Back to Search Start Over

A cluster randomized trial to evaluate a centralized remote clinical pharmacy service in large, health system primary care clinics.

Authors :
Kennelty K
Coffey CS
Ardery G
Uribe L
Yankey J
Ecklund D
James PA
Vander Weg MW
Chrischilles EA
Christensen AJ
Polgreen LA
Gryzlak B
Carter BL
Source :
Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP [J Am Coll Clin Pharm] 2021 Oct; Vol. 4 (10), pp. 1287-1299. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Jul 02.
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

Background: We developed a remote cardiovascular risk service (CVRS) managed by clinical pharmacists to support primary care teams. The purpose of this study was to examine whether the CVRS could improve guideline adherence in primary care clinics with diverse geographic and patient characteristics.<br />Methods: This study was a cluster-randomized trial initiated in 20 primary care clinics across the US. Clinics were stratified as high or low minority and then randomized to receive the intervention or maintain usual care for 12 months. The primary outcome was adherence to relevant The Guideline Advantage (TGA) criteria met. TGA is a compilation of criteria from practice guidelines intended to improve the quality of primary care. Post-hoc outcomes included changes in individual TGA measures.<br />Results: A total of 401 study subjects were included in the analysis. Mean TGA scores remained the same in the intervention group (n=193, 0.72) and slightly decreased in the usual care group (n=208, 0.67 to 0.66) over the 12-month study period. There was no significant difference between the mean TGA scores in intervention and usual care groups for the overall population at 12 months (0.72 versus 0.66 respectively, p=0.10). For under-represented minority subjects, there was no significant difference between TGA scores at 12 months (n=186; 0.70 versus 0.67, respectively, p=0.50). In a post-hoc analysis of subjects uncontrolled at baseline, there was a significant improvement in systolic BP at 12 months in the intervention group versus usual care (model-based difference of -8.03mmHg, p=0.03).<br />Conclusions: Improvements in individual TGA measures were limited, in part, due to higher than expected baseline TGA scores. Future studies of this model should focus on patients with uncontrolled conditions at high risk for cardiovascular events.<br />Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02215408; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02215408?id=NCT02215408.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
2574-9870
Volume :
4
Issue :
10
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
37265855
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.1497