5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Pharmacist’s role in hypertension management: a review of key randomized controlled trials

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A Cluster-Randomized Trial of Blood-Pressure Reduction in Black Barbershops

          BACKGROUND Uncontrolled hypertension is a major problem among non-Hispanic black men, who are underrepresented in pharmacist intervention trials in traditional health care settings. METHODS We enrolled a cohort of 319 black male patrons with systolic blood pressure of 140 mm Hg or more from 52 black-owned barbershops (nontraditional health care setting) in a cluster-randomized trial in which barbershops were assigned to a pharmacist-led intervention (in which barbers encouraged meetings in barbershops with specialty-trained pharmacists who prescribed drug therapy under a collaborative practice agreement with the participants’ doctors) or to an active control approach (in which barbers encouraged lifestyle modification and doctor appointments). The primary outcome was reduction in systolic blood pressure at 6 months. RESULTS At baseline, the mean systolic blood pressure was 152.8 mm Hg in the intervention group and 154.6 mm Hg in the control group. At 6 months, the mean systolic blood pressure fell by 27.0 mm Hg (to 125.8 mm Hg) in the intervention group and by 9.3 mm Hg (to 145.4 mm Hg) in the control group; the mean reduction was 21.6 mm Hg greater with the intervention (95% confidence interval, 14.7 to 28.4; P<0.001). A blood-pressure level of less than 130/80 mm Hg was achieved among 63.6% of the participants in the intervention group versus 11.7% of the participants in the control group (P<0.001). In the intervention group, the rate of cohort retention was 95%, and there were few adverse events (three cases of acute kidney injury). CONCLUSIONS Among black male barbershop patrons with uncontrolled hypertension, health promotion by barbers resulted in larger blood-pressure reduction when coupled with medication management in barbershops by specialty-trained pharmacists. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02321618.)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Improving Blood Pressure Control Through Pharmacist Interventions: A Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

            Background Control of blood pressure (BP) remains a major challenge in primary care. Innovative interventions to improve BP control are therefore needed. By updating and combining data from 2 previous systematic reviews, we assess the effect of pharmacist interventions on BP and identify potential determinants of heterogeneity. Methods and Results Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of pharmacist interventions on BP among outpatients with or without diabetes were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL databases. Weighted mean differences in BP were estimated using random effect models. Prediction intervals (PI) were computed to better express uncertainties in the effect estimates. Thirty‐nine RCTs were included with 14 224 patients. Pharmacist interventions mainly included patient education, feedback to physician, and medication management. Compared with usual care, pharmacist interventions showed greater reduction in systolic BP (−7.6 mm Hg, 95% CI: −9.0 to −6.3; I2 =67%) and diastolic BP (−3.9 mm Hg, 95% CI: −5.1 to −2.8; I2 =83%). The 95% PI ranged from −13.9 to −1.4 mm Hg for systolic BP and from −9.9 to +2.0 mm Hg for diastolic BP. The effect tended to be larger if the intervention was led by the pharmacist and was done at least monthly. Conclusions Pharmacist interventions – alone or in collaboration with other healthcare professionals – improved BP management. Nevertheless, pharmacist interventions had differential effects on BP, from very large to modest or no effect; and determinants of heterogeneity could not be identified. Determining the most efficient, cost‐effective, and least time‐consuming intervention should be addressed with further research.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Long-term Outcomes of the Effects of Home Blood Pressure Telemonitoring and Pharmacist Management on Blood Pressure Among Adults With Uncontrolled Hypertension

              Key Points Question How long does blood pressure remain lower compared with usual care after a 12-month intensive intervention (home telemonitoring and pharmacist management)? Findings In this follow-up of a cluster randomized trial of 326 patients with uncontrolled hypertension, research clinic measurements showed that home blood pressure telemonitoring with pharmacist management lowered blood pressure more than usual care in the first 18 months, but this was not sustained through 54 months. The results from routine clinical measurements suggested significantly lower blood pressure in the intervention group for up to 24 months. Meaning Long-term maintenance strategies may be needed to sustain blood pressure intervention effects over several years.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Human Hypertension
                J Hum Hypertens
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                0950-9240
                1476-5527
                April 1 2020
                Article
                10.1038/s41371-020-0331-7
                32238889
                805d7123-06f5-41c0-a28c-7ca822eb6c60
                © 2020

                http://www.springer.com/tdm

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article