Collaborative Physician-Pharmacist-Managed Multiple Myeloma Clinic Improves Guideline Adherence and Prevents Treatment Delays

Impact of coordinated care on adherence to antihypertensive medicines among adults experiencing polypharmacy in Australia

BACKGROUND

Adherence to antihypertensives is key for blood pressure control. Most people with hypertension have several comorbidities and require multiple medicines, leading to complex care pathways. Strategies for coordinating medicine use can improve adherence, but cumulative benefits of multiple strategies are unknown.

METHODS

Using dispensing claims for a 10% sample of eligible Australians, we identified adult users of antihypertensives during July 2018-June 2019 who experienced polypharmacy (≥5 unique medicines). We measured medicine use reflecting coordinated medicine management in 3 months before and including first observed dispensing, including: use of simple regimens for each cardiovascular medicine; prescriber continuity; and coordination of dispensings at the pharmacy. We measured adherence (proportion of days covered) to antihypertensive medicines in the following 12 months, and used logistic regression to assess independent associations and interactions of adherence with these measures of care.

RESULTS

We identified 202 708 people, of which two-thirds (66.6%) had simple cardiovascular medicine regimens (one tablet per day for each medicine), two-thirds (63.3%) were prescribed >75% of medicines from the same prescriber, and two-thirds (65.5%) filled >50% of their medicine on the same day. One-third (28.4%) of people experienced all three measures of coordinated care. Although all measures were significantly associated with higher adherence, adherence was greatest among people experiencing all three measures (odds ratio = 1.63; 95% confidence interval: 1.55-1.72). This interaction was driven primarily by effects of prescriber continuity and dispensing coordination.

CONCLUSIONS

Coordinating both prescribing and dispensing of medicines can improve adherence to antihypertensives, which supports strategies consolidating both prescribing and supply of patients' medicines.

Physician knowledge, practice patterns, and barriers encountered regarding guideline-concordant use of bone modifying agents for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend bone-modifying agents (BMAs) for patients with castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and bone metastasis, but not for castrate-sensitive prostate cancer (CSPC). Physicians beliefs and practices regarding BMA therapy are poorly understood.

METHODS

This was a qualitative interview study with embedded Likert-scale elements. Study participants were physicians who treat prostate cancer, located within an academic cancer center or an affiliated community-based network. Participants were asked about their experiences and practice patterns regarding BMA therapy. Participants used Likert-scale items to identify the most common barriers to guideline-concordant BMA use and the most effective potential interventions. Participants were subsequently asked to rank the three most common barriers and the three most effective interventions to reduce underuse (for CRPC) and overuse (for CSPC).

RESULTS

Nineteen physicians were invited and 15 participated; one physician did not answer some questions as outside of their practice scope. All were aware of the recommendation for BMAs in CRPC. 14% (2/14) were unaware of the recommendation against BMA use for CSPC; an additional 29% (4/14) believed that BMA use could be appropriate for CSPC depending on the metastatic disease burden. 36% (5/14) were unaware of recommendations for screening and treatment of low bone mineral density. The most common barriers (occurring "often" or "sometimes") were obtaining dental clearance (11/15) and insufficient clinic time (6/15). The interventions identified as most effective to reduce underuse were dental navigation (11/15) and electronic medical record (EMR)-based guidance (9/15). The interventions identified as most effective to reduce overuse were peer-to-peer education (14/15) and EMR-based guidance (13/15).

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness of guideline recommendations for screening and treatment of low bone mineral density and against BMA use for CSPC was good, but not complete. Dental navigation, peer-to-peer education, and EMR-based guidance were preferred intervention strategies to improve guideline-concordant use.

