Dataset Information

Benefit of a pharmacist-led intervention for medication management of renal transplant patients: a controlled before-and-after study.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

To assess the effect of a pharmacist-led intervention, using Barrows cards method, during the first year after renal transplantation, on patient knowledge about their treatment, medication adherence and exposure to treatment in a French cohort.

Methods

We conducted a before-and-after comparative study between two groups of patients: those who benefited from a complementary pharmacist-led intervention [intervention group (IG), n = 44] versus those who did not [control group (CG), n = 48]. The pharmacist-led intervention consisted of a behavioral and educational interview at the first visit (visit 1). The intervention was assessed 4 months later at the second visit (visit 2), using the following endpoints: treatment knowledge, medication adherence [proportion of days covered (PDC) by immunosuppressive therapy] and tacrolimus exposure.

Results

At visit 2, IG patients achieved a significantly higher knowledge score than CG patients (83.3% versus 72.2%, p = 0.001). We did not find any differences in treatment exposure or medication adherence; however, the intervention tended to reduce the proportion of non-adherent patients with low knowledge scores. Using the PDC by immunosuppressive therapy, we identified 10 non-adherent patients (10.9%) at visit 1 and six at visit 2.

Conclusions

Our intervention showed a positive effect on patient knowledge about their treatment. However, our results did not show any improvement in overall medication adherence, which was likely to be because of the initially high level of adherence in our study population. Nevertheless, the intervention appears to have improved adherence in non-adherent patients with low knowledge scores.

SUBMITTER: Chambord J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8024450 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Patient adherence to cardioprotective medications improves outcomes of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but few adherence-enhancing interventions have been tested in low-income and middle-income countries. Objectives: We aimed to assess whether a pharmacist-led intervention enhances medication adherence in patients with ACS and reduces mortality and hospital readmission. Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial in Vietnam. Patients with ACS were recruited, randomized to the intervention or usual care prior to discharge, and followed 3 months after discharge. Intervention patients received educational and behavioral interventions by a pharmacist. Primary outcome was the proportion of adherent patients 1 month after discharge. Adherence was a combined measure of self-reported adherence (the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale) and obtaining repeat prescriptions on time. Secondary outcomes were (1) the proportion of patients adherent to medication; (2) rates of mortality and hospital readmission; and (3) change in quality of life from baseline assessed with the European Quality of Life Questionnaire - 5 Dimensions - 3 Levels at 3 months after discharge. Logistic regression was used to analyze data. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02787941). Results: Overall, 166 patients (87 control, 79 intervention) were included (mean age 61.2 years, 73% male). In the analysis excluding patients from the intervention group who did not receive the intervention and excluding all patients who withdrew, were lost to follow-up, died or were readmitted to hospital, a greater proportion of patients were adherent in the intervention compared with the control at 1 month (90.0% vs. 76.5%; adjusted OR = 2.77; 95% CI, 1.01-7.62) and at 3 months after discharge (90.2% vs. 77.0%; adjusted OR = 3.68; 95% CI, 1.14-11.88). There was no significant difference in median change of EQ-5D-3L index values between intervention and control [0.000 (0.000; 0.275) vs. 0.234 (0.000; 0.379); p = 0.081]. Rates of mortality, readmission, or both were 0.8, 10.3, or 11.1%, respectively; with no significant differences between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Pharmacist-led interventions increased patient adherence to medication regimens by over 13% in the first 3 months after ACS hospital discharge, but not quality of life, mortality and readmission. These results are promising but should be tested in other settings prior to broader dissemination.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Medication errors, adverse drug events, and nonadherence lead to increased health care utilization and increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes, including graft loss, in solid organ transplant recipients. Veterans living with organ transplants represent a population that is at substantial risk for medication safety events and fragmented care coordination issues. To improve medication safety and long-term clinical outcomes in veteran transplant patients, interventions should address interorganizational system failures and provider-level and patient-level factors. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to measure the clinical and economic effectiveness of a pharmacist-led, technology-enabled intervention, compared with usual care, in veteran organ transplant recipients. METHODS:This is a 24-month prospective, parallel-arm, cluster-randomized, controlled multicenter study. The pharmacist-led intervention uses an innovative dashboard system to improve medication safety and health outcomes, compared with usual posttransplant care. Pharmacists at 10 study sites will be consented into this study before undergoing randomization, and 5 sites will then be randomized to each study arm. Approximately, 1600 veteran transplant patients will be included in the assessment of the primary outcome across the 10 sites. RESULTS:This study is ongoing. Institutional review board approval was received in October 2018 and the study opened in March 2019. To date there are no findings from this study, as the delivery of the intervention is scheduled to occur over a 24-month period. The first results are expected to be submitted for publication in August 2021. CONCLUSIONS:With this report, we describe the study design, methods, and outcome measures that will be used in this ongoing clinical trial. Successful completion of the Improving Transplant Medication Safety through a Technology and Pharmacist Intervention study will provide empirical evidence of the effectiveness of a feasible and scalable technology-enabled intervention on improving medication safety and costs. CLINICAL TRIAL:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03860818; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03860818. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):PRR1-10.2196/13821.

