Physician-pharmacist collaboration versus usual care for treatment-resistant hypertension.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Smith SM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4829453 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Physician-pharmacist collaboration versus usual care for treatment-resistant hypertension.
Smith Steven M SM Carris Nicholas W NW Dietrich Eric E Gums John G JG Uribe Liz L Coffey Christopher S CS Gums Tyler H TH Carter Barry L BL
Journal of the American Society of Hypertension : JASH 20160118 4
Team-based care has been recommended for patients with treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH), but its efficacy in this setting is unknown. We compared a physician-pharmacist collaborative model (PPCM) to usual care in patients with TRH participating in the Collaboration Among Pharmacists and Physicians To Improve Outcomes Now study. At baseline, 169 patients (27% of Collaboration Among Pharmacists and Physicians To Improve Outcomes Now patients) had TRH: 111 received the PPCM intervention and 5 ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effectiveness of collaborative management of hypertension by primary care-pharmacist teams in community-based clinics. STUDY DESIGN: A 12-month prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial in the Providence Primary Care Research Network of patients with hypertension and uncontrolled blood pressure. METHODS: As compared to usual primary care, intervention consisted of pharmacy practitioners participating in the active management of hypertension in the primary care office according to established collaborative treatment protocols. At baseline, there was no significant difference in blood pressure between groups. Primary outcome measures were the differences in mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures between arms at study end. Secondary measures included blood pressure goal attainment (<140/90 mmHg), hypertension-related knowledge, medication adherence, home blood pressure monitoring, resource utilization, quality of life, and satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 463 subjects were enrolled (n = 233 control, n = 230 intervention). Subjects receiving the intervention achieved significantly lower systolic (p = 0.007) and diastolic (p = 0.002) blood pressures compared to control (137/75 mmHg vs. 143/78 mmHg). In addition, 62% of intervention subjects achieved target blood pressure compared to 44% of control subjects (p = 0.003). The intervention group received more total office visits (7.2 vs. 4.9, p < 0.0001), however had fewer physician visits (3.2 vs. 4.7, p < 0.0001) compared to control. Intervention subjects were prescribed more antihypertensive medications (2.7 vs. 2.4, p = 0.02), but did not take more antihypertensive pills per day (2.4 vs. 2.5, p = 0.87). There were minimal differences between groups in hypertension-related knowledge, medication adherence, quality of life, or satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Patients randomized to collaborative primary care-pharmacist hypertension management achieved significantly better blood pressure control compared to usual care with no difference in quality of life or satisfaction.
| S-EPMC2596500 | biostudies-other
Project description:Physician-pharmacist collaborative care (PPCC) is effective in improving blood pressure (BP) control, but primary care provider (PCP) engagement in such models has not been well-studied. The authors analyzed data from PPCC referrals to 108 PCPs, for patients with uncontrolled hypertension, assessing the proportion of referral requests approved, disapproved, and not responded to, and reasons for disapproval. Of 2232 persons with uncontrolled hypertension, PPCC referral requests were sent for 1516 (67.9%): 950 (62.7%) were approved, 406 (26.8%) were disapproved, and 160 (10.6%) received no response. Approval rates differed widely by PCP with a median approval rate of 75% (interquartile range, 41%-100%). The most common reasons for disapproval were: PCP prefers to manage hypertension (19%), and BP controlled per PCP (18%); 8% of cases were considered too complex for PPCC. Provider acceptance of a PPCC hypertension clinic was generally high and sustained but varied widely among PCPs. No single reason for disapproval predominated.
