Effect of pharmacist intervention and initiation of home blood pressure monitoring in patients with uncontrolled hypertension

Self-measurement of blood pressure at home using a cuff device for change in blood pressure levels: systematic review and meta-analysis

The effect of self-measurement of blood pressure (BP) at home (home BP measurement, HBPM) has been evaluated over the past decade. This meta-analysis included the latest studies to determine whether HBPM reduced BP (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023442225). PubMed, Cochrane Library Database, and IchuShi-Web were searched for randomized controlled trials after the year 2000 which demonstrated the effect of HBPM on BP change compared with usual care (UC). Overall, 65 articles (n = 21,053; 63 based on patients with hypertension) were included. The systolic/diastolic BP reduction was significantly greater in the HBPM than in the UC group by 3.27/1.61 mmHg (95% confidence intervals: 2.40-4.15/1.14-2.07) at the end of the intervention, and I2 values ≥ 46.7% suggested moderate-to-high heterogeneity. The funnel plots exhibited no notable publication bias (Egger's test p ≥ 0.16). HBPM with co-interventions (such as telemonitoring) showed a stronger BP-lowering effect than without co-interventions while the effect of HBPM on BP change remained significant in the absence of co-interventions. HBPM was not associated with systolic BP changes when we combined the four studies that used a wrist cuff device for HBPM. The number of antihypertensive medications increased by 0.17 medications in the HBPM group compared with that in the UC group. There were no significant differences in body mass index changes or risk of severe adverse outcomes between the groups. Our results demonstrated a beneficial effect of HBPM in reducing BP, particularly when used in conjunction with telemonitoring or additional medical support and when employing upper-arm cuff devices.

Feasibility of a blood pressure telemedicine program in the virtual age

BACKGROUND

Despite strong evidence for maintaining blood pressure (BP) < 130/80 for secondary stroke prevention, there have been many barriers toward achieving this goal. The purpose of this pilot study was to assess the feasibility of a new physician-led BP telemedicine program on the improvement of BP and medication compliance in stroke survivors.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients with a history of stroke and hypertension into this BP telemedicine program where participants were paired with a physician for one-on-one counseling. Participants submitted daily recordings of their BP as well as completed surveys assessing the usability of the program (Marshfield Usability Survey) and medication compliance (Morisky Medication Adherence Scale). A repeated measures ANOVA was utilized to examine differences in BP recordings at enrollment, 3 months, and 6 months.

RESULTS

Due to an interruption of external funding only 27 patients were ultimately enrolled (4/25/22-10/15/23). There were significant differences over time for both systolic (p = 0.022) and diastolic (p = 0.007) BP, however these differences were seen only between the enrollment and 6-month timepoint in follow-up testing. Participants rated the program highly favorably across multiple categories, commenting on the ease of using the program and feeling confident in the system. There was also an observed reduction in reported barriers to taking medications.

CONCLUSION

This pilot program demonstrated the feasibility of managing BP using a telemedicine approach. A minimum of 6 months was required to see significant differences in BP as well as trends toward improvements in medication compliance. These results have an impact in how similar remote programs should be designed for future evaluations of this patient population.

Role of Health Care Professionals in the Success of Blood Pressure Control Interventions in Patients With Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Globally, only 13.8% of patients with hypertension have their blood pressure (BP) controlled. Trials testing interventions to overcome barriers to BP control have produced mixed results. Type of health care professional delivering the intervention may play an important role in intervention success. The goal of this meta-analysis is to determine which health care professionals are most effective at delivering BP reduction interventions.

METHODS

We searched Medline and Embase (until December 2023) for randomized controlled trials of interventions targeting barriers to hypertension control reporting who led intervention delivery. One hundred articles worldwide with 116 comparisons and 90 474 participants with hypertension were included. Trials were grouped by health care professional, and the effects of the intervention on systolic and diastolic BP were combined using random effects models and generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

Pharmacist-led interventions , community health worker-led interventions, and health educator-led interventions resulted in the greatest systolic BP reductions of -7.3 (95% CI, -9.1 to -5.6), -7.1 (95% CI, -10.8 to -3.4), and -5.2 (95% CI, -7.8 to -2.6) mm Hg, respectively. Interventions led by multiple health care professionals, nurses, and physicians also resulted in significant systolic BP reductions of -4.2 (95% CI, -6.1 to -2.4), -3.0 (95% CI, -4.2 to -1.9), and -2.4 (95% CI, -3.4 to -1.5) mm Hg, respectively. Similarly, the greatest diastolic BP reductions were -3.9 (95% CI, -5.2 to -2.5) mm Hg for pharmacist-led and -3.7 (95% CI, -6.6 to -0.8) mm Hg for community health worker-led interventions. In pairwise comparisons, pharmacist were significantly more effective than multiple health care professionals, nurses, and physicians at delivering interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacists and community health workers are most effective at leading BP intervention implementation and should be prioritized in future hypertension control efforts.

Remote Blood Pressure Monitoring With Social Support for Patients With Hypertension: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Hypertension management has traditionally been based on office visits. Integrating remote monitoring into routine clinical practices and leveraging social support might improve blood pressure (BP) control.

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of a bidirectional text monitoring program focused on BP control and medication adherence with and without social support in adults with hypertension.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial included adults aged 18 to 75 treated at an academic family medicine practice in Philadelphia in 2018 and 2019. Patients had been seen at least twice in the prior 24 months and had at least 2 elevated BP measurements (>150/90 mm Hg or >140/90 mm Hg for patients aged 18-59 years or with diabetes or chronic kidney disease) during visits. All participants had a cell phone with text messaging, offered at least 1 support partner, and were taking maintenance medications to treat hypertension. Patients were randomized 2:2:1 to remote monitoring of BP and medication adherence (RM), remote monitoring of BP and medication adherence with feedback provided to a social support partner (SS), or usual care (UC). Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis between October 14, 2019, and May 30, 2020, and were revisited from May 23 through June 2, 2023.

Interventions

The RM and SS groups received an automatic home BP monitor, 3 weekly texts requesting BP measurements, 1 weekly text inquiring about medication adherence, and a weekly text with feedback. In the SS arm, support partners received a weekly progress report. The UC group received UC through their primary care practice. Clinicians caring for the patients in the intervention groups received nudges via electronic health records to adjust medications when 3 of 10 reported BP measurements were elevated. Patients were followed up for 4 months.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was systolic BP at 4 months measured during the final follow-up visit. Secondary outcomes included achievement of normotension and diastolic BP.

Results

In all, 246 patients (mean [SD] age, 50.9 [11.4] years; 175 females [71.1%]; 223 Black individuals [90.7%] and 13 White individuals [5.3%]) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis: 100 patients in the RM arm, 97 in the SS arm, and 49 in the UC arm. Compared with the UC arm, there was no significant difference in systolic or diastolic BP at the 4-month follow-up visit in the RM arm (systolic BP adjusted mean difference, -5.25 [95% CI, -10.65 to 0.15] mm Hg; diastolic BP adjusted mean difference, -1.94 [95% CI, -5.14 to 1.27] mm Hg) or the SS arm (systolic BP adjusted mean difference, -0.91 [95% CI, -6.37 to 4.55] mm Hg; diastolic BP adjusted mean difference, -0.63 [95% CI, -3.77 to 2.51] mm Hg). Of the 206 patients with a final BP measurement at 4 months, BP was controlled in 49% (41 of 84) of patients in the RM arm, 31% (27 of 87) of patients in the SS arm, and 40% (14 of 35) of patients in the UC arm; these rates did not differ significantly between the intervention arms and the UC group.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, neither remote BP monitoring nor remote BP monitoring with social support improved BP control compared with UC in adults with hypertension. Additional efforts are needed to examine whether interventions directed at helping patients remember to take their BP medications can lead to improved BP control.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03416283.

Effect of Pharmaceutical Intervention in Pharmacologically Treated Hypertensive Patients-A Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial: AFPRES-CLM Study

BACKGROUND

Evaluate the effect of a community pharmaceutical intervention on the control of blood pressure in hypertensive patients treated pharmacologically.

METHODS

A cluster-randomized clinical trial of 6 months was carried out. It was conducted in the Autonomous Community of Castilla-La Mancha (Spain). Sixty-three community pharmacies and 347 patients completed the study. Intervention patients received the community pharmaceutical intervention based on a protocol that addresses the individual needs of each patient related to the control of their blood pressure, which included Health Education, Pharmacotherapy Follow-up and 24 h Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurement. Control patients received usual care in the community pharmacy.