Project description:BackgroundMedication errors are common in primary care and are associated with considerable risk of patient harm. We tested whether a pharmacist-led, information technology-based intervention was more effective than simple feedback in reducing the number of patients at risk of measures related to hazardous prescribing and inadequate blood-test monitoring of medicines 6 months after the intervention.MethodsIn this pragmatic, cluster randomised trial general practices in the UK were stratified by research site and list size, and randomly assigned by a web-based randomisation service in block sizes of two or four to one of two groups. The practices were allocated to either computer-generated simple feedback for at-risk patients (control) or a pharmacist-led information technology intervention (PINCER), composed of feedback, educational outreach, and dedicated support. The allocation was masked to researchers and statisticians involved in processing and analysing the data. The allocation was not masked to general practices, pharmacists, patients, or researchers who visited practices to extract data. [corrected]. Primary outcomes were the proportions of patients at 6 months after the intervention who had had any of three clinically important errors: non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) prescribed to those with a history of peptic ulcer without co-prescription of a proton-pump inhibitor; β blockers prescribed to those with a history of asthma; long-term prescription of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or loop diuretics to those 75 years or older without assessment of urea and electrolytes in the preceding 15 months. The cost per error avoided was estimated by incremental cost-effectiveness analysis. This study is registered with Controlled-Trials.com, number ISRCTN21785299.Findings72 general practices with a combined list size of 480,942 patients were randomised. At 6 months' follow-up, patients in the PINCER group were significantly less likely to have been prescribed a non-selective NSAID if they had a history of peptic ulcer without gastroprotection (OR 0·58, 95% CI 0·38-0·89); a β blocker if they had asthma (0·73, 0·58-0·91); or an ACE inhibitor or loop diuretic without appropriate monitoring (0·51, 0·34-0·78). PINCER has a 95% probability of being cost effective if the decision-maker's ceiling willingness to pay reaches £75 per error avoided at 6 months.InterpretationThe PINCER intervention is an effective method for reducing a range of medication errors in general practices with computerised clinical records.FundingPatient Safety Research Portfolio, Department of Health, England.

Project description:BackgroundIn this study, an intensive review of pharmaceutical care for elderly patients was conducted in a Veterans Administration nursing home in Taiwan and its effects were evaluated.MethodsOne hundred participants were enrolled in this randomized controlled study with even distribution. The inclusion criteria were age 65 years or older, prescriptions for at least 5 oral medicines daily, and ≥2 chronic diseases, for the period May 2013 to October 2014. Subjects were excluded if they had previously been included in an intensive medication review conducted by a pharmacist. The primary outcomes were numbers of drugs prescribed, potential inappropriate medications, and numbers of drug-related problems. The secondary outcomes were self-reported medical usages, measurements of quality of life, results of a satisfaction survey, and health status.ResultsA total of 80 cases (42 in the intervention group with medication reconciliation and 38 in the control group without medication reconciliation) completed the study. Baseline characteristics were not statistically different between the 2 groups. The overall prevalence of potential inappropriate medication was 74.3%. There were no differences between the 2 groups, with the exception of "medical problems," which showed a significantly higher prevalence in the intervention group (P < .05). The intervention group reported greater satisfaction regarding pharmacist visits and medication compliance (P < .01). The mean number of drug-related problems was significantly lower after the intervention (P < .01).ConclusionIn this study, the intensive review of the elderly patients' medications revealed that the only significant effect of pharmaceutical care was on "all outcomes." A possible reason for this is the rather advanced ages of some patients who needed a considerable number of medications to treat several chronic diseases. Another reason may be the small sample size. However, participants who received the pharmacist intervention did have higher satisfaction with medication reconciliation and fewer drug-related problems.

Project description:Introduction: Non-adherence to medication is a complex health care problem. In spite of substantial efforts, up till now little progress has been made to effectively tackle the problem with adherence-enhancing interventions. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of a patient-tailored, pharmacist-led and theory-driven intervention program aimed to enhance self-reported adherence to antihypertensive medication. Materials and Methods: A parallel-group randomized controlled trial in 20 community pharmacies with nine months follow-up was conducted. Patients (45-75 years) using antihypertensive medication and considered non-adherent based on both pharmacy dispensing data and a self-report questionnaire were eligible to participate. The intervention program consisted of two consultations with the pharmacist to identify participants' barriers to adhere to medication and to counsel participants in overcoming these barriers. The primary outcome was self-reported medication adherence. Secondary outcomes were beliefs about medicines, illness perceptions, quality of life and blood pressure. Mixed-model and generalized estimating equation (GEE) analyses were used to assess overall effects of the intervention program and effects per time point. Results: 170 patients were included. No significant differences between intervention and control groups were found in self-reported adherence, quality of life, illness perceptions, beliefs about medicines (concern scale), and blood pressure. After nine months, intervention participants had significantly stronger beliefs about the necessity of using their medicines as compared to control participants (mean difference 1.25 [95% CI: 0.27 to 2.24], p = 0.012). Discussion: We do not recommend to implement the intervention program in the current form for this study population. Future studies should focus on how to select eligible patient groups with appropriate measures in order to effectively target adherence-enhancing interventions. Trial Register: NTR5017 http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=5017.