Optimizing finite resources: Pharmacist chart reviews in an outpatient kidney transplant clinic

Evaluation of Provider Acceptance of Pharmacist Recommendations in a High User Patient Population

OBJECTIVE

To compare the acceptance rate of pharmacist recommendations in an interdisciplinary team for patients interviewed by the pharmacist versus those assessed by chart review.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

SETTING

Interdisciplinary consultative team in an outpatient setting as part of a large academic health system provided care for "high utilizer" patients.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-five patients at moderate to high risk of hospitalization who completed their first appointment with the team between March 1, 2019, and December 30, 2019. Most patients were 65 years of age or older and all had Medicare insurance.

INTERVENTIONS

A pharmacist completed a chart review for all patients. A cohort of patients were also interviewed. Recommendations were recorded in the electronic medical record, discussed with the team, and forwarded to the patient's primary care provider.

RESULTS

A total of 253 recommendations were made by pharmacists, with a significantly higher acceptance rate for patients who completed an interview with the pharmacist (40.7% vs. 28.4%; P = 0.046). Patientspecific factors resulting in higher acceptance rates in the interview group included age younger than 65 years (P = 0.013), 10 to 19 medications (P = 0.004), and mental health diagnosis (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

The addition of an interview to chart review allowed pharmacists to make recommendations that were more likely to be accepted and therefore more clinically impactful.

Prevalence of Non-Adherence to Immunosuppressive Medications in Kidney Transplant Recipients: Barriers and Predictors

Background

Non-adherence to immunosuppressant therapy (IST) is a major risk factor for graft rejection. Limited reports are available regarding the prevalence of non-adherence to IST in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) as well as the predictors and barriers of non-adherence.

Material/Methods

The study included ambulatory KTRs, ≥18 years of age, with a functional kidney, from January 2017 to November 2018. The primary outcome was the prevalence of non-adherence, assessed with: 1) A telephone interview to complete the Arabic-translated and validated Immunosuppressant Therapy Adherence Instrument Scale (ITAS) and 2) IST serum blood levels within therapeutic levels. The secondary outcomes were the barriers to adherence using the validated Immunosuppressant Therapy Barriers of Adherence Scale (ITBS).

Results

We enrolled 102 of 141 patients screened. The mean±SD for age, body mass index, and the baseline of the estimated glomerular filtration rate were 45.5±15.6 years, 29.1±6 kg/m², and 72.7±21.9 ml/min/1.73 m², respectively. The prevalence of non-adherence was 5.9%, 95% CI (2.19–12.36%) and 14.7%, 95% CI (8.47–23.09%) using the ITAS and the average blood serum drug levels, respectively. The concordance of the 2 methods demonstrated an agreement of 81.3%, kappa of 0.01, and 95% CI (−0.16 to 0.18). The median, interquartile range (IQR) for ITBS, and uncontrollable and controllable barriers for adherence were 21, (18–25), 15, (12–18), and 6, (5–8), respectively.

Conclusions

The current study demonstrated a low to moderate prevalence of non-adherence to IST in KTRs. The barriers for adherence with IST necessitate additional targeted interventions to manage and optimize therapeutic and clinical outcomes.

Follow-up of liver transplant recipients

The number of surviving liver allograft recipients is increasing almost exponentially. The quality and length of life is increasing but most recipients have reduced survival and quality of life compared with healthy matched individuals. Causes of premature death include cardio and cerebrovascular disease, renal failure, graft failure, de novo malignancy and recurrent disease. Follow-up is needed lifelong to ensure graft and patient health and ensure that complications are recognised and treated early. Immunosuppression is kept to the appropriate minimum and prophylactic interventions are given early, such as use of statins and tight control of blood pressure and blood sugar. Recipients will require life-long follow-up, and this is placing an increasing burden on transplant units. Follow-up is best done by close collaboration between the Liver Transplant Unit, the local hospital and primary care team. Involvement of other health care practitioners, such as recipient coordinators, pharmacists, dermatologists and addiction specialists may improve outcomes. Key to successful follow-up are agreed protocols and good communication between the recipients and all relevant health care providers. Use of IT allows for better communication and will support use of video and telephone consultations in selected instances. The most appropriate follow-up will depend on many factors, including logistic and geographic issues, local experience. The provision of well-funded and supported registries at local, national and international levels will allow for improvements in management.

Clinical pharmacy practice in the care of Chronic Kidney Disease patients: a systematic review

Background Clinical pharmacy services have potential to contribute significantly to the multidisciplinary team providing safe, effective and economic care for patients. Given recent practice developments (e.g. polypharmacy reviews and pharmacist prescribing) there is a need to provide a current synthesis of the evidence base for characteristics and outcomes of clinical pharmacy practice in chronic kidney disease patients. Aim of the review To critically appraise, synthesise and present the available evidence of the characteristics (structures and processes) and outcomes of clinical pharmacy practice as part of the multidisciplinary care of patients with chronic kidney disease. Method PubMed, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medline and Scopus were searched for peer reviewed papers using improved search strategy. Included studies were quality assessed using Downs and Black tool for controlled studies and the mixed methods appraisal tool for all controlled and non-controlled studies. Data were extracted and synthesised using a narrative approach. Screening, quality assessment and data extraction were performed by two independent researchers. Ethics approval was not required. Results Forty-seven studies were identified from a variety of countries, with 31 based in a hospital setting. Controlled study designs were employed in 20, with only ten of these using randomisation. Resources available for service provision were poorly reported in all papers. Positive impact on clinical outcomes included significant improvement in parathyroid hormone, blood pressure, haemoglobin and creatinine clearance. Pharmacists identified 5302 drug related problems in 2933 patients and made 3160 recommendations with acceptance rates up to 95%. Impact on humanistic outcomes was shown through improvement in health related quality of life and patient satisfaction. Economic benefits arose from significant cost savings through pharmaceutical care provision. Conclusion While there is some evidence of positive impact on clinical, humanistic and economic outcomes, this evidence is generally of low quality and insufficient volume. While the existing evidence is in favour of pharmacists' involvement in the multidisciplinary team providing care to patients with chronic kidney disease, more high-quality research is warranted.