RESULTS

The pharmaceutical intervention resulted in better control of blood pressure (85.8% vs. 66.3% p < 0.001), lower use of emergencies (p = 0.002) and improvement trends in the physical components of quality of life, measured by SF-36 questionnaire, after 6 months of pharmaceutical intervention. No significant changes were observed for any of these variables in the control group. There were also detected 354 negative medication-related outcomes that were satisfactorily resolved in a 74.9% of the cases and 330 healthcare education interventions and 29 Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitorings were performed in order to increase adherence to pharmacological treatment and minimize Negative Outcomes associated with Medication and prevent medication-related problems.

CONCLUSIONS

Community pharmaceutical intervention can increase hypertensive patients with controlled blood pressure, after 6 months, compared with usual care.

Adding Pharmacist-Led Home Blood Pressure Telemonitoring to Usual Care for Blood Pressure Control: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Health systems have been quickly adopting telemedicine throughout the United States, especially since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there are limited data on whether adding pharmacist-led home blood pressure (BP) telemonitoring to office-based usual care improves BP. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase for randomized controlled trials from January 2000 until April 2022, comparing studies on pharmacist-led home BP telemonitoring with usual care. Six randomized controlled trials, including 1,550 participants, satisfied the inclusion criteria. There were 774 participants in the pharmacist-led telemonitoring group and 776 in the usual care group. The addition of pharmacist-led telemonitoring to usual care was associated with a significant decrease in systolic BP (mean difference -8.09, 95% confidence interval -11.15 to -5.04, p <0.001, I2 = 72%) and diastolic BP (mean difference -4.19, 95% confidence interval -5.58 to -2.81, p <0.001, I2 = 42%) compared with usual care. In conclusion, this meta-analysis showed that adding pharmacist-led home BP telemonitoring to usual care achieves better BP control than usual care alone.

The Burden of Hypertension and Prehypertension in a Community Health Centre of Haryana

Background Hypertension (HTN) is endemic in India and it is considered a public health challenge in both economically developed and developing nations. Unfortunately, despite its high prevalence, its awareness, treatment, and control status are low in urban as well as rural Indian populations. Objectives To determine the burden of hypertension and prehypertension in a Community Health Center (CHC) and to find the association of hypertension with the age group and sex of study subjects. Methodology A cross-sectional study was carried out among 713 patients of age 20 years and above attending the Out Patient Department (OPD) of the Community Health Centre (CHC), Barwala in the Hisar district of Haryana. JNC 7 classification of blood pressure was used to diagnose hypertension. The collected data was analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0. Appropriate statistical tests were used. Result Out of the total patients enrolled, 200 (28.1%) were found to be hypertensives. The burden of prehypertension was further observed to be 28.1%. About (61.6%) of OPD patients were female. Among hypertensive patients, nearly half (48.8%) were in the age group of 60-80 years whereas the majority of the hypertensives (56%) were females. Conclusion In our study, more than 50 percent of OPD patients were found to have hypertension and pre-hypertension. Health-seeking behavior was more among females.

EFFECT OF PHARMACIST COUNSELING ON PATIENT MEDICATION COMPLIANCE AND HELICOBACTER PYLORI ERADICATION AMONG JORDANIAN OUTPATIENTS

BACKGROUND

To examine the impact of pharmacist counseling and follow-up on patient's medication compliance and Helicobacter Pylori (H. pylori) eradication and evaluate the efficiency of an eradication regimen consisting of Clarithromycin 500 mg, Amoxicillin 1 g, and Lansoprazole 30 mg, twice daily for 14 days.

METHODS

Two hundred patients undergoing endoscopy and positive rapid urease tests were included in the present study. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: an intervention group (n=100) and a control group (n=100). The intervention patients obtained their medications from the hospital pharmacist and received sufficient counseling and follow-up. On the other hand, the control patients received their medications from another hospital pharmacist and went through the routine hospital procedure without good counseling and follow-up.

RESULTS

The intervention resulted in a statistically significant improvement in outpatient compliance with medication (45.0% vs 27.5%; P<0.05) and eradication of H. pylori (28.5% vs 42.5%; P<0.05) among those patients.

CONCLUSION

This study reflects the importance of pharmacist counseling and patient compliance to medication, as the patients who received pharmacist counseling exhibited perfect compliance to medication, which led to the successful eradication of H. pylori.

A narrative review: Pharmacy intervention fidelity

BACKGROUND

There has been a significant increase in the literature surrounding community-based pharmacy interventions. However, less is known about how researchers assured these interventions were implemented consistently and faithfully to the established protocol.

OBJECTIVE

This narrative review aims to describe the nature and extent to which researchers reported intervention fidelity measures across depression and hypertension studies completed in community and ambulatory care settings.

METHODS

Two research assistants used defined literature search criteria to identify manuscripts involving community pharmacist interventions in hypertension or depression care management. These research assistants independently evaluated each manuscript based on the nature and extent to which the studies described intervention training to support intervention fidelity, the intervention structure and content, the tools used to document intervention fidelity, and the extent to which the intervention was performed as expected. Manuscript authors were contacted for clarification of any details not clear from their published works.

RESULTS

Of the 6 depression and 19 hypertension manuscripts, intervention training was described in only 2 and 9 depression and hypertension manuscripts, respectively. Other depression and hypertension manuscripts did not describe such training or gave unclear training information. Respectively, only 2 and 9 of the depression and hypertension manuscripts described a tool that was used to capture interventions made according to protocol. Two of the depression manuscripts and 6 of the hypertension manuscripts were known to have measured the extent to which the intervention was performed as expected.

CONCLUSION

There is considerable variability in the nature and extent that intervention fidelity measures are reported in the literature. Researchers should be required to report key intervention fidelity measures when seeking publication of their research. Such additional reporting of fidelity results will enable the scientific community to have greater confidence in study results, conclusions, and implications.

Consumer Devices for Patient-Generated Health Data Using Blood Pressure Monitors for Managing Hypertension: Systematic Review

Background

In the era of digital health information technology, there has been a proliferation of devices that collect patient-generated health data (PGHD), including consumer blood pressure (BP) monitors. Despite their widespread use, it remains unclear whether such devices can improve health outcomes.

Objective

We performed a systematic review of the literature on consumer BP monitors that collect PGHD for managing hypertension to summarize their clinical impact on health and surrogate outcomes. We focused particularly on studies designed to measure the specific effect of using a BP monitor independent of cointerventions. We have also summarized the process and consumer experience outcomes.

Methods

An information specialist searched PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase for controlled studies on consumer BP monitors published up to May 12, 2020. We assessed the risk of bias using an adapted 9-item appraisal tool and performed a narrative synthesis of the results.

Results

We identified 41 different types of BP monitors used in 49 studies included for review. Device engineers judged that 38 (92%) of those devices were similar to the currently available consumer BP monitors. The median sample size was 222 (IQR 101-416) participants, and the median length of follow-up was 6 (IQR 3-12) months. Of the included studies, 18 (36%) were designed to isolate the clinical effects of BP monitors; 6 of the 18 (33%) studies evaluated health outcomes (eg, mortality, hospitalizations, and quality of life), and data on those outcomes were unclear. The lack of clarity was due to low event rates, short follow-up duration, and risk of bias. All 18 studies that isolated the effect of BP monitors measured both systolic and diastolic BP and generally demonstrated a decrease of 2 to 4 mm Hg in systolic BP and 1 to 3 mm Hg in diastolic BP compared with non–BP monitor groups. Adherence to using consumer BP monitors ranged from 38% to 89%, and ease of use and satisfaction ratings were generally high. Adverse events were infrequent, but there were a few technical problems with devices (eg, incorrect device alerts).

Conclusions

Overall, BP monitors offer small benefits in terms of BP reduction; however, the health impact of these devices continues to remain unclear. Future studies are needed to examine the effectiveness of BP monitors that transmit data to health care providers. Additional data from implementation studies may help determine which components are critical for sustained BP improvement, which in turn may improve prescription decisions by clinicians and coverage decisions by policy makers.

A national pilot program for chronic diseases and health inequalities in South Korea

BACKGROUND

To achieve the health equity, it is important to reduce socioeconomic inequalities when managing chronic diseases. In South Korea, a pilot program for chronic diseases was implemented at the national level. This study aimed to examine its effect on socioeconomic inequalities in chronic disease management at the individual and regional levels.

