BACKGROUND: Complete control of emesis during chemotherapy remains to be achieved. This could be improved by increasing adherence to medicines and recommendations. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyse the effects of pharmaceutical care on the incidence of delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in adult cancer outpatients. METHOD: This is a longitudinal prospective intervention study. Patients included were those who received a new cancer intravenous treatment. We compared complete response (no vomiting and no rescue treatment) and the incidence of nausea in the control group (CG) and in the intervention group (IG), as well as patients' adherence. Pharmaceutical intervention consisted of: reviewing the antiemetic protocol and giving some recommendations to the patients. RESULTS: 102 patients were studied. In the delayed phase complete response was achieved in 84.8 % of the patients in the IG, compared with 69.6 % in the control group [absolute risk reduction (ARR), 15.2 %; p = 0.144]. Regarding absence of vomiting, the difference was higher (71.0 CG vs 97.0 % IG, ARR, 26.0%; p = 0.002). Absence of delayed nausea were also better in the IG (61 vs. 52 %). Compliant patients increased from 59 to 76 %. CONCLUSION: The intervention of a pharmacist reduced the incidence of delayed CINV and improved medication adherence.
BACKGROUND: Complete control of emesis during chemotherapy remains to be achieved. This could be improved by increasing adherence to medicines and recommendations. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyse the effects of pharmaceutical care on the incidence of delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in adult cancer outpatients. METHOD: This is a longitudinal prospective intervention study. Patients included were those who received a new cancer intravenous treatment. We compared complete response (no vomiting and no rescue treatment) and the incidence of nausea in the control group (CG) and in the intervention group (IG), as well as patients' adherence. Pharmaceutical intervention consisted of: reviewing the antiemetic protocol and giving some recommendations to the patients. RESULTS: 102 patients were studied. In the delayed phase complete response was achieved in 84.8 % of the patients in the IG, compared with 69.6 % in the control group [absolute risk reduction (ARR), 15.2 %; p = 0.144]. Regarding absence of vomiting, the difference was higher (71.0 CG vs 97.0 % IG, ARR, 26.0%; p = 0.002). Absence of delayed nausea were also better in the IG (61 vs. 52 %). Compliant patients increased from 59 to 76 %. CONCLUSION: The intervention of a pharmacist reduced the incidence of delayed CINV and improved medication adherence.
Authors: Mark G Kris; Paul J Hesketh; Mark R Somerfield; Petra Feyer; Rebecca Clark-Snow; James M Koeller; Gary R Morrow; Lawrence W Chinnery; Maurice J Chesney; Richard J Gralla; Steven M Grunberg Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-22 Impact factor: 44.544