Impact of oral chemotherapy pharmacists on cost avoidance of oral oncolytics in an integrated health system

BACKGROUND

While the impact of oncology pharmacist interventions on patient outcomes has been well-documented in previous studies, there is a scarcity of articles relating to oncology pharmacists' impact on cost avoidance of oral oncolytics within an integrated health care system. Cost savings and cost avoidance studies are needed to help promote the expansion of clinical services provided by the oncology pharmacy department.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to analyze interventions made by oncology pharmacists in the Oral Chemotherapy Treatment Program (OCTP) at the Kaiser Permanente-San Diego Service Area and determine the direct cost avoidance effects over one year. A secondary objective was to evaluate oncologists' satisfaction with OCTP.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, observational, single-arm study where the drug cost avoidance impact resulting from oncology pharmacists' interventions was calculated. A report containing all documented oncology pharmacist interventions made in OCTP from 1 January to 31 December 2021 were reviewed for study inclusion. A retrospective chart review was conducted to verify that the interventions were made by the oncology pharmacists. The average wholesale price of drugs listed on Lexicomp as of 1 November 2021 was used to calculate drug cost avoidance values.

RESULTS

A total of 238 OCTP oncology pharmacist interventions associated with direct drug cost avoidance values were identified, amounting to a total cost avoidance of $2,521,844 and an annual return on investment of 440%.

From mechanism to resistance - changes in the use of dexamethasone in the treatment of multiple myeloma

Glucocorticoids, including dexamethasone, have been a mainstay of treatment for multiple myeloma (MM) for decades. In current treatment protocols and NCCN clinical practice guidelines, dexamethasone is included in all phases of MM treatment as a key adjunct to novel therapies within all preferred therapy regimen, augmenting clinical response rates to these agents. The inclusion of dexamethasone in MM treatment regimens, combined with novel agents, continues to deliver good response rates. Further understanding of drug combinations and dose modifications is anticipated to enhance clinical care, mitigate toxicities and optimize outcomes. New formulations are providing the opportunity for a reduction in pill burden and potential for medication errors, whereby improving treatment adherence. Here, we summarize and discuss the role of dexamethasone in the treatment of MM, its mechanism of action and doses used, and provide a critical appraisal current evidence and its clinical implications.

Estimation of Kidney Function in Patients With Multiple Myeloma: Implications for Lenalidomide Dosing

BACKGROUND

Lenalidomide is an immunomodulatory drug used to treat multiple myeloma that requires renal dosing adjustment based on Cockcroft-Gault (CG). Various equations to estimate kidney function exist and pose a potential issue with lenalidomide dosing.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the impact of estimating kidney function in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients with CG, Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) and their potential impact on lenalidomide dosing.

METHODS

Data from 1121 multiple myeloma patients at the time of diagnosis acquired from the Mayo Clinic were used to calculate creatinine clearance (CrCl) using Cockcroft-Gault with actual body weight (CG_ABW), ideal body weight (CG_IBW), or adjusted body weight (CG_AdjBW); MDRD; and CKD-EPI for each subject. Discordances in dosing were then analyzed, and lenalidomide exposure was calculated for each subject to assess impact on pharmacokinetics of lenalidomide for patients who received discordant doses.

RESULTS

Overall, approximately 16% of patients received a discordant dose when using MDRD or CKD-EPI instead of CG_ABW. The most common dose discordance was the decrease of a full dose of lenalidomide 25 mg when using CG_ABW down to 10 mg and when using MDRD or CKD-EPI with 53.8% to 55.6% of all discordances in this category. When assessing different body weights, the most common discordance was a decrease from 25 to 10 mg when using CG_IBW instead of CG_ABW; the same trend was observed when using CG_AdjBW instead as well. Patients were also at risk of over- or underexposure based on area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC) for discordant dosing.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

A significant proportion of patients are at risk of under- or overdose of lenalidomide if CKD-EPI or MDRD are used instead of CG_ABW. Physicians should use CG_ABW when estimating renal function to dose lenalidomide.