METHODS

Korean National Health Insurance data from September 2016 to October 2017 were used. Study subjects in the national pilot program for chronic diseases included 31,765 participants and 5,741,922 non-participants. The dependent variable was continuity of prescription medication. Socioeconomic position indicators were health insurance contribution level and the area deprivation index. Covariates were gender, age, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). A multilevel logistic regression model was used to address the effects at both the individual and regional levels. This is a cross-sectional study.

RESULTS

Unlike the group of non-participants, the participants showed no inequality in prescription medication continuity according to individual-level socioeconomic position. However, continuity of prescription medication was higher among those in less deprived areas compared to those in more deprived areas in both the participation and non-participation groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that the pilot program for chronic diseases at the least did not contribute to the worsening of health inequalities at the individual level in South Korea. However, there was a trend showing health inequalities based on the socioeconomic level of the area. These findings suggest that additional policy measures are needed to attain equality in the management of chronic diseases regardless of the regional socioeconomic position.

Determinants of Satisfaction with Services, and Trust in the Information Received in Community Pharmacies: A Comparative Analysis to Foster Pharmaceutical Care Adoption

Patient’s satisfaction with community pharmacy services, and patients’ trust in the information received in community pharmacies are important drivers of pharmaceutical care adoption. An online questionnaire assessing patient satisfaction with the services received in pharmacies and trust in the pharmacist’s advice, along with their determinants, was administered to 343 Romanian chronic and non-chronic patients. Using various statistical tests, exploratory factor analysis, and robust regression we explored determinants of satisfaction and trust. We found that satisfaction with services is predicted by pharmacists’ attitude (β = 631, p < 0.001), low waiting time (β = 0.180, p < 0.001), affordable cost of the drugs (β = 0.09, p = 0.009), and drug availability (β = 0.157, p < 0.001). At the same time, trust in the information received is driven by pharmacists’ attention (β = 0.610, p < 0.001), whether the patient received precautionary information (β = 0.425, p < 0.001), low waiting time (β = 0.287, p < 0.001), and whether the respondent is a chronic patient or not (non-chronic patients express more trust, β = 0.328, p = 0.04). Our study expands the existing paradigm that sees trust as a simple predictor of satisfaction by showing that trust and satisfaction are predicted by different variables, and thus they should be addressed using different strategies. In fact, we found that they share only one predictor—waiting time, highly significant in both cases. Our findings show that, without prioritizing trust in the information received in community pharmacies to reduce information asymmetry between patient and pharmacist, the focus only on patient satisfaction may lead to a scenario in which community pharmacies will end up to be better integrated in the business sector and not in the public health system.

Healthcare professional-led interventions on lifestyle modifications for hypertensive patients - a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

About 0.9 billion people in the world have hypertension. The mortality due to hypertension increased dramatically over the last decades. Healthcare professionals should support patients with hypertension to modify their lifestyle to decrease blood pressure, but an overview of effective lifestyle interventions is lacking. The aim of this study was to determine whether healthcare professional-led interventions on lifestyle modifications are effective in lowering blood pressure in patients with hypertension.

METHODS

A systematic literature review following the PRISMA guidelines was conducted. PubMed, EMBASE and CINAHL databases were searched for randomized control trials (RCTs) of interventions on lifestyle modifications of hypertensive patients which were performed by healthcare professionals (physician, nurse, pharmacist) and which reported blood pressure measurements. Papers were reviewed by two reviewers and analysed using Cochrane software Revman 5.4. In a meta-analysis difference in systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and the percentage of patients with controlled blood pressure (BP) was analysed.

RESULTS

In total, 34 clinical trials reporting on 22,419 patients (mean age 58.4 years, 49.14% female, 69.9% used antihypertensive medications) were included. The mean difference SBP was - 4.41 mmHg (95% CI, - 5.52to - 3.30) and the mean difference DBP was - 1.66 mmHg (95% CI - 2.44 to - 0.88) in favor of the intervention group vs usual care. Fifty-six percent of patients achieved BP control in the intervention group vs 44% in usual care, OR = 1.87 (95% CI, 1.51 to 2.31).

CONCLUSION

Healthcare professional-led interventions were effective. Patients achieved almost 5 mmHg decrease of SBP and more patients achieved BP control. The results suggest that efforts are needed for widespread implementation.

Hypertension-Focused Medication Therapy Management: A Collaborative Pilot Program Uniting Pharmacists, Public Health, and Health Insurers in Wisconsin

Heart disease and stroke are leading causes of death and disability in the United States, and high blood pressure is a major risk factor for both. Community pharmacists are readily positioned to improve cardiovascular health through services such as medication therapy management and self-management education. In 2018, the Pharmacy Society of Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Division of Public Health, and NeuGen, a not-for-profit health insurer, piloted a pharmacist-led medication therapy management program for people with hypertension in partnership with 8 community pharmacies. We evaluated changes in use of blood pressure self-management tools and barriers to antihypertensive medication adherence before and after medication therapy management services. Participant satisfaction was also assessed for the 59 participants at the end of the program. We observed improvements in self-reported use of self-management tools, reductions in medication adherence barriers, and high satisfaction with pharmacist care. This collaborative pilot resulted in sustainable reimbursement for participating pharmacies delivering medication therapy management services to eligible NeuGen members.

Interventions for improving medication-taking ability and adherence in older adults prescribed multiple medications

BACKGROUND

Older people taking multiple medications represent a large and growing proportion of the population. Managing multiple medications can be challenging, and this is especially the case for older people, who have higher rates of comorbidity and physical and cognitive impairment than younger adults. Good medication-taking ability and medication adherence are necessary to ensure safe and effective use of medications.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions designed to improve medication-taking ability and/or medication adherence in older community-dwelling adults prescribed multiple long-term medications.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts from inception until June 2019. We also searched grey literature, online trial registries, and reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster-RCTs. Eligible studies tested interventions aimed at improving medication-taking ability and/or medication adherence among people aged ≥ 65 years (or of mean/median age > 65 years), living in the community or being discharged from hospital back into the community, and taking four or more regular prescription medications (or with group mean/median of more than four medications). Interventions targeting carers of older people who met these criteria were also included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts and full texts of eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of included studies. We conducted meta-analyses when possible and used a random-effects model to yield summary estimates of effect, risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Narrative synthesis was performed when meta-analysis was not possible. We assessed overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcomes were medication-taking ability and medication adherence. Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life (HRQoL), emergency department (ED)/hospital admissions, and mortality.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 50 studies (14,269 participants) comprising 40 RCTs, six cluster-RCTs, and four quasi-RCTs. All included studies evaluated interventions versus usual care; six studies also reported a comparison between two interventions as part of a three-arm RCT design. Interventions were grouped on the basis of their educational and/or behavioural components: 14 involved educational components only, 7 used behavioural strategies only, and 29 provided mixed educational and behavioural interventions. Overall, our confidence in results regarding the effectiveness of interventions was low to very low due to a high degree of heterogeneity of included studies and high or unclear risk of bias across multiple domains in most studies. Five studies evaluated interventions for improving medication-taking ability, and 48 evaluated interventions for improving medication adherence (three studies evaluated both outcomes). No studies involved educational or behavioural interventions alone for improving medication-taking ability. Low-quality evidence from five studies, each using a different measure of medication-taking ability, meant that we were unable to determine the effects of mixed interventions on medication-taking ability. Low-quality evidence suggests that behavioural only interventions (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.38; 4 studies) and mixed interventions (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.37; 12 studies) may increase the proportions of people who are adherent compared with usual care. We could not include in the meta-analysis results from two studies involving mixed interventions: one had a positive effect on adherence, and the other had little or no effect. Very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects of educational only interventions (5 studies) on the proportions of people who are adherent. Low-quality evidence suggests that educational only interventions (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.43; 5 studies) and mixed interventions (SMD 0.47, 95% CI -0.08 to 1.02; 7 studies) may have little or no impact on medication adherence assessed through continuous measures of adherence. We excluded 10 studies (4 educational only and 6 mixed interventions) from the meta-analysis including four studies with unclear or no available results. Very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects of behavioural only interventions (3 studies) on medication adherence when assessed through continuous outcomes. Low-quality evidence suggests that mixed interventions may reduce the number of ED/hospital admissions (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.90; 11 studies) compared with usual care, although results from six further studies that we were unable to include in meta-analyses indicate that the intervention may have a smaller, or even no, effect on these outcomes. Similarly, low-quality evidence suggests that mixed interventions may lead to little or no change in HRQoL (7 studies), and very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects on mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.30; 7 studies). Moderate-quality evidence shows that educational interventions alone probably have little or no effect on HRQoL (6 studies) or on ED/hospital admissions (4 studies) when compared with usual care. Very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects of behavioural interventions on HRQoL (1 study) or on ED/hospital admissions (2 studies). We identified no studies evaluating effects of educational or behavioural interventions alone on mortality. Six studies reported a comparison between two interventions; however due to the limited number of studies assessing the same types of interventions and comparisons, we are unable to draw firm conclusions for any outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Behavioural only or mixed educational and behavioural interventions may improve the proportion of people who satisfactorily adhere to their prescribed medications, but we are uncertain of the effects of educational only interventions. No type of intervention was found to improve adherence when it was measured as a continuous variable, with educational only and mixed interventions having little or no impact and evidence of insufficient quality to determine the effects of behavioural only interventions. We were unable to determine the impact of interventions on medication-taking ability. The quality of evidence for these findings is low due to heterogeneity and methodological limitations of studies included in the review. Further well-designed RCTs are needed to investigate the effects of interventions for improving medication-taking ability and medication adherence in older adults prescribed multiple medications.

