drugs suggest that these results should be viewed with caution. Adverse events were common in both the intervention (32%) and comparator (27%) groups, with participants randomised to fixed-dose combination therapy being 16% (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.25, 11 studies, 6906 participants, moderate-quality evidence) more likely to report an adverse event . The mean differences in systolic blood pressure between the intervention and control arms was -6.34 mmHg (95% CI -9.03 to -3.64, 13 trials, 7638 participants, moderate-quality evidence). The mean differences (95% CI) in total and LDL cholesterol between the intervention and control arms were -0.61 mmol/L (95% CI -0.88 to -0.35, 11 trials, 6565 participants, low-quality evidence) and -0.70 mmol/L (95% CI -0.98 to -0.41, 12 trials, 7153 participants, moderate-quality evidence), respectively. There was a high degree of statistical heterogeneity in comparisons of blood pressure and lipids (I2 ≥ 80% for all) that could not be explained, so these results should be viewed with caution. Fixed-dose combination therapy improved adherence to a multidrug strategy by 44% (26% to 65%) compared with usual care (4 trials, 3835 participants, moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of fixed-dose combination therapy on all-cause mortality or ASCVD events are uncertain. A limited number of trials reported these outcomes, and the included trials were primarily designed to observe changes in ASCVD risk factor levels rather than clinical events, which may partially explain the observed differences in risk factors that were not translated into differences in clinical outcomes among the included trials. Fixed-dose combination therapy is associated with modest increases in adverse events compared with placebo, active comparator, or usual care but may be associated with improved adherence to a multidrug regimen. Ongoing, longer-term trials of fixed-dose combination therapy will help demonstrate whether short-term changes in risk factors might be maintained and lead to expected differences in clinical events based on these changes.

Implementation of a consumer-focused eHealth intervention for people with moderate-to-high cardiovascular disease risk: protocol for a mixed-methods process evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Technology-mediated strategies have potential to engage patients in modifying unhealthy behaviour and improving medication adherence to reduce morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease (CVD). Furthermore, electronic tools offer a medium by which consumers can more actively navigate personal healthcare information. Understanding how, why and among whom such strategies have an effect can help determine the requirements for implementing them at a scale. This paper aims to detail a process evaluation that will (1) assess implementation fidelity of a multicomponent eHealth intervention; (2) determine its effective features; (3) explore contextual factors influencing and maintaining user engagement; and (4) describe barriers, facilitators, preferences and acceptability of such interventions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Mixed-methods sequential design to derive, examine, triangulate and report data from multiple sources. Quantitative data from 3 sources will help to inform both sampling and content framework for the qualitative data collection: (1) surveys of patients and general practitioners (GPs); (2) software analytics; (3) programme delivery records. Qualitative data from interviews with patients and GPs, focus groups with patients and field notes taken by intervention delivery staff will be thematically analysed. Concurrent interview data collection and analysis will enable a thematic framework to evolve inductively and inform theory building, consistent with a realistic evaluation perspective. Eligible patients are those at moderate-to-high CVD risk who were randomised to the intervention arm of a randomised controlled trial of an eHealth intervention and are contactable at completion of the follow-up period; eligible GPs are the primary healthcare providers of these patients.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been received from the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee and the Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council (AH&MRC) of New South Wales. Results will be disseminated via scientific forums including peer-reviewed publications and national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ANZCTR 12613000715774.

Usefulness of the Polypill for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease and Hypertension

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death in the developed countries and is estimated to be the leading cause of death in the developing countries by the year 2030. The cause for this rise in CVD is the increase in the major CVD risk factors (CVRFs) like hypertension, obesity, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia, which account for 80 % of all CVD deaths worldwide. In order to prevent the increase in CVD, it has been proposed to develop a low-cost polypill containing four to five generic drugs with known effectiveness in the reduction of the CVRFs. This polypill has now been tested in several recent studies for the primary and secondary prevention of CVD and stroke with fairly good results. A Medline search of the English language literature between 2011 and 2015 resulted in the identification of 15 studies with pertinent findings. These findings together with collateral literature will be discussed in this review.

Stroke survivors', caregivers' and GPs' attitudes towards a polypill for the secondary prevention of stroke: a qualitative interview study

OBJECTIVES

To understand the perspectives of stroke survivors, caregivers and general practitioners (GPs) on a polypill approach, consisting of blood pressure and cholesterol-lowering therapies, with or without aspirin, for the secondary prevention of stroke.

METHODS

A qualitative interview study was undertaken in 5 GP surgeries in the East of England. 28 survivors of stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA) were interviewed, 14 of them with a caregiver present, along with a convenience sample of 5 GPs, to assess attitudes towards a polypill and future use. Topic guides explored participants attitudes, potential uptake and long-term use, management of polypill medication and factors influencing the decision to prescribe. Data were analysed using a grounded theory approach. Key themes are presented and illustrated with verbatim quotes.

RESULTS

The analysis identified 3 key themes: polypill benefits, polypill concerns and polypill lessons for implementation. Stroke/TIA survivors were positive about the polypill concept and considered it acceptable in the secondary prevention of stroke. Perceived benefits of a polypill included convenience resulting in improved adherence and reduced burden of treatment. Caregivers felt that a polypill would improve medication-taking practices, and GPs were open to prescribing it to those at increased cardiovascular risk. However, concerns raised included whether a polypill provided equivalent therapeutic benefit, side effects through combining medications, consequences of non-adherence, lack of flexibility in regulating dosage, disruption to current treatment and suitability to the wider stroke population.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants acknowledged potential advantages in a polypill approach for secondary prevention of stroke; however, significant concerns remain. Further research on the efficacy of a polypill is needed to reassure practitioners whose concerns around inflexibility and treatment suitability are likely to influence the decision to prescribe a polypill for secondary prevention of stroke. Acceptability among survivors, caregivers and GPs is likely to determine the uptake and subsequent use of a polypill in the future.