Effects of a pharmacist-led structured medication review in primary care on drug-related problems and hospital admission rates: a randomized controlled trial.

Objective. To determine whether a pharmacist-led medications review in primary care reduces the number of drugs and the number of drug-related problems. Design. Prospective randomized controlled trial. Setting. Liljeholmen Primary Care Centre, Stockholm, Sweden. Subjects. 209 patients aged ≥ 65 years with five or more different medications. Intervention. Patients answered a questionnaire regarding medications. The pharmacist reviewed all medications (prescription, non-prescription, and herbal) regarding recommendations and renal impairment, giving advice to patients and GPs. Each patient met the pharmacist before seeing their GP. Control patients received their usual care. Main outcome measures. Drug-related problems and number of drugs. Secondary outcomes included health care utilization and self-rated health during 12 months of follow-up. Results. No significant difference was seen when comparing change in drug-related problems between the groups. However, a significant decrease in drug-related problems was observed in the intervention group (from 1.73 per patient at baseline to 1.31 at follow-up, p < 0.05). The change in number of drugs was more pronounced in the intervention group (p < 0.046). Intervention group patients were not admitted to hospital on fewer occasions or for fewer days, and there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding utilization of primary care during follow-up. Self-rated health remained unchanged in the intervention group, whereas a drop (p < 0.02) was reported in the control group. This resulted in a significant difference in change in self-rated health between the groups (p < 0.047). Conclusions. The addition of a skilled pharmacist to the primary care team may contribute to reductions in numbers of drugs and maintenance of self-rated health in elderly patients with polypharmacy

Medication persistence to antihypertensive drug treatment – a cross-sectional study of attitudes towards hypertension and medication in persistent and non-persistent patients

Purpose: To study the differences in attitudes towards hypertension and drug treatment between patients persistent and non-persistent to antihypertensive drug treatment. Materials and methods: Cross-sectional study on patients with hypertension treated at 25 primary healthcare centres in Stockholm, Sweden. Questionnaires were sent to the patients 3–12 months after initiation of antihypertensive drug treatment. Persistent medication users, defined as patients with less than 30 days without tablet supply between prescription refills, were compared with non-persistent users by scores from Likert scales: Brief-Illness Perception Questionnaire (Brief IPQ, 0–10) and Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ General, 4–20 and BMQ Specific, 5–25). Results: A total of 711 patients were included in the final analyses (mean age: 62 years; 50% women), of whom 609 (86%) were classified as persistent and 102 (14%) as non-persistent by analyses of their filled prescriptions. Likert scales from the Brief-IPQ showed (all p < 0.02) that persistent patients believed that hypertension was a chronic condition (median 6 vs. 4), that hypertension had less consequences on their life (median 2 vs. 3) and that they can prevent cardiovascular disease by taking antihypertensive treatment (median 7 vs. 5). Likert scales from the BMQ General showed (all p < 0.02) that persistent patients believed that there are potential benefits from taking the treatment (median 16 vs. 16), and they did not believe that the doctors put too much trust in drugs (median 12 vs. 13). Further, results from the BMQ Specific showed that they believed that the antihypertensive drugs are necessary for them in order to maintain or improve their own health (median 17 vs. 16). Conclusions: Primary healthcare providers should further emphasize the chronicity of hypertension diagnosis and the benefits of treatment, to improve the patients’ medication persistence to antihypertensive treatment

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and blood pressure control in patients treated for hypertension: results from the Swedish primary care cardiovascular database

Purpose: The aim of this observational cohort study was to investigate blood pressure level and the possibility to reach target blood pressure during concomitant use of NSAID in hypertensive patients. Materials and methods: From the Swedish primary care cardiovascular database (SPCCD) a cohort of 5463 patients (2007 to 2008) with at least one prescription of NSAID dispensed 6 months prior to the last blood pressure measurement were included. Clinical data were extracted from computerized medical records and linked to the Prescribed Drug Register. Multivariable logistic regression models were used for analysis. Results: Patients with NSAID usage were younger, more often female, with lower creatinine concentrations, more musculoskeletal diagnosis and less cardiovascular comorbidity compared to patients without dispensed NSAID (p < .0001 for all). Regular dose of NSAID was not associated with a decreased possibility to reach target blood pressure. A correlation between the dose of naproxen and an increase in SBP of 7 mm Hg was found. Impairment in renal function did not influence the association between blood pressure control and NSAID (p = .27). Conclusion: In hypertensive patients with concomitant use of NSAID the chance to reach target blood pressure was not impaired. In intermediate and frequent users of NSAID there was a dose response relation with naproxen and SBP which was not found in diclofenac and ibuprofen

The transition from hypertension to hypertensive heart disease and heart failure: the PREFERS Hypertension study