| S-EPMC4562808 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundStudies have demonstrated that blood pressure (BP) control can be improved when clinical pharmacists assist with patient management. The objective of this study was to evaluate if a physician and pharmacist collaborative model in community-based medical offices could improve BP control.MethodsThis was a prospective, cluster randomized, controlled clinical trial with clinics randomized to a control group (n = 3) or to an intervention group (n = 3). The study enrolled 402 patients (mean age, 58.3 years) with uncontrolled hypertension. Clinical pharmacists made drug therapy recommendations to physicians based on national guidelines. Research nurses performed BP measurements and 24-hour BP monitoring.ResultsThe mean (SD) guideline adherence scores increased from 49.4 (19.3) at baseline to 53.4 (18.1) at 6 months (8.1% increase) in the control group and from 40.4 (22.6) at baseline to 62.8 (13.5) at 6 months (55.4% increase) in the intervention group (P = .09 for adjusted between-group comparison). The mean BP decreased 6.8/4.5 mm Hg in the control group and 20.7/9.7 mm Hg in the intervention group (P < .05 for between-group systolic BP comparison). The adjusted difference in systolic BP was -12.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], -24.0 to 0.0) mm Hg, while the adjusted difference in diastolic BP was -1.8 (95% CI, -11.9 to 8.3) mm Hg. The 24-hour BP levels showed similar effect sizes. Blood pressure was controlled in 29.9% of patients in the control group and in 63.9% of patients in the intervention group (adjusted odds ratio, 3.2; 95% CI, 2.0-5.1; P < .001).ConclusionsA physician and pharmacist collaborative intervention achieved significantly better mean BP and overall BP control rates compared with a control group. Additional research should be conducted to evaluate efficient strategies to implement team-based chronic disease management.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00201019.
| S-EPMC2882170 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This was a prospective, cluster randomized controlled trial in patients with uncontrolled hypertension aged 21 to 85 years (mean, 61 years). Pharmacists made recommendations to physicians for patients in the intervention clinics (n=101) but not patients in the control clinics (n=78). The mean adjusted difference in systolic blood pressure (BP) between the control and intervention groups was 8.7 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.4-12.9), while the difference in diastolic BP was 5.4 mm Hg (CI, 2.8-8.0) at 9 months. The 24-hour BP levels showed similar effects, with a mean systolic BP level that was 8.8 mm Hg lower (CI, 5.0-12.6) and a mean diastolic BP level that was 4.6 mm Hg (CI, 2.4-6.8) lower in the intervention group. BP was controlled in 89.1% of patients in the intervention group and 52.9% in the control group (adjusted odds ratio, 8.9; CI, 3.8-20.7; P<.001). Physician/pharmacist collaboration achieved significantly better mean BP values and overall BP control rates, primarily by intensification of medication therapy and improving patient adherence.
| S-EPMC2453045 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pharmacist-physician comanagement of hypertension has been shown to improve office blood pressures (BPs). We sought to describe the effect of such a model on 24-hour ambulatory BPs.We performed a prospective, cluster-randomized, controlled clinical trial, enrolling 179 patients with uncontrolled hypertension from 5 primary care clinics in Iowa City, Iowa. Patients were randomized by clinic to receive pharmacist-physician collaborative management of hypertension (intervention) or usual care (control) for a 9-month period. In the intervention group, pharmacists helped patients to identify barriers to BP control, counseled on lifestyle and dietary modifications, and adjusted antihypertensive therapy in collaboration with the patients' primary care providers. Patients were seen by pharmacists a minimum of every 2 months. Ambulatory BP was measured at baseline and at study end.Baseline and end-of-study ambulatory BP profiles were evaluated for 175 patients. Mean (SD) ambulatory systolic BPs (SBPs), reported in millimeters of mercury, were reduced more in the intervention group than in the control group: daytime change in (?) SBP, 15.2 (11.5) vs 5.5 (13.5) (P < .001); nighttime ?SBP, 12.2 (14.8) vs 3.4 (13.3) (P < .001); and 24-hour ?SBP, 14.1 (11.3) vs 5.5 (12.5) (P < .001). More patients in the intervention group than in the control group had their BP controlled at the end of the study (75.0% vs 50.7%) (P < .001), as defined by overall 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring.Pharmacist-physician collaborative management of hypertension achieved consistent and significantly greater reduction in 24-hour BP and a high rate of BP control. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00201045.