Pharmacist Interventions in the Management of Blood Pressure Control and Adherence to Antihypertensive Medications: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

Pharmacists are ideally positioned to promote optimal use and assess the adherence of prescription medications in patients with chronic diseases. This systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) ascertains the effectiveness of pharmacist interventions to improve blood pressure (BP) control and medication adherence in patients with hypertension.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases were searched for studies in English published between January 1, 1995, and January 31, 2018. Eligibility criteria included patients with a diagnosis of hypertension tested with RCT where pharmacist-led interventions occurred. The primary outcome was BP control and the secondary outcome was adherence to hypertensive medication. Quality of studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Thirty-five studies met the inclusion-exclusion criteria and were included in this study. Major themes included pharmacist-led interventions with medication counseling, patient education, distribution of interventions materials, individualized care plans, and check-in meetings. The vast majority of trials (n = 29) showed statistically significant improvement in BP in the intervention groups at follow-up. Of the 35 studies, most (n = 20) assessed medication adherence; several trials (n = 9) showed statistically significant improvement in medication adherence in patients receiving additional pharmaceutical care services. None of the RCTs was considered to have a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacist-led interventions improved BP control and medication adherence through education, counseling, or a combination of both. Future research is needed to determine the most effective pharmacists' interventions in managing hypertension and to assess the cost-effectiveness of these interventions.

Modeling the Health and Budgetary Impacts of a Team-based Hypertension Care Intervention That Includes Pharmacists

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the potential health and budgetary impacts of implementing a pharmacist-involved team-based hypertension management model in the United States.

RESEARCH DESIGN

In 2017, we evaluated a pharmacist-involved team-based care intervention among 3 targeted groups using a microsimulation model designed to estimate cardiovascular event incidence and associated health care spending in a cross-section of individuals representative of the US population: implementing it among patients with: (1) newly diagnosed hypertension; (2) persistently (≥1 year) uncontrolled blood pressure (BP); or (3) treated, yet persistently uncontrolled BP-and report outcomes over 5 and 20 years. We describe the spending thresholds for each intervention strategy to achieve budget neutrality in 5 years from a payer's perspective.

RESULTS

Offering this intervention could prevent 22.9-36.8 million person-years of uncontrolled BP and 77,200-230,900 heart attacks and strokes in 5 years (83.8-174.8 million and 393,200-922,900 in 20 years, respectively). Health and economic benefits strongly favored groups 2 and 3. Assuming an intervention cost of $525 per enrollee, the intervention generates 5-year budgetary cost-savings only for Medicare among groups 2 and 3. To achieve budget neutrality in 5 years across all groups, intervention costs per person need to be around $35 for Medicaid, $180 for private insurance, and $335 for Medicare enrollees.

CONCLUSIONS

Adopting a pharmacist-involved team-based hypertension model could substantially improve BP control and cardiovascular outcomes in the United States. Net cost-savings among groups 2 and 3 make a compelling case for Medicare, but favorable economics may also be possible for private insurers, particularly if innovations could moderately lower the cost of delivering an effective intervention.

Effect of Home Medication Titration on Blood Pressure Control in Patients With Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background:

Medication titration has been used in home blood pressure (BP) control, with the expectation of enabling patients with hypertension to better manage their BP.

Objective:

The study goal was to estimate the effects of medication titration intervention in lowering the systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure of patients with hypertension.

Methods:

The meta-analysis included randomized controlled trials on adults diagnosed with hypertension and BP≧130/80 mm Hg, having a medication-titration intervention, and using a home BP measurement. We systematically searched PubMed, CINAHL, Ovid-Medline, and the Cochrane Library, for studies published from 1997 to 2017. The quality of the studies was evaluated by the Modified Jadad scale. Statistical heterogeneity among the trials was evaluated using Q statistics and I². Publication bias was assessed with the funnel plot and Rosenthal’s fail-safe N.

Results:

The meta-analysis included 4 studies randomizing 1335 participants. Medication-titration intervention significantly assisted hypertensive patients to improve BP control; systolic blood pressure was reduced by 6.86 mm Hg [95% confidence interval (CI), 4.80-8.93, P<0.0001] and diastolic blood pressure by 3.03 mm Hg (95% CI, 2.07-3.99, P<0.0001), did not significantly affect EQ-5D scores (mean difference, 0.02; 95% CI, −0.01 to 0.04, P=0.13).

Conclusions:

Our findings suggest home medication titration of antihypertensive medication for hypertensive patients significantly improved home BP control. However, the strategy did not enhance quality of life in patients with hypertension.

Rationale and study design of the MyHEART study: A young adult hypertension self-management randomized controlled trial

Young adults (18-39 year-olds) with hypertension have a higher lifetime risk for cardiovascular disease. However, less than 50% of young adults achieve hypertension control in the United States. Hypertension self-management programs are recommended to improve control, but have been targeted to middle-aged and older populations. Young adults need hypertension self-management programs (i.e., home blood pressure monitoring and lifestyle modifications) tailored to their unique needs to lower blood pressure and reduce the risks and medication burden they may face over a lifetime. To address the unmet need in hypertensive care for young adults, we developed MyHEART (My Hypertension Education And Reaching Target), a multi-component, theoretically-based intervention designed to achieve self-management among young adults with uncontrolled hypertension. MyHEART is a patient-centered program, based upon the Self-Determination Theory, that uses evidence-based health behavior approaches to lower blood pressure. Therefore, the objective of this study is to evaluate MyHEART's impact on changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure compared to usual care after 6 and 12 months in 310 geographically and racially/ethnically diverse young adults with uncontrolled hypertension. Secondary outcomes include MyHEART's impact on behavioral outcomes at 6 and 12 months, compared to usual clinical care (increased physical activity, decreased sodium intake) and to examine whether MyHEART's effects on self-management behavior are mediated through variables of perceived competence, autonomy, motivation, and activation (mediation outcomes). MyHEART is one of the first multicenter, randomized controlled hypertension trials tailored to young adults with primary care. The design and methodology will maximize the generalizability of this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03158051.

Pharmacist services for non-hospitalised patients

BACKGROUND

This review focuses on non-dispensing services from pharmacists, i.e. pharmacists in community, primary or ambulatory-care settings, to non-hospitalised patients, and is an update of a previously-published Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effect of pharmacists' non-dispensing services on non-hospitalised patient outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases and two trial registers in March 2015, together with reference checking and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We included non-English language publications. We ran top-up searches in January 2018 and have added potentially eligible studies to 'Studies awaiting classification'.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of pharmacist services compared with the delivery of usual care or equivalent/similar services with the same objective delivered by other health professionals.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures of Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group. Two review authors independently checked studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risks of bias. We evaluated the overall certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 116 trials comprising 111 trials (39,729 participants) comparing pharmacist interventions with usual care and five trials (2122 participants) comparing pharmacist services with services from other healthcare professionals. Of the 116 trials, 76 were included in meta-analyses. The 40 remaining trials were not included in the meta-analyses because they each reported unique outcome measures which could not be combined. Most trials targeted chronic conditions and were conducted in a range of settings, mostly community pharmacies and hospital outpatient clinics, and were mainly but not exclusively conducted in high-income countries. Most trials had a low risk of reporting bias and about 25%-30% were at high risk of bias for performance, detection, and attrition. Selection bias was unclear for about half of the included studies.Compared with usual care, we are uncertain whether pharmacist services reduce the percentage of patients outside the glycated haemoglobin target range (5 trials, N = 558, odds ratio (OR) 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 2.22; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmacist services may reduce the percentage of patients whose blood pressure is outside the target range (18 trials, N = 4107, OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.55; low-certainty evidence) and probably lead to little or no difference in hospital attendance or admissions (14 trials, N = 3631, OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.11; moderate-certainty evidence). Pharmacist services may make little or no difference to adverse drug effects (3 trials, N = 590, OR 1.65, 95% CI 0.84 to 3.24) and may slightly improve physical functioning (7 trials, N = 1329, mean difference (MD) 5.84, 95% CI 1.21 to 10.48; low-certainty evidence). Pharmacist services may make little or no difference to mortality (9 trials, N = 1980, OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.12, low-certaintly evidence).Of the five studies that compared services delivered by pharmacists with other health professionals, no studies evaluated the impact of the intervention on the percentage of patients outside blood pressure or glycated haemoglobin target range, hospital attendance and admission, adverse drug effects, or physical functioning.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrate that pharmacist services have varying effects on patient outcomes compared with usual care. We found no studies comparing services delivered by pharmacists with other healthcare professionals that evaluated the impact of the intervention on the six main outcome measures. The results need to be interpreted cautiously because there was major heterogeneity in study populations, types of interventions delivered and reported outcomes.There was considerable heterogeneity within many of the meta-analyses, as well as considerable variation in the risks of bias.

