Search

Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate how the prescribing knowledge and skills of junior doctors in the Netherlands and Belgium develop in the year after graduation. We also analysed differences in knowledge and skills between surgical and nonsurgical junior doctors. Methods: This international, multicentre (n = 11), longitudinal study analysed the learning curves of junior doctors working in various specialties via three validated assessments at about the time of graduation, and 6 months and 1 year after graduation. Each assessment contained 35 multiple choice questions (MCQs) on medication safety (passing grade ≥85%) and three clinical scenarios. Results: In total, 556 junior doctors participated, 326 (58.6%) of whom completed the MCQs and 325 (58.5%) the clinical case scenarios of all three assessments. Mean prescribing knowledge was stable in the year after graduation, with 69% (SD 13) correctly answering questions at assessment 1 and 71% (SD 14) at assessment 3, whereas prescribing skills decreased: 63% of treatment plans were considered adequate at assessment 1 but only 40% at assessment 3 (P <.001). While nonsurgical doctors had similar learning curves for knowledge and skills as surgical doctors (P =.53 and P =.56 respectively), their overall level was higher at all three assessments (all P <.05). Conclusion: These results show that junior doctors' prescribing knowledge and skills did not improve while they were working in clinical practice. Moreover, their level was under the predefined passing grade. As this might adversely affect patient safety, educational interventions should be introduced to improve the prescribing competence of junior doctors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adherence to antihypertensive drugs (AHDs) is crucial for controlling blood pressure (BP). We aimed to determine the effectiveness of measuring AHD concentrations using a dried blood spot (DBS) sampling method to identify nonadherence, combined with personalized feedback, in reducing resistant hypertension., Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial (RHYME-RCT, ICTRP NTR6914) in patients with established resistant hypertension. Patients were randomized to receive either an intervention with standard of care (SoC) or SoC alone. SoC consisted of BP measurement and DBS sampling at baseline, 3 months (t3), 6 months (t6), and 12 months (t12); AHD concentrations were measured but not reported in this arm. In the intervention arm, results on AHD concentrations were discussed during a personalized feedback conversation at baseline and t3. Study endpoints included the proportion of patients with RH and AHD adherence at t12., Results: Forty-nine patients were randomized to receive the intervention+SoC, and 51 were randomized to receive SoC alone. The proportion of adherent patients improved from 70.0 to 92.5% in the intervention+SoC arm ( P  = 0.008, n  = 40) and remained the same in the SoC arm (71.4%, n  = 42). The difference in adherence between the arms was statistically significant ( P  = 0.014). The prevalence of resistant hypertension decreased to 75.0% in the intervention+SoC arm ( P  < 0.001, n  = 40) and 59.5% in the SoC arm ( P  < 0.001, n  = 42) at t12; the difference between the arms was statistically nonsignificant ( P  = 0.14)., Conclusion: Personalized feedback conversations based on DBS-derived AHD concentrations improved AHD adherence but did not reduce the prevalence of RH., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: Nonadherence to antihypertensive drugs (AHDs) is a major contributor to pseudo-resistant hypertension. The primary objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of nonadherence to AHDs among patients visiting the nephrology and vascular outpatient clinics., Methods: Patients were eligible to participate in this prospective observational study if they used at least two AHDs that could be measured with a validated UHPLC-MS/MS method and had an office blood pressure at least 140 and/or at least 90 mmHg. For resistant hypertension, included patients had to use at least three AHDs including a diuretic or four AHDs. Adherence was assessed by measuring drug concentrations in blood. The complete absence of drug in blood was defined as nonadherence. A posthoc analysis was performed to determine the influence of a having a kidney transplant on the adherence rates., Results: One hundred and forty-two patients were included of whom 66 patients fulfilled the definition of resistant hypertension. The overall adherence rate to AHDs was 78.2% ( n  = 111 patients), with the highest adherence rate for irbesartan (100%, n  = 9) and lowest adherence rate for bumetanide ( n  = 69%, n  = 13). In further analysis, only kidney transplantation could be identified as an important factor for adherence (adjusted odds ratio = 3.35; 95% confidence interval 1.23-9.09). A posthoc analysis showed that patients with a kidney transplant were more likely to be adherent to AHDs (non-KT cohort 64.0% vs. KT-cohort 85.7%, χ 2 (2) = 10.34, P  = 0.006)., Conclusion: The adherence rate to AHDs in hypertensive patients was high (78.2%) and even higher after a kidney transplant (85.7%). Furthermore, patients after kidney transplant had a lower risk of being nonadherent to AHDs., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Nonadherence to antihypertensive drugs is an important reason for not reaching blood pressure goals. A possible method to improve nonadherence involves three essential steps: identification of nonadherent patients (step 1), determination of underlying causes (step 2) and a personalized solution (step 3). We present three unique cases to show the importance and difficulties of this three-step approach. Patients participated in a randomized controlled trial to improve nonadherence to antihypertensive drugs (RHYME-RCT, Dutch Trial Register NL6736). Drug level measurements were used to identify nonadherence to antihypertensive drugs and communication on drug levels was supported by a tailored feedback tool in these patients. These cases showed that a three-step approach of identifying nonadherence and determination of the underlying cause, can lead to a personalized solution to improve therapy even when nonadherence was excluded. Open communication with patients remains an essential part when improving nonadherence., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)