Résumé
BackgroundJanus kinase inhibitors drugs (JAKi) are novel small molecule medications known to cause abnormalities such as elevations in hepatic transaminases, decreases in neutrophil and lymphocyte counts and elevations in cholesterol and creatinine kinase. Blood monitoring is recommended and dose adjustments are advised if abnormalities arise. Recent warnings by the EMA and MHRA have highlighted the importance of monitoring these medications.Timely review and management of patients on JAKi drugs is difficult to maintain with increasing workload amongst the rheumatology team. A baseline audit (2020) demonstrated that hospital blood monitoring guidelines for JAKi drugs were not being followed. The rheumatology multidisciplinary team met and utilised Quality Improvement methodology including fish and driver diagrams to address this. This led to the creation of a pharmacist-led JAKi blood monitoring clinic.ObjectivesTo establish a pharmacist-led rheumatology blood monitoring clinic for the JAKi drug class in order to: increase patient safety with increased compliance to blood monitoring, save consultant/nurse time, improve communication with primary care on the frequency of blood testing required, increase patient understanding of the importance of blood monitoring with JAKi drugs, reinforce counselling advice such as risk of infections, shingles and thrombosis and promote medication adherence.MethodsThe clinic was established in March 2021. Patients commencing JAKi drugs are referred to the pharmacist-led clinic by the medical team. The pharmacist contacts the patient by phone following delivery of their medication. The patient is counselled on their new medication and dates for blood checks are agreed. A letter is sent to the patient and their GP providing this information. The patient is booked into virtual telephone appointments and bloods are monitored every month for the first 3 months and every 3 months thereafter. Any change or abnormality in blood results are flagged early in the patient's treatment and if necessary, discussed with the consultant. Adjustments are made to the patient's dose if appropriate.ResultsIn order to evaluate the benefit of the pharmacist clinic a re-audit of compliance with blood monitoring (March 2021- September 2022) was carried out alongside a patient satisfaction postal survey (August 2022).A total of 58 patients were sampled in the re-audit. The re-audit found an increase in compliance in blood monitoring since the introduction of the pharmacist clinic. 98% of patients had their full blood count performed at 3 months compared to 56% in audit 1 and 95% of patients had their lipid profile completed at 3 months compared to 15% in audit 1 (Table 1).A patient satisfaction survey (N=62, response rate 48%) found that 28 (93%) patients either agreed or strongly agreed that they were more aware of the importance of attending for regular blood monitoring when prescribed JAKi therapy as a result of the clinic.The pharmacy team made several significant interventions (self-graded Eadon grade 4 and 5). For example by improving medication adherence, detecting haematological abnormalities that required JAKi dose reduction, identifying patients suffering from infection requiring intervention including shingles and Covid-19.Table 1.Comparison of audit results pre (Audit 1) and post (Audit 2) clinic establishmentAudit 1 (N=48)Audit 2 (N=58)Number of patients with full blood count completed at weeks 4, 8 & 1227 (56%)57 (98%)Number of patients with lipid profile completed at week 127 (15%)55 (95%)Number of patients LFTs completed at weeks 4, 8 & 1226 (54%)54 (93%)ConclusionIntroduction of the pharmacist-led clinic has increased patient safety by ensuring compliance with blood monitoring as per hospital guidelines. The clinic has paved the way for improved communication with primary care teams and has provided patients with extra support during their first months on treatment with their JAKi. It has also expanded the role of the rheumatology pharmacy team and saved nursing and medical time.Acknowled ementsI wish to thank the SHSCT Rheumatology team for all their help, support and guidance with this project.Disclosure of InterestsNone Declared.
Résumé
BackgroundSubcutaneous self-injection of methotrexate (SC MTX) is used for the treatment of several inflammatory diseases. All newly initiated patients should be educated and trained in the proper injection technique by their healthcare provider (HCP), with the first injection performed under medical supervision. This training has typically been conducted during face-to-face consultations, however since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic it has been necessary to conduct training remotely due to the cancellation of clinics.ObjectivesTo understand patient-reported experiences and satisfaction with remote SC MTX self-injection training.MethodsA cross-sectional electronic survey was administered between 11 October 2022 and 30 November 2022 to patients at Southern Health and Social Care Trust who had recently been trained via telephone or video conference [VC] on how to self-inject methotrexate using a pre-filled, auto-injector pen. Patients were aged ≥18 with a range of arthritis types, including rheumatoid, psoriatic, polyarticular juvenile idiopathic and chronic reactive inflammatory arthritis. Remote training was delivered by the patient's nurse as per routine practice (independently of this survey). Patients were sent a patient information pack (PIP) prior to the training consultation. During the training, the nurse discussed the process of injecting with the auto-injector pen before virtually supervising the first injection.The survey consisted of 14 questions;topics included experiences and satisfaction with preparation for the HCP appointment, the training consultation itself and post-training experiences and preferences. The responses were analysed descriptively on an item-by-item basis.ResultsIn total 73 patients completed the survey;77% (n=56/73) were female, and 96% (n=70/73) had no prior experience with a SC MTX auto-injector pen. The training was completed by telephone for 92% (n=67/73) of patients and by VC for 8% (n=6/73). 99% (n=72/73) received a PIP in advance of their training consultation and 92% (n=67/73) received this by post. 67% (n=49/73) of patients strongly agreed and 26% (n=19/73) agreed that they felt prepared for the training after receiving the PIP;78% (n=57/73) of patients strongly agreed and 22% (n=16/73) agreed that it was easy to read and understand, whilst 52% (n=38/73) strongly agreed and 32% (n=23/73) agreed that the PIP was helpful and did not require additional instructions before the appointment. 84% (n=61/73) took 15 minutes or less to complete the training with their HCP. None of the participants felt confused or did not understand the training instructions from their HCP, 78% (n=57/73) strongly agreed and 19% (n=14/73) agreed that the remote training was helpful and made them feel more confident to use the injector pen on their own and 97% (n=71/73) did not need to contact their HCP for more training or advice following their appointment. When asked about the main advantages of remote training, 32% (n=23/73) agreed it was more convenient, 25% (n=18/73) agreed that it was time saving and 30% (n=22/73) agreed that not having to attend the hospital was beneficial. 85% (n=62/73) strongly agreed and 14% (n=10/73) agreed that they were satisfied with the remote training provided and 82% (n=60/73) strongly agreed and 18% (n=13/73) agreed that they would recommend the remote training to another patient.ConclusionThese findings provide new insight into patients' experiences with self-injection training when delivered remotely by their HCP. The patient information pack and training consultation were well received as most patients found it helpful, convenient and time saving.References:NIL.AcknowledgementsThis survey was funded by Nordic Pharma. Medical writing support was provided by Angie Bonsu of Open Health and funded by Nordic Pharma.Disclosure of InterestsShannon McCourt Grant/research support from: Nordic Pharma, Mano Andiappan Employee of: Open Health who were paid by Nordic Pharma to support the work described in the .