A review of interventions ≥ 6 months by pharmacists on adherence to medicines in cardiovascular disease: Characteristics of what works and what doesn't

BACKGROUND

Nonadherence to cardiovascular medicines occurs in 60% of subjects with chronic cardiovascular disease and leads to poor outcomes. In an attempt to improve adherence and cardiovascular outcomes, interventions are often used. Interventions may involve a pharmacist, but it is not always clear whether these are effective.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this review is to determine whether interventions by pharmacists, alone, discussing adherence to medicines, improve adherence to medicines for cardiovascular disease. Subsequently, the review links the characteristics of the individual studies with effectiveness or lack of effect. The second objective of this review is to consider whether any improvement in adherence with interventions by pharmacist is associated with better clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A literature search of PubMed and CINAHL for 'pharmacist', 'medicine' with 'adherence' or 'compliance' or 'persistence' was undertaken. To be included in this review, papers had to be of a pharmacist working alone and in person in an intervention of subjects with hypertension, hyperlipidemia (prior to or after a coronary artery event) or heart failure. The paper had to be published in a peer review journal, with a measure of adherence to medicines. The effectiveness of the intervention had to be evaluated after ≥6 months.

RESULTS

Only 3 out of 8 interventions by pharmacists in hypertension, and 5 out of 12 interventions in subjects with hyperlipidemia led to improved adherence to medicines. In contrast, all 6 interventions by a pharmacist in subjects with heart failure were successful in improving adherence. One characteristic of successful interventions by pharmacists to improve adherence to cardiovascular medicines is that they must be more than brief/single interventions. A second characteristic is that the intervention should not involve subjects who are already highly adherent, as it is unlikely adherence can be improved in this population. Only 2 of 3 successful interventions in hypertension were associated with small reductions in blood pressure, and only one intervention in hyperlipidemia was shown to decrease LDL-cholesterol to a small extent. In subjects with heart failure, 5 of the 6 successful studies of the successful interventions by pharmacists to increase adherence also showed improved clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

When planning an intervention to improve adherence to medicines and cardiovascular outcomes in subjects with hypertension or hyperlipidemic, by a pharmacist alone, or as part of a multi-faceted interventions, it is essential to use an intervention that has been shown to be effective, as most interventions are not effective at improving adherence or only improve adherence and clinical outcomes to a small extent. In heart failure, there is well documented evidence of interventions by pharmacists that do improve clinical outcomes, which should be adopted widely.

The degree of integration of non-dispensing pharmacists in primary care practice and the impact on health outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

A non-dispensing pharmacist conducts clinical pharmacy services aimed at optimizing patients individual pharmacotherapy. Embedding a non-dispensing pharmacist in primary care practice enables collaboration, probably enhancing patient care. The degree of integration of non-dispensing pharmacists into multidisciplinary health care teams varies strongly between settings. The degree of integration may be a determinant for its success.

OBJECTIVES

This study investigates how the degree of integration of a non-dispensing pharmacist impacts medication related health outcomes in primary care.

METHODS

In this literature review we searched two electronic databases and the reference list of published literature reviews for studies about clinical pharmacy services performed by non-dispensing pharmacists physically co-located in primary care practice. We assessed the degree of integration via key dimensions of integration based on the conceptual framework of Walshe and Smith. We included English language studies of any design that had a control group or baseline comparison published from 1966 to June 2016. Descriptive statistics were used to correlate the degree of integration to health outcomes. The analysis was stratified for disease-specific and patient-centered clinical pharmacy services.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine health outcomes in 60 comparative studies contributed to the analysis. The accumulated evidence from these studies shows no impact of the degree of integration of non-dispensing pharmacists on health outcomes. For disease specific clinical pharmacy services the percentage of improved health outcomes for none, partial and fully integrated NDPs is respectively 75%, 63% and 59%. For patient-centered clinical pharmacy services the percentage of improved health outcomes for none, partial and fully integrated NDPs is respectively 55%, 57% and 70%.

CONCLUSIONS

Full integration adds value to patient-centered clinical pharmacy services, but not to disease-specific clinical pharmacy services. To obtain maximum benefits of clinical pharmacy services for patients with multiple medications and comorbidities, full integration of non-dispensing pharmacists should be promoted.

Pilot study, in a rental retirement village, of an "AdherenceCheck" on the management of medicines by the older-aged

Background The older-aged living in a low socioeconomic, rental, retirement village have a low adherence to medicines and a poor understanding of their illnesses. MedsChecks are commonly used in Australian pharmacies in an attempt to improve the management of medicines. There is no published evidence that MedsChecks, or similar brief/single, interventions improve the management of medicines in the older-aged. Objective The objective of our study was to determine the effect of an AdherenceCheck, which is similar to a MedsCheck, but is performed in the home of the older-aged, had on the ongoing management of medicines by the older-aged living independently. Both a MedsCheck and an AdherenceCheck involves forming an individual Action Plan. Setting Rental retirement village. Method After interviewing the older-aged in the village about their management of medicines, they were given an AdherenceCheck and an Action Plan. Six months later their management of medicines and the Action Plan were (re-)evaluated. Main outcome measure Present and ongoing adherence to medicines. Results Only 15 of the original 23 participants completed the study. The AdherenceCheck with Action Plan did not significantly change the adherence to medicines of these older-aged living in the rental retirement village. Pre- to post-AdherenceCheck, there was a reduction in the percentage of participants with a good knowledge of their illnesses, and thus a corresponding significant increase in the percentage with no knowledge of their illnesses, and this may have been age related. Only 11 of the 15 participants remembered receiving an Action Plan, as part of the AdherenceCheck, and 7 of these considered that the Action Plan helped them manage their medicines. Conclusion An AdherenceCheck may not improve the management of medicines by the older-aged living in a rental retirement village. As there are no peer-reviewed publications as to whether the commonly used MedsChecks, which have some similarities to the AdherenceCheck, improve the management of medicines, it is suggested that these MedsChecks should also be formally evaluated.

Evaluation of the types and frequency of drug-related problems and the association with gender in patients with chronic diseases attending a primary health care center in Jordan

BACKGROUND

Drug-related problems (DRPs) can be defined as any event that is drug related that results in harm or in providing less than optimum medical care to patients. The aim of this study is to determine the types and frequency of each type of DRP in selected outpatient settings in Jordan, with emphasis on gender as a grouping variable.

METHODS

This study was a non-randomized controlled trial, carried out over 3 days, at Alsarih Medical Health Center in the north of Jordan. Clinical pharmacists conducting the research interviewed a randomly selected population, assessed their DRPs, proposed appropriate clinical interventions to physicians and provided appropriate patient counseling.

RESULTS

The study included a total of 258 patients (mean age 54.4±12.1; male ratio 37.6%). The most frequently encountered DRPs in our study were patients' need for counseling and education (83.8%), and life style modifications (80%). This study also revealed that 71.8% of patients required additional and/or more frequent monitoring, and 53% of patients had untreated conditions that required pharmacological and/or non-pharmacological interventions. Gender did not affect the frequency of DRPs among patients.

CONCLUSION

Certain types of DRPs are the most common among outpatient settings. Therefore, measures should be taken to specifically tackle these types of DRPs.

