Pharmacy Department, Hospital General Universitario de Elda, Alicante, Spain.
Pharmacy and Technology Area, University Miguel Hernandez, Crtra Alicante-Valencia, km81, Alicante, 03550, Spain; CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health, CIBERESP, Spain.
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2022 May;18(5):2748-2756. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2021.06.023. Epub 2021 Jul 2.
Polipharmacy has been identified as a contributing factor to the high hospital readmission rates of heart failure (HF) patients. Nevertheless, there limited evidence on pharmacist-led intervention on the reduction of inappropriate medication use in patients.
To summarize the available evidence resulting from interventions, led by pharmacists (alone or as part of a professional team), aimed at reducing inappropriate medications in patients with heart failure.
A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE through PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Scopus until June 2020. We reviewed both randomized controlled trials and non-randomized intervention studies.The quality of evidence was assessed in accordance with the modified Cochrane Collaboration tool to assess risk of bias for randomized controlled trials. The search and extraction process followed PRISMA guidelines.
Of the 4367 records screening, 9 studies were included in the analysis. In 4 (44.4%) studies, the intervention was carried out by a pharmacist working together with a physician; in 4 (44.4%) the intervention was carried out by a pharmacist alone, and in 1 study, the pharmacist collaborated with a nurse. Only 5 (55.5%) studies described the utilization of guidelines or recommendations to carry out the deprescription, and 3 of these showed improved clinical outcomes in the interventional group compared to the control group. The other studies (4, 44.4%) did not follow a specific guideline or recommendation to evaluate the appropriateness of medication, and none of them showed statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes between interventional and control groups.
Only those studies where pharmacists evaluated the appropriateness of treatment to specific HF guidelines showed significant differences in patients' clinical outcomes. The development and validation of a specific tool to evaluate medication appropriateness in patients with HF, could contribute to the improvement of patient health.
多药治疗已被确定为心力衰竭(HF)患者住院率高的一个因素。然而,关于药师主导的干预措施减少患者不合理用药的证据有限。
总结由药师(单独或作为专业团队的一部分)主导的干预措施可减少心力衰竭患者不合理用药的现有证据。
通过 MEDLINE 下的 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆和 Scopus 进行系统评价,检索时间截至 2020 年 6 月。我们回顾了随机对照试验和非随机干预研究。根据改良 Cochrane 协作风险偏倚评估工具评估证据质量。搜索和提取过程遵循 PRISMA 指南。
在 4367 条筛选记录中,有 9 项研究纳入分析。在 4 项(44.4%)研究中,干预措施由一名药师与一名医生共同进行;在 4 项(44.4%)研究中,干预措施由一名药师单独进行,在 1 项研究中,药师与一名护士合作。只有 5 项(55.5%)研究描述了利用指南或建议进行去处方的情况,其中 3 项研究显示干预组的临床结局优于对照组。其他研究(4,44.4%)没有遵循特定的指南或建议来评估药物的适宜性,而且它们之间在干预组和对照组之间的临床结局没有统计学上的显著差异。
只有那些药师根据特定的 HF 指南评估治疗适宜性的研究显示了患者临床结局的显著差异。开发和验证一种特定的工具来评估 HF 患者的药物适宜性,可能有助于改善患者的健康状况。