| S-EPMC2992979 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Inaccurate or missing medication information in medical discharge summaries is a widespread and intractable problem. This study evaluated the effectiveness and sustainability of an intervention in which ward-based hospital pharmacists reviewed, contributed and verified medication information in electronic discharge summaries (EDSs) in collaboration with physicians. Retrospective audits of randomly selected EDSs were conducted on seven wards at a major public hospital before and after implementation of the intervention and repeated two years later on four wards where the intervention was incorporated into usual pharmacist care. EDSs for 265 patients (prescribed a median of nine discharge medications) were assessed across the three time points. Pharmacists verified the EDSs for 47% patients in the first post-intervention audit and 68% patients in the second post-intervention audit. Following the intervention, the proportion of patients with one or more clinically significant discharge medication list discrepancy fell from 40/93 (43%) to 14/92 (15%), p < 0.001. The proportion of clinically significant medication changes stated in the EDSs increased from 222/417 (53%) to 296/366 (81%), p < 0.001, and the proportion both stated and explained increased from 206/417 (49%) to 245/366 (67%), p < 0.001. Significant improvements were still evident after two years. Pharmacists spent a median of 5 (range 2-16) minutes per patient contributing to EDSs. Logistics, timing and pharmacist workload were barriers to delivering the intervention. Additional staff resources is needed to enable pharmacists to consistently deliver this effective intervention.
| S-EPMC7151653 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposePharmacists are uniquely trained to provide guidance to patients in the selection of appropriate non-prescription therapy. Physicians in Qatar may not always recognize how pharmacists function in assuring safe medication use. Both these health professional groups come from heterogeneous training and experiences before migrating to the country and these backgrounds could influence collaborative patient care. Qatar Petroleum (QP), the largest private employer in the country, has developed a pharmacist-guided medication consulting service at their primary care clinics, but physician comfort with pharmacists recommending drug therapy is currently unknown. The objective of this study is to characterize physician perceptions of pharmacists and their roles in a primary care patient setting in Qatar.MethodsThis cross-sectional survey was developed following a comprehensive literature review and administered in English and Arabic. Consenting QP physicians were asked questions to assess experiences, comfort and expectations of pharmacist roles and abilities to provide medication-related advice and recommend and monitor therapies.ResultsThe median age of the 62 (77.5%) physicians who responded was between 40 and 50 years old and almost two-third were men (64.5%). Fourteen different nationalities were represented. Physicians were more comfortable with pharmacist activities closely linked to drug products than responsibilities associated with monitoring and optimization of patient outcomes. Medication education (96.6%) and drug knowledge (90%) were practically unanimously recognized as abilities expected of pharmacists, but consultative roles, such as assisting in drug regimen design were less acknowledged. They proposed pharmacist spend more time with physicians attending joint meetings or education events to help advance acceptance of pharmacists in patient-centered care at this site.ConclusionsPhysicians had low comfort and expectations of patient-oriented pharmacist roles but were not threatened to learn more about these capabilities or explore enhanced collaboration in patient care.
| S-EPMC3475112 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Physician-pharmacist collaborative models have been shown to improve the care of patients with numerous chronic medical conditions. Team-based health care using integrated clinical pharmacists provides one opportunity to improve quality in health care systems that use population-based financing. In November 2015, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) requested that the relative value of pharmacists' work in team-based care needs to be established. Thus the objective of this study was to describe the components of pharmacists' work in the management of hypertension with a physician-pharmacist collaborative model.Descriptive analysis of the components of pharmacists' work in the Collaboration Among Pharmacists and Physicians to Improve Outcomes Now (CAPTION) study, a prospective, cluster randomized trial.This analysis was intended to provide policymakers with data and information, using the CAPTION study model, on the time and intensity of pharmacists' work to understand pharmacists' relative value contributions in the context of CMS financing and population management aims. The CAPTION trial was conducted in 32 community-based medical offices in 15 U.S. states and included 390 patients with multiple cardiovascular risk factors. Blood pressure was measured by trained study coordinators in each office, and patients were included in the study if they had uncontrolled blood pressure. Included patients were randomized to a 9-month intervention, a 24-month intervention, or usual care. The goal of the pharmacist intervention was to improve blood pressure control and resolve drug therapy problems impeding progress toward blood pressure goals. This intervention included medical record review, a structured assessment with the patient, collaboration to achieve goals of therapy, and patient follow-up. The two intervention arms (9 and 24 mo) were identical the first 9 months, and that time frame is the focus of this workload evaluation. Pharmacists completed study encounter forms for every patient encounter and estimated time spent in pre-visit, face-to-face care, and post-visit activities. Among the 390 patients, there were 2811 encounters with pharmacists that involved 3.44 hours/patient for face-to-face care visits plus 1.55 hours/patient for pre-visit and post-visit work. Intensity of work was reflected in interventions to resolve drug therapy problems with patients (43% of encounters) and with physicians (1169 recommendations, of which physicians accepted 1153 [98.6%]), resulting in improvement of patients' blood pressure goals achieved (from 0% at baseline to 43% at 9 months based on the primary study end point).Pharmacists provided extensive interventions to patients with hypertension. This analysis provides a framework for health systems, provider groups, and payers to measure pharmacists' work in value-based financing and population management.