Modeled Health and Economic Impact of Team-Based Care for Hypertension

INTRODUCTION

Team-based interventions for hypertension care have been widely studied and shown effective in improving hypertension outcomes. Few studies have evaluated long-term effects of these interventions; none have assessed broad-scale implementation. This study estimates the prospective health, economic, and budgetary impact of universal adoption of a team-based care intervention model that targets people with treated but uncontrolled hypertension in the U.S.

METHODS

Analysis was conducted in 2014-2015 using a microsimulation model, constructed with various data sources from 1948 to 2014, designed to evaluate prospective cardiovascular disease (CVD)-related interventions in the U.S.

POPULATION

Ten-year primary outcomes included prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension; incident myocardial infarction, stroke, CVD events, and CVD-related mortality; intervention and net medical costs by payer; productivity; and quality-adjusted life years.

RESULTS

About 4.7 million (13%) fewer people with uncontrolled hypertension and 638,000 prevented cardiovascular events would be expected over 10 years. Assuming $525 per enrollee, implementation would cost payers $22.9 billion, but $25.3 billion would be saved in averted medical costs. Estimated net cost savings for Medicare approached $5.8 billion. Net costs were especially sensitive to intervention costs, with break-even thresholds of $300 (private), $450 (Medicaid), and $750 (Medicare).

CONCLUSIONS

Nationwide adoption of team-based care for uncontrolled hypertension could have sizable effects in reducing CVD burden. Based on the study's assumptions, the policy would be cost saving from the perspective of Medicare and may prove to be cost effective from other payers' perspectives. Expected net cost savings for Medicare would more than offset expected net costs for all other insurers.

Interventions to Improve Medication Adherence in Hypertensive Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This systematic review applied meta-analytic procedures to synthesize medication adherence interventions that focus on adults with hypertension. Comprehensive searching located trials with medication adherence behavior outcomes. Study sample, design, intervention characteristics, and outcomes were coded. Random-effects models were used in calculating standardized mean difference effect sizes. Moderator analyses were conducted using meta-analytic analogues of ANOVA and regression to explore associations between effect sizes and sample, design, and intervention characteristics. Effect sizes were calculated for 112 eligible treatment-vs.-control group outcome comparisons of 34,272 subjects. The overall standardized mean difference effect size between treatment and control subjects was 0.300. Exploratory moderator analyses revealed interventions were most effective among female, older, and moderate- or high-income participants. The most promising intervention components were those linking adherence behavior with habits, giving adherence feedback to patients, self-monitoring of blood pressure, using pill boxes and other special packaging, and motivational interviewing. The most effective interventions employed multiple components and were delivered over many days. Future research should strive for minimizing risks of bias common in this literature, especially avoiding self-report adherence measures.

The Effect of Self-Monitoring of Blood Pressure on Medication Adherence and Lifestyle Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Self-monitoring of blood pressure (SMBP) can contribute to reduced blood pressure in people with hypertension. Potential mediators include increased medication, improved adherence, and changes in lifestyle factors including dietary change and increased physical activity. The objective of this review was to determine the effect of SMBP on medication adherence, medication persistence, and lifestyle factors in people with hypertension.

METHODS

Electronic bibliographic databases were searched through February 2014 to identify randomized controlled trials that compared SMBP to control/usual care in ambulatory hypertensive patients and reported medication or nonpharmacologic treatment adherence measures.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight trials with 7,021 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Medication adherence was assessed in 25 trials (89%), dietary outcomes in 8 (29%), physical activity in 6 (21%), and medication persistence in 1 (4%). Blood pressure was assessed in 26 studies (93%). Follow-up ranged from 2 weeks to 12 months. Pooled results of 13 studies demonstrated a small but significant overall effect on medication adherence in favor of SMBP interventions (standardized mean difference 0.21, 95% CI 0.08, 0.34), with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 43%). Standardized mean difference was used to express the size of intervention effect in each study relative to the variability observed, and was used to combine the results of studies where different measures of medication adherence were used. Where SMBP interventions had a significant effect on lifestyle factor change, the effect was unlikely to be clinically significant. Pooled results of 11 studies demonstrate a significant overall effect on diastolic blood pressure in favor of SMBP (weighted mean difference -2.02, 95% CI -2.93, -1.11), with low heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). A test for subgroup differences showed no difference when studies were grouped according to whether medication adherence was significantly improved or not.

CONCLUSIONS

SMBP may contribute to improvements in medication adherence in hypertensives. However, evidence for the effect of SMBP on lifestyle change and medication persistence is scarce, of poor quality, and suggests little clinically relevant benefit.

A mixed-method approach to evaluate a pharmacist intervention for veterans with hypertension

This paper examines blood pressure (BP) control after 6 months of an intensive pharmacist-managed intervention in a mixed-methods randomized controlled trial conducted at the Iowa City Veteran Affairs Health Care System and two community-based outreach clinics. Patients received the pharmacist intervention for the first 6 months. The study coordinator conducted a summative evaluation with 37 patients 18 to 24 months following the initial 6-month intervention period. BP was significantly reduced in diabetic patients following an intensive pharmacist intervention (-8.0/-4.0 ± 14.4/9.1 mm Hg systolic/diastolic, P<.001 and P=.001, respectively). BP was reduced even more in nondiabetic patients (-14.0/-5.0 ± 1.9/10.0 mm Hg, P<.001). Medication adherence significantly improved from baseline to 6 months (P=.017). BPs were significantly lower at 6 months following an intensive pharmacist intervention. Patients also expressed a high level of satisfaction with and preference for co-management of their hypertension, as well as other chronic diseases.

Check it, change it: a community-based, multifaceted intervention to improve blood pressure control

BACKGROUND

Although home blood pressure (BP) monitoring interventions have shown potential in selected populations, it is unclear whether such strategies can be generalized. We sought to determine whether a multifaceted BP control program that uses a web-based health portal (Heart360), community health coaches, and physician assistant guidance could improve hypertension control in a diverse community setting.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Between September 12, 2010, and November 11, 2011 Check It, Change It, a community-based hypertension quality improvement program, enrolled 1756 patients with hypertension from 8 clinics in Durham County, NC. The Check It, Change It community intervention was evaluated using a prepost study design without a concurrent control. Participants were stratified into 3 tiers according to their initial BP: tier 0 (BP <140/90 mm Hg)=51% of population, tier 1 (BP=140/90-159/99 mm Hg)=30% of total, and tier 2 (BP ≥159/99 mm Hg)=19% of total. Overall, median age was 59 years (interquartile range, 49-69), 67% were female, and 76% black. After 6 months, the mean overall systolic BP declined 4.7 mm Hg. Rates of achieving target BP control (<140/90) increased overall from 51% at baseline to 63% by 6 months, and 69% had either reached their BP target or had reduced their baseline systolic BP by 10 mm Hg or more.

CONCLUSIONS

A multicomponent-tiered hypertension program was associated with improved BP control in a diverse community-based population.

Primary care-based, pharmacist-physician collaborative medication-therapy management of hypertension: a randomized, pragmatic trial

PURPOSE

A collaborative pharmacist-primary care provider (PharmD-PCP) team approach to medication-therapy management (MTM), with pharmacists initiating and changing medications at separate office visits, holds promise for the cost-effective management of hypertension, but has not been evaluated in many systematic trials. The primary objective of this study was to examine blood pressure (BP) control in hypertensive patients managed by a newly formed PharmD-PCP MTM team versus usual care in a university-based primary care clinic.

METHODS

This randomized, pragmatic clinical trial was conducted in hypertensive patients randomly selected for PharmD-PCP MTM or usual care. In the PharmD-PCP MTM group, pharmacists managed drug-therapy initiation and monitoring, medication adjustments, biometric assessments, laboratory tests, and patient education. In the usual-care group, patients continued to see their PCPs. Participants were aged ≥ 18 years, were diagnosed with hypertension, had a most recent BP measurement of ≥ 140/≥ 90 mm Hg (≥ 130/≥ 80 mm Hg if codiagnosed with diabetes mellitus), were on at least 1 antihypertensive medication, and were English speaking. The primary outcome was the difference in the mean change from baseline in systolic BP at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included the percentage achieving therapeutic BP goal and the mean changes from baseline in diastolic BP and low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

FINDINGS

A total of 166 patients were enrolled (69 men; mean age, 67.7 years; PharmD-PCP MTM group, n = 75; usual-care group, n = 91). Mean reduction in SBP was significantly greater in the PharmD-PCP MTM group at 6 months (-7.1 [19.4] vs +1.6 [21.0] mm Hg; P = 0.008), but the difference was no longer statistically significant at 9 months (-5.2 [16.9] vs -1.7 [17.7] mm Hg; P = 0.22), based on an intent-to-treat analysis. In the intervention group, greater percentages of patients who continued to see the MTM pharmacist versus those who returned to their PCP were at goal at 6 months (81% vs 44%) and at 9 months (70% vs 52%). No significant between-group differences in changes in cholesterol were detected at 6 and 9 months; however, the mean baseline values were near recommended levels. The PharmD-PCP MTM group had significantly fewer PCP visits compared with the usual-care group (1.8 [1.5] vs 4.2 [1.0]; P < 0.001).