A Scoping Review on the Relationship between Race/Ethnicity and the Receipt of Supportive Care Medications during Cancer Treatment: Implications for the Clinical Pharmacist

There is surmounting levels of evidence on the health disparities within cancer treatment in the United States (US). Most of the research focused on cancer specific factors including anticancer incidence, screening, treatment and follow-up, and clinical outcomes such as overall survival (OS). Less is known about the disparities present with supportive care medication use in cancer patients. Supportive care utilization during cancer treatment has been linked to improved quality of life (QoL) and OS among patients. The goal of this scoping review is to summarize findings of current literature on the relationship between race and ethnicity and the receipt of supportive care medications during cancer treatment for pain and chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This scoping review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Our literature search included quantitative studies, qualitative studies, and grey literature written in the English language with clinically relevant outcomes pertaining to pain and CINV management in cancer treatment published from 2001-2021. Articles that met the predefined inclusion criteria were considered for inclusion in the analysis. The initial search yielded 308 studies. Following de-duplication and screening, 14 studies met the predefined inclusion criteria, with majority of the studies being quantitative studies (n=13). Collectively, results were mixed results regarding the presence of racial disparities for supportive care medication use. Half of the studies (n=7) supported this finding whereas, the other half (n=7) did not identify any racial disparities. In our review, multiple studies illustrate the existence of disparities in the use of supportive care medications in some cancer types. Clinical pharmacists should strive to eliminate supportive medication use disparities as part of a multidisciplinary team. In order to develop strategies to prevent supportive care medication use disparities in this population, further research and analysis of external factors that influence them are needed.

Real World Adherence to and Persistence With Oral Oncolytics in Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Oral oncolytic treatments (OOTs) have improved the prognosis of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). However, the effectiveness of these therapies is undermined by poor adherence. We aimed to characterize the real-world adherence to, and persistence with, OOTs for MM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the International Pharmaceutical abstracts databases were searched for relevant observational studies published in English up to November 21, 2021. This was supplemented by manual searches of abstracts from the annual meetings of the American Society of Hematology, the American Society for Clinical Oncology, and the European Hematology Association as well as screening the references of included articles. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Following screening of 11,557 articles, 19 studies involving 27,129 patients in 8 countries (France, the US, Germany, Italy, the UK, Brazil, South Korea, and Belgium) prescribed OOTs (lenalidomide, thalidomide, pomalidomide, panobinostat, ixazomib, and melphalan) for MM were included. The overall pooled proportion of adherent patients was 67.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 57.1%-77.8%). The pooled proportion of adherent patients was higher in self-reported questionnaire-based studies compared to those using prescription/dispensing data (81.6% vs. 61.0%; P-value for difference = .08). Across 5 studies involving 15,363 patients, a pooled proportion of 35.8% (95% CI: 22.0-50.9) discontinued treatment. Factors reported to be associated with nonadherence included increasing age, higher comorbidity, polypharmacy, and a lack of social support.

CONCLUSION

In patients with MM, adherence to and persistence with OOTs remains suboptimal. To achieve desired clinical outcomes, interventions to improve adherence and minimize discontinuation may be warranted.

Multidisciplinary Professional Roles Addressing Needs in Multiple Myeloma: An Innovative 'Virtual' Pharmacist Surveillance Clinic

OBJECTIVES

Advances in pharmacologic options has rendered multiple myeloma a chronic disease for most patients. This article explores the role of the pharmacist in new therapy start counseling, supportive care, and patient navigation in people affected by multiple myeloma. The role of the pharmacist in the pharmacist-led 'Virtual Multiple Myeloma Clinic' and the foundations guiding pharmacist prescribing are described in detail. Directions for future patient-centered research and opportunities in multiple myeloma are explored, specific to this jurisdiction.

DATA SOURCES

These include academic databases (PubMed, MedLine), professional guideline documents, and first-person experience.

