Impact of medication nonadherence and drug-drug interaction testing on the management of primary care patients with polypharmacy: a randomized controlled trial.

IF 7 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Randy E David, Kelsy Gibson Ferrara, Joshua Schrecker, David Paculdo, Steven Johnson, Rhonda Bentley-Lewis, Rebecca Heltsley, John W Peabody
{"title":"Impact of medication nonadherence and drug-drug interaction testing on the management of primary care patients with polypharmacy: a randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Randy E David, Kelsy Gibson Ferrara, Joshua Schrecker, David Paculdo, Steven Johnson, Rhonda Bentley-Lewis, Rebecca Heltsley, John W Peabody","doi":"10.1186/s12916-024-03757-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical management of patients with chronic cardiometabolic disease is complicated by polypharmacy. Consequently, when patients clinically deteriorate, physicians are challenged to distinguish both medication nonadherence and drug-drug interactions (DDI) from chronic disease progression.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this randomized controlled trial, we enrolled U.S. board-certified Primary Care Physicians (PCPs) serving patients with cardiometabolic disease. PCPs were randomized and managed their patients with (intervention), or without (control), a novel chronic disease management test (CDMT) that can detect medication nonadherence and DDIs. Patients' medical records were abstracted at baseline and 3-month follow-up. Primary outcomes were the CDMT's impact on both the PCPs' detection of medication nonadherence and DDI, and the frequency of performing medication nonadherence- and DDI-related clinical actions. Secondary outcomes examined the types of clinical actions performed. Primary and secondary outcomes were analyzed by logistic regression using single variable and clustered multivariable modeling to adjust for similarities in patient characteristics, by PCP practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen intervention and 20 control PCPs shared de-identified records for 126 and 207 patients, respectively. There were no significant demographic differences between the two study arms, among PCPs or patients. At baseline, there was no significant difference between the intervention and control PCPs in the percentage of clinical actions performed for medication nonadherence (P = 0.98) and DDI (P = 0.41). At 3-month follow-up (after CDMT), 69.1% of intervention compared to 20.3% of control patients with medication nonadherence had a related clinical action performed (P < 0.001). Regarding DDI, 37.3% of intervention compared to 0.5% of control patients had a relevant clinical action performed in follow-up (P < 0.001). Across the range of medication nonadherence- and DDI-related actions, the intervention compared to the control PCPs were more likely to adjust the medication regimen (24.1% vs. 9.5%) and document medication nonadherence in the patient chart (31.0% vs. 14.3%) at follow-up (P = 0.04).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although intervention and control PCPs similarly detected and acted upon medication nonadherence and DDI at baseline, intervention PCPs' detection increased significantly after using the CDMT. Also, the clinical actions performed with CDMT support were more clinically rigorous. These outcomes support the clinical utility of CDMT in the management of symptomatic patients with cardiometabolic disease and polypharmacy.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05910684 .</p>","PeriodicalId":9188,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medicine","volume":"22 1","pages":"540"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11571933/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03757-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Clinical management of patients with chronic cardiometabolic disease is complicated by polypharmacy. Consequently, when patients clinically deteriorate, physicians are challenged to distinguish both medication nonadherence and drug-drug interactions (DDI) from chronic disease progression.

Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, we enrolled U.S. board-certified Primary Care Physicians (PCPs) serving patients with cardiometabolic disease. PCPs were randomized and managed their patients with (intervention), or without (control), a novel chronic disease management test (CDMT) that can detect medication nonadherence and DDIs. Patients' medical records were abstracted at baseline and 3-month follow-up. Primary outcomes were the CDMT's impact on both the PCPs' detection of medication nonadherence and DDI, and the frequency of performing medication nonadherence- and DDI-related clinical actions. Secondary outcomes examined the types of clinical actions performed. Primary and secondary outcomes were analyzed by logistic regression using single variable and clustered multivariable modeling to adjust for similarities in patient characteristics, by PCP practice.