IMPLICATIONS

A PharmD-PCP collaborative MTM service was more effective in lowering BP than was usual care at 6 months in all patients and at 9 months in patients who continued to see the pharmacist. Incorporating pharmacists into the primary care team may be a successful strategy for managing medication therapy, improving patient outcomes and possibly extending the capacity of primary care. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01973556.

Pharmacist involvement in the patient care improves outcome in hypertension patients

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of this study was to assess the effects of pharmaceutical care interventions in patients with essential hypertension in Lakshmi Pat Singhania Institute of Cardiology, Kanpur, India.

METHODS

The study was carried out from July 2010 to August 2011. Pharmaceutical care was provided for 54 patients (intervention group) which was comprised of the patient education, the prescription assistance and the life style modifications and motivation for health. Then the clinical outcome as well as health related quality of life (HRQOL) were compared with the control group (48 patients) in which the pharmaceutical care was not provided. Furthermore, the effect of pharmaceutical care intervention on HRQOL was assessed using Short Form-36 (SF-36), a general health related quality of life questionnaire used to evaluate the QOL of patients. Blood pressure (BP) measurements and QOL survey was performed at baseline and at the follow-up session.

FINDINGS

The difference between blood pressure readings from the baseline to the second follow-up was significant for systolic [(P = 0.0001), 12.24 mmHg] and diastolic BP [(P = 0.001), 5.17 mmHg] in the intervention group. The questionnaire used to evaluate the QOL of patients also showed improvement in the mean score for intervention group.

CONCLUSION

Results from our study showed that applying pharmaceutical care to hypertensive patients can help in the control of these patients' blood pressure, and consequently lower the risk that hypertension poses in cardiovascular disease. Successful implementation of pharmaceutical care has the potential to increase patients' satisfaction with their pharmacists' activities and may increase patients' expectations that pharmacists will work on their behalf to assist them with their healthcare needs.

The need for PGY2-trained clinical pharmacy specialists

The American College of Clinical Pharmacy and other stakeholder organizations seek to advance clinical pharmacist practitioners, educators, and researchers. Unfortunately, there remains an inadequate supply of residency-trained clinical specialists to meet the needs of our health care system, and nonspecialists often are called on to fill open specialist positions. The impact of clinical pharmacy specialists on pharmacotherapy outcomes in both acute care and primary care settings demonstrates the value of these specialists. This commentary articulates the need for postgraduate year two (PGY2)-trained clinical specialists within the health care system by discussing various clinical and policy rationales, interprofessional support, economic justifications, and their impact on quality of care and drug safety. The integrated practice model that has grown out of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists Pharmacy Practice Model Initiative (PPMI) could threaten the growth and development of future clinical specialists. Therefore, the ways in which PGY2-trained clinical pharmacist specialists are deployed in the PPMI require further consideration. PGY2 residencies provide education and training opportunities that cannot be achieved in traditional professional degree programs or postgraduate year one residencies. These specialists are needed to provide direct patient care to complex patient populations and to educate and train pharmacy students and postgraduate residents. Limitations to training and hiring PGY2-trained clinical pharmacy specialists include site capacity limitations and lack of funding. A gap analysis is needed to define the extent of the mismatch between the demand for specialists by health care systems and educational institutions versus the capacity to train clinical pharmacists at the specialty level.

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.

Hospital pharmacy practice in Saudi Arabia: Drug monitoring and patient education in the Riyadh region

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this national survey is to evaluate hospital pharmacy practice in the Riyadh region of Saudi Arabia. The results of the survey pertaining to the monitoring and patient education of the medication use process were presented.

METHODS

We have invited pharmacy directors from all 48 hospitals in the Riyadh region to participate in a modified-American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) survey questionnaire. The survey was conducted using similar methods to those of the ASHP surveys.

RESULTS

The response rate was 60.4% (29/48). Most hospitals (23, 79%) had pharmacists regularly monitor medication therapy for patients. Of these hospitals, 61% had pharmacists monitoring medication therapy daily for less than 26% of patients, 17% monitored 26-50% of patients and 22% monitored more than half of patients daily. In 41% of hospitals, pharmacists routinely monitored serum medication concentrations or their surrogate markers; 27% gave pharmacists the authority to order initial serum medication concentrations, and 40% allowed pharmacists to adjust dosages. Pharmacists routinely documented their medication therapy monitoring activities in 52% of hospitals. Overall, 74% of hospitals had an adverse drug event (ADE) reporting system, 59% had a multidisciplinary committee responsible for reviewing ADEs, and 63% had a medication safety committee. Complete electronic medical record (EMR) systems were available in 15% of hospitals and 81% had a partial EMR system. The primary responsibility for performing patient medication education lays with nursing (37%), pharmacy (37%), or was a shared responsibility (26%). In 44% of hospitals, pharmacists provided medication education to half or more inpatients and in a third of hospitals, pharmacists gave medication education to 26% or more of patients at discharge.

CONCLUSION

Hospital pharmacists in the Riyadh region are actively engaged in monitoring medication therapy and providing patient medication education, although there is considerable opportunity for further involvement.

Impact of interventions on medication adherence and blood pressure control in patients with essential hypertension: a systematic review by the ISPOR medication adherence and persistence special interest group

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence on the impact of interventions to improve medication adherence in adults prescribed antihypertensive medications.

METHODS

An electronic search was undertaken of articles published between 1979 and 2009, without language restriction, that focused on interventions to improve antihypertensive medication adherence among patients (≥18 years) with essential hypertension. Studies must have measured adherence as an outcome of the intervention. We followed standard guidelines for the conduct and reporting of the review and conducted a narrative synthesis of reported data.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven articles were identified for inclusion; 35 (35 of 97, 36.1%) examined interventions to directly improve medication adherence, and the majority (58 of 97, 59.8%) were randomized controlled trials. Thirty-four (34 of 97, 35.1%) studies reported a statistically significant improvement in medication adherence.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS

Interventions aimed at improving patients' knowledge of medications possess the greatest potential clinical value in improving adherence with antihypertensive therapy. However, we identified several limitations of these studies, and advise future researchers to focus on using validated adherence measures, well-designed randomized controlled trials with relevant adherence and clinical outcomes, and guidelines on the appropriate design and analysis of adherence research.

Effect of a pharmacist intervention in Spanish community pharmacies on blood pressure control in hypertensive patients

PURPOSE

The effect of a protocol-based pharmacist intervention on blood pressure (BP) control among treated hypertensive patients who use community pharmacies was studied.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental study with a control group was conducted at 13 community pharmacies in Jaén and Granada in Spain. Hypertensive patients over age 18 years who were receiving antihypertensive treatment were eligible for participation. The protocol-based intervention consisted of three components: (1) patient education about hypertension, (2) home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM), and (3) referral to a physician through personalized reports when necessary. The control group received the standard of care. BP control was assessed at the beginning and end of the study. Results Data were collected from 176 patients. In the intervention group (n = 87), significant baseline-to-endpoint reductions in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were observed: 6.8 mm Hg (p < 0.001) and 2.1 mm Hg (p = 0.032), respectively. The changes in SBP and DBP in the intervention group at the end of the study were significantly greater than those in the control group (difference between adjusted mean change, 5.7 mm Hg for SBP [p = 0.001] and 2.6 mm Hg for DBP [p = 0.013]). The odds of achieving BP control in the intervention group was 2.46 times higher than in the control group (95% confidence interval, 1.15-5.24; p = 0.020).

CONCLUSION

A protocol-based community pharmacist intervention in combination with HBPM significantly reduced SBP and DBP and increased the percentage of patients with controlled BP compared with patients receiving the standard of care.

A Pharmacist-Led, American Heart Association Heart360 Web-Enabled Home Blood Pressure Monitoring Program

Background—

To determine whether a pharmacist-led, Heart360-enabled, home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) intervention improves blood pressure (BP) control compared with usual care (UC).