CONCLUSION

Although the treatment landscape for multiple myeloma therapy is rapidly evolving, the survival of patients with multiple myeloma has greatly increased, rendering this largely a chronic disease. Accordingly, the role of the clinical pharmacist in multiple myeloma clinics is extensive. Counseling on first-time therapies, supportive care (adverse events management, bone health, and vaccinations), and seamless patient care across local pharmacies and health care facilities are explored. The hematology pharmacist-led Virtual Multiple Myeloma Clinic, providing individualized efficacy monitoring and counseling to patients with stable multiple myeloma on oral immunomodulatory therapy, has been pivotal in optimizing clinic workload management.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Possessing additional prescribing authority is paramount to the efficiency of pharmacists in clinic. Outside of pharmacy, prescribers in community treatment centers require education on the management of novel multiple myeloma therapies. Family physicians and nurses may also benefit from an overview of common issues that patients may experience because of their multiple myeloma treatments, which may enable them to better manage side effects or complications resulting from treatment.

Oral therapy adherence and satisfaction in patients with multiple myeloma

The transition to oral therapies in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) offers potential benefits to patients; however, they must self-manage their medication and adherence plays an important role in patient care. It has been shown that patient satisfaction with their medication has a strong positive correlation with adherence in chronic diseases. The aim of this study was to estimate adherence rate of oral antimyeloma therapies and to identify risk factors for medication non-adherence. This observational, prospective, and multicentre survey based on a self-report questionnaire enrolled MM patients with at least 3 months of oral therapy. The 6-item Girerd scale and the medication possession ratio (MPR) were used for measuring medication adherence and the SATMED-Q® questionnaire was used for measuring satisfaction. An analysis of risk factors for non-adherence to oral therapy was performed using univariate analysis. A total of 101 patients participated in the survey, yielding a response rate of 87%. The prevalence of adherence to oral antimyeloma therapy was estimated at 51.5% using the Girerd questionnaire. According to the MPR, adherence was evaluated at 96% (i.e. MPR ≥ 0.80). Both methods combined, adherence was estimated at 50.5%. One risk factor for medication non-adherence was identified: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status > 2 (p = 0.007). One predictive factor for high medication adherence was identified: high satisfaction with treatment (p = 0.01). Identifying patients at higher risk for non-adherence allows clinical pharmacists to personalise therapeutic information and education and to improve the quality of healthcare overall.

Implementation and outcomes of a pharmacist-led collaborative drug therapy management program for oncology symptom management

INTRODUCTION

Nausea, vomiting, constipation, and diarrhea are common cancer and cancer therapy adverse effects. Pharmacists are uniquely positioned to optimize patient symptom control and minimize excess use of hospital resources, such as emergency department visits.

METHODS

Michigan Medicine oncology clinical pharmacists have been independently providing patient symptom management through a collaborative drug therapy management (CDTM) program which established guidelines for management of gastrointestinal toxicities (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and/or constipation) secondary to a patient's cancer diagnosis or treatment of the cancer. Patients were referred to the pharmacist by the treating oncologist or hematologist.

RESULTS

From June 2019 to May 2020, there were a total of 62 patient referrals. Ten of the 62 referrals did not meet the CDTM inclusion criteria, resulting in 52 patients who were managed by the pharmacists. The total number of individual pharmacist visits was 136, with a median of 2.2 (range, 0-11) visits per patient referred. A total of 169 categorized pharmacist interventions were captured. Most interventions (100/169, 59.2%) were related to nausea/vomiting. Diarrhea-related and constipation-related interventions accounted for 10 (5.9%) and 13 (7.7%) of the total interventions, respectively. Most patients (36/52, 69.2%) had a reduction in the severity of their referral diagnosis symptom(s) based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grading.

CONCLUSION

The Michigan Medicine Pharmacist CDTM program allowed pharmacists to independently manage gastrointestinal toxicities of patients with cancer and improved patient symptom severity. The CDTM program has the opportunity to improve quality of care.

