We have located links that may give you full text access.
Pharmacist-led, checklist intervention did not improve adherence in ambulatory patients starting/resuming DOACs.
Journal of the American Pharmacists Association : JAPhA 2023 Februrary 28
BACKGROUND: High adherence to direct-acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC) is critical to treat and prevent thromboembolic disease. The Anticoagulation Forum recently endorsed a checklist (DOAC checklist) that recommends care processes that may improve adherence.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine whether checklist-driven care from a clinical pharmacist improves adherence in ambulatory patients starting a DOAC or resuming it after a setback.
METHODS: This study included ambulatory patients starting a DOAC or resuming it after setback (thromboembolic event or bleeding) in an ambulatory setting. Settings included office, emergency department, and short-stay hospital visit. Following the DOAC checklist, a clinical pharmacist verified DOAC appropriateness, instructed dose de-escalation, educated through 3 tele-visits, fielded hotline calls, and handed off to a continuity provider after 3 months. Intervention and control patients received coupons and help with completing manufacturer-based medication assistance applications. Using pharmacy dispense records, our group measured medication possession ratio (MPR) at 90 days (primary outcome) and proportion of days covered (PDC) at 90 days and MPR and PDC at 180 and 365 days (secondary outcomes). Given skewing, our team analyzed adherence as < 80%, 80%-89%, and 90% or more and conducted ordered logistic regression.
RESULTS: Of 561 patients randomized, 427 had sufficient records to analyze. Adherence was high with only 41 patients (9.6%) having MPR less than 80% at 90 days. There was no difference in adherence between intervention and control patients for primary outcome (odds ratio 0.94 [95% CI 0.60-1.49]) or secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Our checklist-driven intervention did not appreciably improve adherence beyond that seen in control patients treated with usual care (plus coupons and medication assistance we provided to all patients) in ambulatory patients starting or resuming DOACs, although it should be noted that high levels of adherence in both study groups were noted. Given high adherence, reassessing the DOAC checklist outside of a traditional trial may be more fruitful.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine whether checklist-driven care from a clinical pharmacist improves adherence in ambulatory patients starting a DOAC or resuming it after a setback.
METHODS: This study included ambulatory patients starting a DOAC or resuming it after setback (thromboembolic event or bleeding) in an ambulatory setting. Settings included office, emergency department, and short-stay hospital visit. Following the DOAC checklist, a clinical pharmacist verified DOAC appropriateness, instructed dose de-escalation, educated through 3 tele-visits, fielded hotline calls, and handed off to a continuity provider after 3 months. Intervention and control patients received coupons and help with completing manufacturer-based medication assistance applications. Using pharmacy dispense records, our group measured medication possession ratio (MPR) at 90 days (primary outcome) and proportion of days covered (PDC) at 90 days and MPR and PDC at 180 and 365 days (secondary outcomes). Given skewing, our team analyzed adherence as < 80%, 80%-89%, and 90% or more and conducted ordered logistic regression.
RESULTS: Of 561 patients randomized, 427 had sufficient records to analyze. Adherence was high with only 41 patients (9.6%) having MPR less than 80% at 90 days. There was no difference in adherence between intervention and control patients for primary outcome (odds ratio 0.94 [95% CI 0.60-1.49]) or secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Our checklist-driven intervention did not appreciably improve adherence beyond that seen in control patients treated with usual care (plus coupons and medication assistance we provided to all patients) in ambulatory patients starting or resuming DOACs, although it should be noted that high levels of adherence in both study groups were noted. Given high adherence, reassessing the DOAC checklist outside of a traditional trial may be more fruitful.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app