Daya Ram Parajuli1,2, Sepehr Shakib3,4, Joanne Eng-Frost5,6, Ross A McKinnon7, Gillian E Caughey3,4,8, Dean Whitehead9,10. 1. College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia. dayaram.parajuli@flinders.edu.au. 2. Flinders Rural Health, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Ral Ral Avenue, PO Box 852, Renmark, SA, 5341, Australia. dayaram.parajuli@flinders.edu.au. 3. Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA, Australia. 4. Discipline of Pharmacology, Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia. 5. Department of Medicine, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA, Australia. 6. Department of Cardiology, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, SA, Australia. 7. Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia. 8. Registry of Senior Australians, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA, Australia. 9. College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia. 10. College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies have demonstrated that heart failure (HF) patients who receive direct pharmacist input as part of multidisciplinary care have better clinical outcomes. This study evaluated/compared the difference in prescribing practices of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for chronic HF patients between two multidisciplinary clinics-with and without the direct involvement of a pharmacist. METHODS: A retrospective audit of chronic HF patients, presenting to two multidisciplinary outpatient clinics between March 2005 and January 2017, was performed; a Multidisciplinary Ambulatory Consulting Service (MACS) with an integrated pharmacist model of care and a General Cardiology Heart Failure Service (GCHFS) clinic, without the active involvement of a pharmacist. RESULTS: MACS clinic patients were significantly older (80 vs. 73 years, p < .001), more likely to be female (p < .001), and had significantly higher systolic (123 vs. 112 mmHg, p < .001) and diastolic (67 vs. 60 mmHg, p < .05) blood pressures compared to the GCHF clinic patients. Moreover, the MACS clinic patients showed more polypharmacy and higher prevalence of multiple comorbidities. Both clinics had similar prescribing rates of GDMT and achieved maximal tolerated doses of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in HFrEF. However, HFpEF patients in the MACS clinic were significantly more likely to be prescribed ACEIs/ARBs (70.5% vs. 56.2%, p = 0.0314) than the GCHFS patients. Patients with both HFrEF and HFpEF (MACS clinic) were significantly less likely to be prescribed β-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. Use of digoxin in chronic atrial fibrillation (AF) in MACS clinic was significantly higher in HFrEF patients (82.5% vs. 58.5%, p = 0.004), but the number of people anticoagulated in presence of AF (27.1% vs. 48.0%, p = 0.002) and prescribed diuretics (84.0% vs. 94.5%, p = 0.022) were significantly lower in HFpEF patients attending the MACS clinic. Age, heart rate, systolic blood pressure (SBP), anemia, chronic renal failure, and other comorbidities were the main significant predictors of utilization of GDMT in a multivariate binary logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: Lower prescription rates of some medications in the pharmacist-involved multidisciplinary team were found. Careful consideration of demographic and clinical characteristics, contraindications for use of medications, polypharmacy, and underlying comorbidities is necessary to achieve best practice.
BACKGROUND: Studies have demonstrated that heart failure (HF) patients who receive direct pharmacist input as part of multidisciplinary care have better clinical outcomes. This study evaluated/compared the difference in prescribing practices of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for chronic HF patients between two multidisciplinary clinics-with and without the direct involvement of a pharmacist. METHODS: A retrospective audit of chronic HF patients, presenting to two multidisciplinary outpatient clinics between March 2005 and January 2017, was performed; a Multidisciplinary Ambulatory Consulting Service (MACS) with an integrated pharmacist model of care and a General Cardiology Heart Failure Service (GCHFS) clinic, without the active involvement of a pharmacist. RESULTS: MACS clinic patients were significantly older (80 vs. 73 years, p < .001), more likely to be female (p < .001), and had significantly higher systolic (123 vs. 112 mmHg, p < .001) and diastolic (67 vs. 60 mmHg, p < .05) blood pressures compared to the GCHF clinic patients. Moreover, the MACS clinic patients showed more polypharmacy and higher prevalence of multiple comorbidities. Both clinics had similar prescribing rates of GDMT and achieved maximal tolerated doses of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in HFrEF. However, HFpEF patients in the MACS clinic were significantly more likely to be prescribed ACEIs/ARBs (70.5% vs. 56.2%, p = 0.0314) than the GCHFS patients. Patients with both HFrEF and HFpEF (MACS clinic) were significantly less likely to be prescribed β-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. Use of digoxin in chronic atrial fibrillation (AF) in MACS clinic was significantly higher in HFrEF patients (82.5% vs. 58.5%, p = 0.004), but the number of people anticoagulated in presence of AF (27.1% vs. 48.0%, p = 0.002) and prescribed diuretics (84.0% vs. 94.5%, p = 0.022) were significantly lower in HFpEF patients attending the MACS clinic. Age, heart rate, systolic blood pressure (SBP), anemia, chronic renal failure, and other comorbidities were the main significant predictors of utilization of GDMT in a multivariate binary logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: Lower prescription rates of some medications in the pharmacist-involved multidisciplinary team were found. Careful consideration of demographic and clinical characteristics, contraindications for use of medications, polypharmacy, and underlying comorbidities is necessary to achieve best practice.
Authors: Emily B Levitan; Melissa K Van Dyke; Matthew Shane Loop; Ronan O'Beirne; Monika M Safford Journal: Cardiovasc Drugs Ther Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 3.727
Authors: Brett D Atwater; David Dai; Nancy M Allen-Lapointe; Sana M Al-Khatib; Louise O Zimmer; Gillian D Sanders; Eric D Peterson Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2012-10-16 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Inés Gómez-Otero; Andreu Ferrero-Gregori; Alfonso Varela Román; José Seijas Amigo; Domingo A Pascual-Figal; Juan Delgado Jiménez; Jesús Álvarez-García; Francisco Fernández-Avilés; Fernando Worner Diz; Luis Alonso-Pulpón; Juan Cinca; José Ramón Gónzalez-Juanatey Journal: Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed) Date: 2016-12-21
Authors: W Ouwerkerk; A A Voors; S D Anker; J G Cleland; K Dickstein; G Filippatos; P van der Harst; H L Hillege; C C Lang; J M Ter Maaten; L L Ng; P Ponikowski; N J Samani; D J van Veldhuisen; F Zannad; M Metra; A H Zwinderman Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2017-06-21 Impact factor: 29.983