| S-EPMC4838520 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMore than half of all heart disease and stroke are attributable to hypertension, which is associated with approximately 10% of direct medical costs globally. Clinical trial evidence has demonstrated that the benefits of pharmacist intervention, including education, consultation and/or prescribing, can help to reduce blood pressure; a recent Canadian trial found an 18.3 mmHg reduction in systolic blood pressure associated with pharmacist care and prescribing. The objective of this study was to evaluate the economic impact of such an intervention in a Canadian setting.MethodsA Markov cost-effectiveness model was developed to extrapolate potential differences in long-term cardiovascular and renal disease outcomes, using Framingham risk equations and other published risk equations. A range of values for systolic blood pressure reduction was considered (7.6-18.3 mmHg) to reflect the range of potential interventions and available evidence. The model incorporated health outcomes, costs and quality of life to estimate an overall incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Costs considered included direct medical costs as well as the costs associated with implementing the pharmacist intervention strategy.ResultsFor a systolic blood pressure reduction of 18.3 mmHg, the estimated impact is 0.21 fewer cardiovascular events per person and, discounted at 5% per year, 0.3 additional life-years, 0.4 additional quality-adjusted life-years and $6,364 cost savings over a lifetime. Thus, the intervention is economically dominant, being both more effective and cost-saving relative to usual care.DiscussionAcross a range of one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses of key parameters and assumptions, pharmacist intervention remained both effective and cost-saving.ConclusionComprehensive pharmacist care of hypertension, including patient education and prescribing, has the potential to offer both health benefits and cost savings to Canadians and, as such, has important public health implications.
| S-EPMC5415065 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEndometriosis is the most common cause of chronic pelvic pain worldwide. Non-surgical treatments are effective for only 30-50% of women and have a significant side effect burden that leads to high discontinuation rates. Surgery can be effective but is expensive and invasive, and symptoms tend to recur within 5 years. There is early evidence that acupuncture may be effective in treating endometriosis-related chronic pelvic pain, showing clinically significant analgesia. Both levels of inflammation and pain processing have been shown to be altered in women with chronic pelvic pain. Acupuncture has been shown to reduce inflammation and change central pain processing in other conditions, but research on women with endometriosis is currently lacking. The aim of this feasibility study is to provide data on recruitment rates, retention, appropriateness of outcome measures, minimal clinically important difference in numeric rated scales for pain and the potential effect of acupuncture on pain processing and markers of inflammation in endometriosis-related CPP.MethodsWe will include women aged 18-45 years with a diagnosis of endometriosis via laparoscopy in the past 5 years. A total of 30 participants will be recruited and randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive acupuncture or usual care. Women in the acupuncture group will receive two 45-min treatment sessions per week for 8 weeks (total of 16 sessions). Women in the usual care group will continue with their current treatment regimen. The primary feasibility outcomes are recruitment rates, retention rates and the safety and acceptability of the intervention; secondary patient-centred outcomes include a change in 0-10 daily pelvic pain ratings, the Endometriosis Health Profile 30 (EHP-30) and changes in conditioned pain modulation, resting and task-related EEG activity and inflammatory markers. Analyses will be performed blind to group allocation.DiscussionThis is a two-armed, assessor blind, randomised controlled feasibility trial. Data will be compared at baseline and trial completion 8 weeks later. Outcomes from this feasibility study will inform a larger, fully powered clinical trial should the treatment show trends for potential effectiveness.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617000053325 (http://www.ANZCTR.org.au/ACTRN12617000053325.aspx).
| S-EPMC5500924 | biostudies-literature