Results: Sixteen intervention and 20 control PCPs shared de-identified records for 126 and 207 patients, respectively. There were no significant demographic differences between the two study arms, among PCPs or patients. At baseline, there was no significant difference between the intervention and control PCPs in the percentage of clinical actions performed for medication nonadherence (P = 0.98) and DDI (P = 0.41). At 3-month follow-up (after CDMT), 69.1% of intervention compared to 20.3% of control patients with medication nonadherence had a related clinical action performed (P < 0.001). Regarding DDI, 37.3% of intervention compared to 0.5% of control patients had a relevant clinical action performed in follow-up (P < 0.001). Across the range of medication nonadherence- and DDI-related actions, the intervention compared to the control PCPs were more likely to adjust the medication regimen (24.1% vs. 9.5%) and document medication nonadherence in the patient chart (31.0% vs. 14.3%) at follow-up (P = 0.04).

Conclusions: Although intervention and control PCPs similarly detected and acted upon medication nonadherence and DDI at baseline, intervention PCPs' detection increased significantly after using the CDMT. Also, the clinical actions performed with CDMT support were more clinically rigorous. These outcomes support the clinical utility of CDMT in the management of symptomatic patients with cardiometabolic disease and polypharmacy.

Trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05910684 .

用药不依从性和药物相互作用测试对初级医疗患者多药管理的影响:随机对照试验。
背景:慢性心脏代谢疾病患者的临床管理因多种药物治疗而变得复杂。因此,当患者临床病情恶化时,医生就很难将不遵医嘱用药和药物间相互作用(DDI)与慢性疾病进展区分开来:在这项随机对照试验中,我们招募了为心脏代谢疾病患者服务的美国初级保健医生(PCP)。这些初级保健医生被随机分组,并使用(干预)或不使用(对照)一种新型慢性病管理测试(CDMT)来管理他们的患者,该测试可检测用药不依从性和DDIs。在基线和 3 个月的随访中,对患者的医疗记录进行了摘录。主要结果是 CDMT 对初级保健医生检测用药不依从性和 DDI 的影响,以及执行与用药不依从性和 DDI 相关临床措施的频率。次要结果考察了所采取的临床措施的类型。主要结果和次要结果采用逻辑回归法进行分析,使用单变量和聚类多变量模型来调整初级保健医生做法中患者特征的相似性:16 名干预组和 20 名对照组初级保健医生分别共享了 126 名和 207 名患者的去标识化记录。两个研究组的初级保健医生和患者之间没有明显的人口统计学差异。在基线阶段,干预组和对照组初级保健医生针对不遵医嘱用药(P = 0.98)和DDI(P = 0.41)采取临床行动的比例没有明显差异。在 3 个月的随访中(CDMT 结束后),69.1% 的干预组患者与 20.3% 的对照组患者相比,在用药不依从问题上采取了相关的临床措施(P 结论:干预组与对照组的初级保健医生在用药不依从问题上采取的临床措施相似:虽然干预组和对照组的初级保健医生在基线时对不遵医嘱用药和DDI的发现和处理情况相似,但在使用CDMT后,干预组初级保健医生的发现率显著提高。此外,在 CDMT 支持下采取的临床行动也更加严格。这些结果支持了CDMT在管理有症状的心脏代谢疾病和多药患者方面的临床实用性。试验注册:https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05910684 。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Medicine
BMC Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
1.10%
发文量
435
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medicine is an open access, transparent peer-reviewed general medical journal. It is the flagship journal of the BMC series and publishes outstanding and influential research in various areas including clinical practice, translational medicine, medical and health advances, public health, global health, policy, and general topics of interest to the biomedical and sociomedical professional communities. In addition to research articles, the journal also publishes stimulating debates, reviews, unique forum articles, and concise tutorials. All articles published in BMC Medicine are included in various databases such as Biological Abstracts, BIOSIS, CAS, Citebase, Current contents, DOAJ, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Science Citation Index Expanded, OAIster, SCImago, Scopus, SOCOLAR, and Zetoc.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信