Evaluating the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Telepharmaceutical Service Effectiveness: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Telepharmaceutical services (TPS) led by pharmacists, an emerging telehealth service, improve access to medical services and enable patients to receive specialized services in areas with limited resources. With a lower risk of infection and no restriction of isolation measures, TPS showed great potential during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, whether the effectiveness of TPS changed before and after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic remained unclear.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of TPS, compare the effectiveness before and after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, and explore whether the effectiveness changed over time.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase (Ovid), SinoMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and VIP databases for randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effectiveness of TPS. The search covered studies published from inception to October 24, 2023. Eligible studies were conducted before May 5, 2023, when the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the end of the COVID-19 pandemic as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. We used the random-effect model to pool the results and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the certainty of evidence. To explore whether the effectiveness of TPS changed over time, we applied subgroup analyses (studies conducted before December 31, 2019, and studies conducted after January 1, 2020). Using the independent-sample z test, we compared the effectiveness of TPS between the 2 subgroups. When a significant difference arose between them, we conducted a meta-regression analysis to further evaluate the trend of effectiveness over time.

Results: In addition, 40 studies were finally included. Compared with no TPS or usual care (ie, face-to-face pharmaceutical services), TPS probably increased patient medication adherence (risk difference [RD] 0.15, 95% CI 0.09-0.20, moderate certainty), and may reduce the occurrence of adverse events (RD -0.10, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.02, low certainty) and improve the proportion of patients who were satisfied with medication (RD 0.16, 95% CI 0.05-0.26, low certainty). Moderate to high evidence indicated that patients accepting TPS probably achieved superior management of diabetes and hypertension. The effectiveness of TPS was not significantly different before and after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic except for medication adherence (RD 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.21, P=.007), which also increased over time (coefficient=0.01, 95% CI 0.01-0.02, P<.001).

Conclusions: TPS probably improved patient medication adherence and may lead to better satisfaction and the incidence of adverse events. The effectiveness of TPS in general did not change after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42023487476; https://tinyurl.com/3s47enj6.