Improving rates of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in multiple myeloma patients on immunomodulatory drugs through a pharmacy-based system

INTRODUCTION

Immunomodulatory drugs used to treat multiple myeloma carry an increased risk of venous thromboembolic (VTE) disease. Previously published guidelines outline consensus opinion on how to mitigate this risk.

METHODS

We collected baseline data to analyze how these strategies are utilized at our single institution and sought to improve the rates of anticoagulation for high-risk patients. This was done through a quality improvement project that added pharmacy/haematology oversight to the VTE risk assessment.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients newly started on IMiDs were assessed for VTE risk. This information was passed on to the myeloma provider for consideration. Twenty-two patients were classified as high risk for VTE. Of the high-risk patients, 14 (64%) were placed on an anticoagulant for thromboprophylaxis. Eleven (79%) of the 14 used direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Eight high-risk patients did not receive an anticoagulant for thromboprophylaxis; 4 of these developed VTE. No patients on anticoagulation developed a VTE. This strategy had rare minor bleeding complications.

CONCLUSION

This quality action verifies guideline-based thromboprophylaxis in multiple myeloma and supports the benefit of pharmacy oversight in improving VTE rates. The use of DOACs in myeloma should be further explored.

Development of a process map for the delivery of virtual clinical pharmacy services at Odette Cancer Centre during the COVID-19 pandemic

Virtual methods have been innovatively utilized to provide clinical and supportive care to patients with cancer. Oncology pharmacists have been actively involved in this movement, in order to minimize patient contact and decrease the risk of viral transmission for this high-risk group. In response to COVID-19 restrictions, the Odette Cancer Centre pharmacy modified the delivery of clinical pharmacy services (CPS), including medication histories and patient education/counseling, to a remote telephone-based model. Process maps were created to visualize workflow before and after the pandemic. Process metrics were tracked over a 6-week period. From March 25th to May 1st, 2020, 202 best-possible medication histories and baseline assessments were completed; 149 of these (74%) were completed remotely. For medication therapy counsels, 72 of 199 were completed remotely (36%). Despite workflow disruptions caused by the pandemic, these results demonstrate that clinical pharmacy service levels could be maintained by incorporating remote delivery approaches without significant investment in resources. Challenges included acceptance by patients and lack of technology to support system-level processes. Further research to develop, refine, and individualize virtual clinical pharmacy care models will help to consolidate the role of these approaches in the post-COVID-19 era.

The Expanding Role of the Oncology Pharmacist

Although oncology pharmacists have been involved in the care of cancer patients for over 50 years, the role of the oncology pharmacist continues to expand. Initially, pharmacists were primarily based within either an inpatient or outpatient pharmacy setting and their work focused on providing the necessary safety checks to dispense cancer-related medications. With technology freeing up pharmacists from dispensing functions and advanced training in direct patient care (e.g., oncology residency, oncology fellowship), the oncology pharmacist was able to provide direct patient care at the bedside or within the clinic where treatment decisions are made by the healthcare team. In fact, they have become integral members of the healthcare team. This Issue describes several expanding roles of oncology pharmacists in stem cell transplant, hematology, gastrointestinal oncology, and precision genomics, as well as oncology pharmacists preventing a reduction in cancer patient visits as the oncology physician shortage occurs. Oncology pharmacists are an integral part of the cancer care team; their value has been documented in several studies, and is highlighted in this Issue. We encourage the profession to continue to document their value so that one day each patient can have an oncology pharmacist as part of their cancer care team.

COVID-19 and myeloma: what are the implications for now and in the future?

The pandemic has affected every aspect of myeloma care. Immediate focus is minimising risk of contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the sequelae of infection. However, what does the future hold for our patients? What lessons will be taken forward to tackle myeloma in the fiscally constrained future? If we embrace the challenges that will emerge in the post-pandemic environment, the treatment delivered to patients could be more cost-effective and better tailored than before. Healthcare delivery post-COVID-19 will not return to how it was, and now is the time to invest in novel strategies to deliver the best possible outcomes for patients.