Methods and Results—

This randomized, controlled trial was conducted in 10 Kaiser Permanente Colorado clinics. Overall, 348 patients with BP above recommended levels were randomized to the HBPM (n=175) or UC (n=173) groups. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics between the groups; however, there was a trend toward a higher baseline BP for the HBPM group compared with the UC group (148.8 versus 145.5 mm Hg for systolic BP; 89.6 versus 88.0 mm Hg for diastolic BP). At 6 months, the proportion of patients achieving BP goal was significantly higher in the HBPM group (54.1%) than in the UC group (35.4%; P <0.001). Compared with the UC group, the HBPM group experienced a −12.4-mm Hg larger (95% confidence interval, −16.3 to −8.6) reduction in systolic BP and a −5.7-mm Hg larger (95% confidence interval, −7.8 to −3.6) reduction in diastolic BP. The impact of the intervention on BP reduction was even larger for the subgroup of patients with diabetes mellitus or chronic kidney disease. The HBPM group had more e-mail and telephone contacts and greater medication regimen intensification. The proportion of patients reporting high satisfaction with hypertension care was significantly greater in the HBPM group (58%) than in the UC group (42%), P <0.001.

Conclusions—

A pharmacist-led, Heart360-supported, home BP monitoring intervention led to greater BP reductions, superior BP control, and higher patient satisfaction than UC.

Clinical Trial Registration—

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01162759 . Unique identifier: NCT01162759.

Home blood pressure monitoring with nurse-led telephone support among patients with hypertension and a history of stroke: a community-based randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Adequate control of blood pressure reduces the risk of recurrent stroke. We conducted a randomized controlled study to determine whether home blood pressure monitoring with nurse-led telephone support would reduce blood pressure in patients with hypertension and a history of stroke.

METHODS

We recruited 381 participants (mean age 72 years) from outpatient and inpatient stroke clinics between Mar. 1, 2007, and Aug. 31, 2009. Nearly half (45%, 170) of the participants had some disability due to stroke. Participants were visited at home for a baseline assessment and randomly allocated to home blood pressure monitoring (n = 187) or usual care (n = 194). Those in the intervention group were given a monitor, brief training and telephone support. Participants who had home blood pressure readings consistently over target (target < 130/80 mm Hg) were advised to consult their family physician. The main outcome measure was a fall in systolic blood pressure after 12 months, measured by an independent researcher unaware of group allocation.

RESULTS

Despite more patients in the intervention group than in the control group having changes to antihypertensive treatment during the trial period (60.1% [98/163] v. 47.6% [78/164], p = 0.02), the fall in systolic blood pressure from baseline did not differ significantly between the groups (adjusted mean difference 0.3 mm Hg, 95% confidence interval -3.6 to 4.2 mm Hg). Subgroup analysis showed significant interaction with disability due to stroke (p = 0.03 at 6 months) and baseline blood pressure (p = 0.03 at 12 months).

INTERPRETATION

Overall, home monitoring did not improve blood pressure control in patients with hypertension and a history of stroke. It was associated with a fall in systolic pressure in patients who had uncontrolled blood pressure at baseline and those without disability due to stroke.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT00514800.

Targeting cardiovascular medication adherence interventions

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether adherence interventions should be administered to all medication takers or targeted to nonadherers.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

Systematic search (Medline and Embase, 1966-2009) of randomized controlled trials of interventions to improve adherence to medications for preventing or treating cardiovascular disease or diabetes.

DATA EXTRACTION

Articles were classified as (1) broad interventions (targeted all medication takers), (2) focused interventions (targeted nonadherers), or (3) dynamic interventions (administered to all medication takers; real-time adherence information targets nonadherers as intervention proceeds). Cohen's d effect sizes were calculated.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We identified 7,190 articles; 59 met inclusion criteria. Broad interventions were less likely (18%) to show medium or large effects compared with focused (25%) or dynamic (32%) interventions. Of the 33 dynamic interventions, 6 used externally generated adherence data to target nonadherers. Those with externally generated data were less likely to have a medium or large effect (20% vs. 34.8% self-generated data).

CONCLUSION

Adherence interventions targeting nonadherers are heterogeneous but may have advantages over broad interventions. Dynamic interventions show promise and require further study.

Design and rationale for Home Blood Pressure Telemonitoring and Case Management to Control Hypertension (HyperLink): a cluster randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with high blood pressure (BP) visit a physician an average of 4 times or more per year in the U.S., yet BP is controlled in fewer than half. Practical, robust and sustainable models are needed to improve BP in patients with uncontrolled hypertension.

OBJECTIVES

The Home Blood Pressure Telemonitoring and Case Management to Control Hypertension study (HyperLink) is a cluster-randomized trial designed to determine whether an intervention that combines home BP telemonitoring with pharmacist case management improves BP control compared to usual care at 6 and 12 months in patients with uncontrolled hypertension. Secondary outcomes are maintenance of BP control at 18 months, patient satisfaction with their health care, and costs of care.

METHODS

HyperLink enrolled 450 hypertensive patients with uncontrolled BP from 16 primary care clinics. Eight clinics were randomized to provide usual care (UC) to their patients (n=222) and 8 were randomized to provide the telemonitoring intervention (TI) (n=228). TI patients received home BP telemonitors that internally store and electronically transmit BP data to a secure database. Pharmacist case managers adjust antihypertensive therapy based on the home BP data under a collaborative practice agreement with the clinics' primary care teams. The length of the intervention is 12 months, with follow-up to 18 months to determine the durability of the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

We will test in a real primary care setting whether combining BP telemonitoring and pharmacist case management can achieve and maintain high rates of BP control compared to usual care.

Health coaching to improve hypertension treatment in a low-income, minority population

PURPOSE

Poor blood pressure control is common in the United States. We conducted a study to determine whether health coaching with home titration of antihypertensive medications can improve blood pressure control compared with health coaching alone in a low-income, predominantly minority population.

METHODS

We randomized 237 patients with poorly controlled hypertension at a primary care clinic to receive either home blood pressure monitoring, weekly health coaching, and home titration of blood pressure medications if blood pressures were elevated (n = 129) vs home blood pressure monitoring and health coaching but no home titration (n = 108). The primary outcome was change in systolic blood pressure from baseline to 6 months.

RESULTS

Both the home-titration arm and the no-home-titration arm had a reduction in systolic blood pressure, with no significant difference between them. When both arms were combined and analyzed as a before-after study, there was a mean decrease in systolic blood pressure of 21.8 mm Hg (P <.001) as well as a decrease in the number of primary care visits from 3.5 in the 6 months before the study to 2.6 during the 6-month study period (P <.001) and 2.4 in the 6 months after the study (P <.001). The more coaching encounters patients had, the greater their reduction in blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Blood pressure control in a low-income, minority population can be improved by teaching patients to monitor their blood pressure at home and having nonprofessional health coaches assist patients, in particular, by counseling them on medication adherence. The improved blood pressure control can be achieved while reducing the time spent by physicians.

A collaborative cardiologist-pharmacist care model to improve hypertension management in patients with or at high risk for cardiovascular disease

Physician led collaborative drug therapy management utilizing clinical pharmacists to aid in the medication management of patients with hypertension has been shown to improve blood pressure control. With recommendations for lower blood pressures in patients with coronary artery disease, a cardiologist-pharmacist collaborative care model may be a novel way to achieve these more rigorous goals of therapy.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this project was to evaluate this type of care model in a high cardiac risk patient population.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study determined the ability of a cardiologist-pharmacist care model (n=59) to lower blood pressure and achieve blood pressure goals (< 130/80 mmHg) in patients with or at high risk for coronary artery disease compared to usual cardiologist care (n=58) in the same clinical setting.

RESULTS

The cardiologist-pharmacist care model showed a higher percentage of patients obtaining their goal blood pressure compared to cardiologist care alone, 49.2% versus 31.0% respectively, p=0.0456. Greater reductions in systolic blood pressure (-22 mmHg versus -12 mmHg, p=0.0077) and pulse pressure (-15 mmHg versus -7 mmHg, p=0.0153) were noted in the cardiologist-pharmacist care model. No differences in diastolic blood pressure were found. There was a shorter duration of clinic follow-up (7.0 versus 13.2 months, p=0.0013) but a higher frequency of clinic visits (10.7 versus 3.45, p<0.0001) in the cardiologist-pharmacist care model compared to usual care. The number of antihypertensive agents used did not change over the time period evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests a team-based approach to hypertensive care using a collaborative cardiologist-pharmacist care model improves blood pressure from baseline in a high cardiac risk patient population and was more likely to obtain more stringent blood pressure goals than usual care.