Abstract Aims Despite evidence‐based therapeutic approaches, target blood pressure is obtained by less than half of patients with hypertension. Hypertension is associated with a significant risk for heart failure, in particular heart failure with preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (HFpEF). Although treatment is suggested to be given early after hypertension diagnosis, there is still no evidence‐based medical treatment for HFpEF. We aim to study the underlying mechanisms behind the transition from uncomplicated hypertension to hypertensive heart disease (HHD) and HFpEF. To this end, we will combine cardiac imaging techniques and measurements of circulating fibrosis markers to longitudinally monitor fibrosis development in patients with hypertension. Methods and results In a prospective cohort study, 250 patients with primary hypertension and 60 healthy controls will be characterized at inclusion and after 1 and 6 years. Doppler echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and electrocardiogram will be used for measures of cardiac structure and function over time. Blood biomarkers reflecting myocardial fibrosis, inflammation, and endothelial dysfunction will be analysed. As a proxy for HFpEF development, the primary endpoint is to measure echocardiographic changes in LV function and structure (E/e′ and LAVI) and to relate these measures of LV filling to blood pressure, biomarkers, electrocardiogram, and cardiac magnetic resonance. Conclusions We aim to study the timeline and transition from uncomplicated hypertension to HHD and HFpEF. In order to identify subjects prone to develop HHD and HFpEF, we want to find biomarkers and cardiac imaging variables to explain disease progression. Ultimately, we aim at finding new pathways to prevent HFpEF

Persistence to antihypertensive drug classes : A cohort study using the Swedish Primary Care Cardiovascular Database (SPCCD)

The aim was to study persistence to, and switching between, antihypertensive drug classes and to determine factors associated with poor persistence.This was an observational cohort study. The Swedish Primary Care Cardiovascular Database includes data from medical records, socioeconomic data, filled prescriptions, and hospitalizations from national registries for 75,000 patients with hypertension. Patients included in the study were initiated on antihypertensive drug treatment in primary healthcare in 2006 to 2007. We defined class persistence as the proportion remaining on the initial drug class, including 30 days of gap. Patients with a filled prescription of another antihypertensive drug class after discontinuation of the initial drug, including 30 days of gap, were classified as switchers. Persistence to the various drug classes were compared with that for diuretics.We identified 4997 patients (mean age 60 ± 12 years in men and 63 ± 13 years in women). Out of these, 95 (2%) filled their first prescription for fixed combination therapy and 4902 (98%) for monotherapy, including angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (37%), angiotensin receptor blockers (4%), beta blockers (21%), calcium channel blockers (8%), and diuretics (28%). Persistence to the initial drug class was 57% after 1 year and 43% after 2 years. There were no differences in persistence between diuretics and any of the other antihypertensive drug classes, after adjustment for confounders. Discontinuation (all adjusted) was more common in men (P = 0.004), younger patients (P &lt; 0.001), those with mild systolic blood pressure elevation (P &lt; 0.001), and patients born outside the Nordic countries (P &lt; 0.001). Among 1295 patients who switched drug class after their first prescription, only 21% had a blood pressure recorded before the switch occurred; and out them 69% still had high blood pressures.In conclusion, there appears to be no difference in drug class persistence between diuretics and other major antihypertensive drug classes, when factors known to be associated with poor persistence are taken into account

Person-centred care transitions for people with stroke : study protocol for a feasibility evaluation of codesigned care transition support.

BACKGROUND: Care transitions following stroke should be bridged with collaboration between hospital staff and home rehabilitation teams since well-coordinated transitions can reduce death and disability following a stroke. However, health services are delivered within organisational structures, rather than being based on patients' needs. The aim of this study protocol is to assess the feasibility, operationalised here as fidelity and acceptability, of a codesigned care transition support for people with stroke. METHODS: This study protocol describes the evaluation of a feasibility study using a non-randomised controlled design. The codesigned care transition support includes patient information using videos, leaflets and teach back; what-matters-to me dialogue; a coordinated rehabilitation plan; bridged e-meeting; and a message system for cross-organisational collaboration. Patients with stroke, first time or recurrent, who are to be discharged home from hospital and referred to a rehabilitation team in primary healthcare for continued rehabilitation in the home will be included. One week after stroke, data will be collected on the primary outcome, namely satisfaction with the care transition support, and on the secondary outcome, namely health literacy and medication adherence. Data on use of healthcare will be obtained from a register of healthcare contacts. The outcomes of patients and significant others will be compared with matched controls from other geriatric stroke and acute stroke units, and with matched historic controls from a previous dataset at the intervention and control units. Data on acceptability and fidelity will be assessed through interviews and observations at the intervention units. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approvals have been obtained from the Swedish Ethical Review Authority. The results will be published open-access in peer-reviewed journals. Dissemination also includes presentation at national and international conferences. DISCUSSION: The care transition support addresses a poorly functioning part of care trajectories in current healthcare. The development of this codesigned care transition support has involved people with stroke, significant other, and healthcare professionals. Such involvement has the potential to better identify and reconceptualise problems, and incorporate user experiences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov id: NCT02925871. Date of registration 6 October 2016. PROTOCOL VERSION: 1