Adherence to Oral Anticancer Medications After Implementation of an Ambulatory Adherence Program at a Large Urban Academic Hospital

PURPOSE:

Oral anticancer medications (OAMs) offer convenient administration, reducing the burden of cancer treatment, but create challenges for patients and practitioners. Using data from the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative analysis, a baseline adherence rate of 30% was identified at a large public, academic hospital. To improve OAM adherence, a quality improvement initiative was conducted.

METHODS:

The aim was to increase OAM patient adherence by 30 percentage points. Through cause-and-effect analysis, adherence barriers were identified, leading to the development of 2 strategies: low-cost adherence tools and a pharmacist-led adherence program. Prescription refill data were collected before and after the intervention, using prescription-fill data and specialty pharmacy records. Adherence was defined as the patient having the drug available at least 80% to less than 120% of the days evaluated for 4 treatment cycles. Other indicators collected included the number of interventions, OAM-related toxicity, emergency room visits, and hospitalizations.

RESULTS:

OAM adherence increased from 37% to 85% (n = 20 of 54 v 44 of 52 patients; P < .0001) in 1 year. During the study, 655 interventions were documented by the pharmacist (adherence related, n = 331; treatment related, n = 324). The number of oncology-related emergency room referrals leading to hospitalization increased from 52% (n = 13 of 25) to 62% (n = 23 of 37) during the study period.

CONCLUSION:

A pharmacist-led adherence program, combined with low-cost adherence tools, exceeded the goal for the adherence initiative, suggesting that a multidisciplinary collaborative approach to OAM adherence can have a significant impact on outcomes.

Use of bone-modifying agents and clinical outcomes in older adults with multiple myeloma

Background

Guidelines recommend bone‐modifying agents (BMAs) for all patients initiating treatment for myeloma. We examined adherence to this recommendation, and BMA effectiveness in the era of bortezomib/lenalidomide‐based therapy among Medicare beneficiaries.

Methods

From the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results‐Medicare registry, we selected beneficiaries receiving anti‐myeloma chemotherapy in 2007‐2013. We matched BMA recipients (within 90 days of first chemotherapy) to nonrecipients using a propensity score, balancing patient‐, disease‐, and therapy‐related confounders. Cumulative incidence of skeletal‐related events (SREs) and overall survival (OS) was compared in proportional hazard models accounting for competing risks and immortal‐time bias.

Results

Among 4611 patients with median age of 76 years, 51% received BMA. Bone‐modifying agents use remained steady over time (P = .87) and was significantly less frequent for patients who were older, with comorbidities, without prior SRE, and those treated without bortezomib or lenalidomide. In a propensity score‐matched cohort, BMA recipients experienced a lower incidence of SRE (11.0% vs 14.6% at 3 years; subhazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.60‐0.89) and better OS (53.3% vs 47.8% at 3 years; hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77‐0.95). The results were consistent in the subgroup (76%) treated with bortezomib and/or immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs). The incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) was 3.2% at 3 years.

Conclusions

In this observational study, the observed benefits of early BMA administration among patients treated with contemporary anti‐myeloma regimens were similar to historical clinical trials. Frequent omission of BMA highlights a remediable deficiency in the quality of supportive care, and suggests that timely administration may be a useful indicator of quality care in myeloma.

Demonstrating the value of the oncology pharmacist within the healthcare team

INTRODUCTION

Although many oncology pharmacists are embedded members within the healthcare team, data documenting their contributions to optimal patient outcomes are growing. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the value of the oncology pharmacist within the healthcare team and describe the knowledge, skills, and functions of the oncology pharmacist.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of articles that were published on PubMed between January 1951 and October 2018 was completed. Identified abstracts were reviewed and included if they focused on measuring the value or impact of the oncology pharmacist on provider/patient satisfaction, improvement of medication safety, improvement of quality/clinical care outcomes, economics, and intervention acceptance. Review articles, meta-analysis, and studies not evaluating oncology pharmacist activities were excluded. Studies were thematically coded into four themes (clinical care, patient education, informatics, and cost savings) by 10 oncology pharmacists.

