Fischer Michael A, Choudhry Niteesh K, Bykov Katsiaryna, Brill Gregory, Bopp Gregory, Wurst Aaron M, Shrank William H
*Department of Medicine, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA †CVS-Health, Woonsocket, RI.
Med Care. 2014 Dec;52(12):1050-4. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000247.
Primary medication nonadherence (PMN) occurs when patients do not fill new prescriptions. Interventions to reduce PMN have not been well described.
To determine whether 2 pharmacy-based interventions could decrease PMN.
Two sequential interventions with a control group were evaluated after completion. The automated intervention began in 2007 and consisted of phone calls to patients on the third and seventh days after a prescription was processed but remained unpurchased. The live intervention began in 2009 and used calls from a pharmacist or technician to patients who still had not picked up their prescriptions after 8 days.
Patients with newly prescribed cardiovascular medications received at CVS community pharmacies. Patients with randomly selected birthdays served as the control population.
Patient abandonment of new prescription, defined as not picking up medications within 30 days of initial processing at the pharmacy.
The automated intervention included 852,612 patients and 1.2 million prescriptions, with a control group of 9282 patients and 13,178 prescriptions. The live intervention included 121,155 patients and 139,502 prescriptions with a control group of 2976 patients and 3407 prescriptions. The groups were balanced by age, sex, and patterns of prior prescription use. For the automated intervention, 4.2% of prescriptions were abandoned in the intervention group and 4.5% in the control group (P>0.1), with no significant differences for any individual classes of medications. The live intervention was used in a group that had not purchased prescriptions after 8 days and thus had much higher PMN. In this setting 36.9% of prescriptions were abandoned in the intervention group and 41.7% in the control group, a difference of 4.8% (P<0.0001). The difference in abandoned prescriptions for antihypertensives was 6.9% (P<0.0001) but for antihyperlipidemics was only 1.4% (P>0.1).
Automated reminder calls had no effect on PMN. Live calls from pharmacists decreased antihypertensive PMN significantly, although many patients still abandoned their prescriptions.
当患者未取新处方药物时,即发生原发性药物治疗不依从(PMN)。减少PMN的干预措施尚未得到充分描述。
确定两种基于药房的干预措施是否能降低PMN。
完成后对有对照组的两项连续干预措施进行评估。自动干预始于2007年,包括在处方处理后第三天和第七天给未购买药物的患者打电话。现场干预始于2009年,由药剂师或技术人员给那些在8天后仍未取药的患者打电话。
在CVS社区药房领取新处方心血管药物的患者。随机选择生日的患者作为对照人群。
患者放弃新处方,定义为在药房初次处理后30天内未取药。
自动干预包括852,612名患者和120万张处方,对照组有9282名患者和13,178张处方。现场干预包括121,155名患者和139,502张处方,对照组有2976名患者和3407张处方。两组在年龄、性别和既往处方使用模式方面均衡。对于自动干预,干预组4.2%的处方被放弃,对照组为4.5%(P>0.1),任何单个药物类别均无显著差异。现场干预用于8天后仍未购买处方药物且PMN高得多的一组患者。在此情况下,干预组36.9%的处方被放弃,对照组为41.7%,差异为4.8%(P<0.0001)。抗高血压药物放弃处方的差异为6.9%(P<0.0001),但抗血脂药物仅为1.4%(P>0.1)。
自动提醒电话对PMN无影响。药剂师的现场电话显著降低了抗高血压药物的PMN,尽管许多患者仍放弃了他们的处方。