Evaluation of Home Visits by Multidisciplinary Team with Pharmacist involvement to Manage Drug Related Problems in Diabetic and Hypertensive Patients at Nampong Hospital, Khon Kaen
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: To compare proportion of drug related problems (DRPs) and clinical outcomes among diabetic/hypertensive patients with uncontrolled conditions or DRPs, between before and after home visit, and to assess patient satisfaction towards this service by pharmacist. Methods: A quasi-experimental study was conducted. Pharmacists, together with the multi-disciplinary health team, visited homes of selected diabetic/hypertensive patients with uncontrolled conditions or DRPs, during November 2014 to July 2015. Three visits were made for one patient (month 0, 3, 6). Pharmacist had a role on assessing DRPs, recording blood pressure that had been measured, and recording fasting blood sugar and HbA1C from patient’s personal profiles. Satisfaction was assessed by interview. Results: A total of 90 patients were visited. The majority of them were female (80.0%), having diabetes with hypertension and with/without other co-morbidities (84.4%), having average age at 68.9±7.0 years and being prescribed 5 or more medications (61.1%). The most frequently found DRPs was non-adherence (175 events or 98.3% of total events identified). This problem decreased to 33 events after the home visit (81.1% reduction). The median of HbA1C decreased from 9.9% to 9.0% (P<0.001). Systolic and diastolic blood pressures also decreased from 140 and 90 mmHg to 130 and 85, respectively (P<0.001). Over 65% of patients were satisfied at the high or very high levels on the involvement of pharmacist in home visit, home visit process, pharmacist and treatment outcomes. Conclusion: A home visit by multidisciplinary team with the involvement of a pharmacist can help decrease DRPs and improve clinical outcomes among diabetic and hypertensive patients. The service is satisfied to patients. Therefore, it should be continued.
Article Details
ผลการวิจัยและความคิดเห็นที่ปรากฏในบทความถือเป็นความคิดเห็นและอยู่ในความรับผิดชอบของผู้นิพนธ์ มิใช่ความเห็นหรือความรับผิดชอบของกองบรรณาธิการ หรือคณะเภสัชศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยสงขลานครินทร์ ทั้งนี้ไม่รวมความผิดพลาดอันเกิดจากการพิมพ์ บทความที่ได้รับการเผยแพร่โดยวารสารเภสัชกรรมไทยถือเป็นสิทธิ์ของวารสารฯ
References
2. Couney N. Literature review: The current situation and care model of non-communicable diseases. Nonthaburi: Institute of Medical Research and Technology Assessment, 2014.
3. World Health Organization. The world health report 2008: primary health care-now more than ever. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2008.
4. Ministry of Public Health. A plan for developing health service system 2012-2017 [online]. 2012. [cited Jan 5, 2016]. Available from: plan.hss.moph .go.th/display_document.jsp?id=D00000000637.
5. Leesathapornwongsa P. Action plan of role of primary care pharmacy in universal coverage system [online]. 2011. [cited Jan 5, 2016]. Available from: thaihp.org/index2.php?option=show file&tbl=home&id=697.
6. Primary Care Pharmacy Working Group. Handbook for pharmacists working in primary care units. Bangkok: Office of Health Consumer Protection Plan, 2011.
7. National Health Security Office Area 7 at Khon Kaen. A handbook for developing primary care system in the fiscal Year 2014. Khon Kaen: National Health Security Office Area 7 Khon Kaen, 2014.
8. Ensing HT, Koster ES, Stuijt CCM, van Dooren AA, Bouvy ML. Bridging the gap between hospital and primary care: the pharmacist home visit [commentary]. Int J Clin Pharm 2015; 37: 430–4.
9. Peterson GM, Fitzmaurice KD, Naunton M, Vial JH, Stewart K. Impact of pharmacist-conducted home visits on the outcomes of lipid-lowering drug therapy. J Clin Pharm Ther 2005; 29: 23-30.
10. Thaungsuwan W, Jedsadayanmata A. Effect of pharmacist participation in multidisciplinary team for home visit on blood pressure and drug adherence of stroke patients. Thai Journal of Pharmacy Practice 2016; 8: 48-57.
11. Rachaniyom S, Saramunee K. Family pharmacist’s management of drug related problems for chronic diseases at patient’s in home, Kranuan district health network. Thai Journal of Pharmacy Practice 2016; 8: 169-81.
12. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes-2016. Diabetes Care 2016; 39(suppl 1): S1-S106.
13. James PA, Oparil S, Carter BL, Cushman WC, Dennison-Himmelfarb C, Handler J, et al. Evidence-based guideline for the management of high blood pressure in adults report from the panel members appointed to the eighth joint national committee (JNC 8). JAMA 2014; 311: 507-20.
14. Ningsanon T, Monthakarnkul P, Wanakmanee U, Suansanea T, Chatuporn T, editors. Textbook of family pharmacist. Bangkok: The Association of Hospital Pharmacy (Thailand), 2014.
15. Hepler CD, Strand LM. Opportunities and responsibilities in pharmaceutical care. Am J Hosp Pharm 1990; 47: 533-43.
16. Weerawattanachai C. Factors affecting drug related problems in diabetic inpatients at Rajavithi hospital [master thesis]. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University, 2002.
17. Hajjar ER, Cafiero AC, Hanlon JT. Polypharmacy in elderly patients. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother 2007; 5: 345-51.
18. Mamun K, Lien CTC, Goh-Tan CYE, Ang WST. Polypharmacy and inappropriate medication use in Singapore nursing home. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2004; 33: 49-52.
19. Shrestha R, Pant A, Shakya SS, Shrestha B, Gurung RB, Karmacharya B. A cross-sectional study of medication adherence pattern and factors affecting the adherence in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Kathmandu Univ Med J 2015; 13: 64-70.
20. Chaimay B, Boonrod T, Simla W. Factors affecting herbal uses in primary health care. Public Health Journal of Burapha University 2012; 7: 25-35.
21. Sirithanawuthichai T, Wongsaowasup A, Nopuan W, Kruenak T. The effectiveness of village health volunteers in Muang District, Mahasarakham. Journal of Science and Technology Mahasara- kham University 2010; 29: 439-45.
22. Zermansky AG, Alldred DP, Petty DR, Raynor DK, Freemantle N, Eastaugh J, et al. Clinical medication review by a pharmacist of elderly people living in car homes-randomised controlled trial. Age Ageing 2006; 35: 586-91.
23. Pharmaceutical Society of Australia. Guidelines for pharmacists providing home medicines review (HMR) services. Deakin West: Pharmaceutical Society of Australia Ltd, 2011.
24. Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee. Medicines use review (MUR) [online]. 2014. [cited Apr 29, 2016]. Available from: psnc.org.uk/service s-commissioning/advanced-services/murs/.
25. White L, Klinner C, Carter S. Consumer perspectives of the Australian home medicines review program: benefits and barriers. Res Social Adm Pharm 2012; 8:4-16.
26. Stamler J, Rose G, Stamler R, Elliott P, Dyer A, Marmot M. INTERSALT study findings: public health and medical care implications. Hyper- tension 1989; 14: 570-7.
27. Fiß T, Meinke-Franze C, van den Berg N, Hoffmann W. Effects of a three party healthcare network on the incidence levels of drug related problems. Int J Clin Pharm 2013; 35: 763–71.