RESULTS

Four-hundred twenty-two articles were identified, in which 66 articles met inclusion criteria for this review. The selected literature included 27 interventional and 38 descriptive studies. The value of the oncology pharmacist was demonstrated by published articles in four key themes: clinical care, patient education, informatics, and cost savings.

CONCLUSION

With an expected shortage of oncology physicians and the ongoing development of complex oncology therapies, the board-certified oncology pharmacist is well suited to serve as a physician extender alongside nurse practitioners and/or physician assistants as the medication expert on the oncology care team. The demonstrated value of the oncology pharmacist supports their role as frontline providers of patient care.

The state of the science of interprofessional collaborative practice: A scoping review of the patient health-related outcomes based literature published between 2010 and 2018

INTRODUCTION

If interprofessional collaborative practice is to be an important component of healthcare reform, then an evidentiary base connecting interprofessional education to interprofessional practice with significantly improved health and healthcare outcomes is an unconditional necessity. This study is a scoping review of the current peer reviewed literature linking interprofessional collaborative care and interprofessional collaborative practice to clearly identified healthcare and/or patient health-related outcomes. The research question for this review was: What does the evidence from the past decade reveal about the impact of Interprofessional collaborative practice on patient-related outcomes in the US healthcare system?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A modified preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) approach was followed.

RESULTS

Of an initial 375 articles retrieved 20 met review criteria. The most common professions represented in the studies reviewed were physicians, pharmacists and nurses. Primary care was the most common care delivery setting and measures related to chronic disease the most commonly measured outcomes. No study identified negative impacts of interprofessional collaborative practice. Eight outcome categories emerged from a content analysis of the findings of the reviewed studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest a need for more research on the measurable impact of interprofessional collaborative practice and/or care on patient health-related outcomes to further document its benefits and to explore the models, systems and nature of collaborations that best improve population health, increase patient satisfaction, and reduce cost of care.

Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication use is highly prevalent in multiple myeloma patients and is improved by a collaborative physician–pharmacist clinic

Objective

To compare polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication use in multiple myeloma patients receiving care under a traditional, physician-managed, or collaborative physician–pharmacist clinic.

Design

Retrospective chart review.

Setting

Urban academic cancer center.

Data source

Computerized electronic record.

Patients

Forty-four patients in the traditional physician-managed clinic and 57 patients in the collaborative physician-pharmacist clinic.

Measurements and main results

Patients in the collaborative clinic took fewer medications on average (9 vs. 7, p = 0.045). Although the median number of myeloma-related medications was higher (2 vs. 4, p < 0.0001), the number of non-myeloma-related medications was lower (7 vs. 3, p < 0.0001) in the collaborative clinic. Polypharmacy rates were high in both clinics (93% vs. 84%, p = 0.22). However, the collaborative clinic had a lower rate of polypharmacy of non-myeloma medications (71 vs. 33%, p = 0.0003), including both minor (five to nine medications, 48 vs. 28%, p = 0.06) and major (≥10 medications, 23 vs. 5%, p = 0.02) polypharmacy. Minor polypharmacy of myeloma-related medications was higher in the collaborative clinic (32 vs. 2%; p = 0.0002). Multivariate analysis showed a reduced risk of having a higher number of medications (Relative risk (RR) 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.67–0.93; p = 0.004), a lower risk of having any polypharmacy of non-myeloma-related medications (RR 0.41, 95% confidence interval 0.25–0.67; p < 0.001) and a lower risk of receiving potentially inappropriate medication (RR 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.41–0.95; p = 0.029) in the collaborative clinic.

Conclusions

Multiple myeloma patients have a high rate of polypharmacy but comanagement with a pharmacist reduced the number of all medications, but in particular the number of non-myeloma-related medications.