Screening premorbid metabolic syndrome in community pharmacies: a cross-sectional descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Premorbid metabolic syndrome (pre-MetS) is a cluster of cardiometabolic risk factors characterised by central obesity, elevated fasting glucose, atherogenic dyslipidaemia and hypertension without established cardiovascular disease or diabetes. Community pharmacies are in an excellent position to develop screening programmes because of their direct contact with the population.The main aim of the study was to determine the prevalence of pre-MetS in people who visited community pharmacies for measurement of any of its five risk factors to detect the presence of other risk factors. The secondary aims were to study the presence of other cardiovascular risk factors and determine patients' cardiovascular risk. METHODS: Cross-sectional, descriptive, multicentre study. Patients meeting selection criteria aged between 18 and 65 years who visited participating community pharmacies to check any of five pre-MetS diagnostic factors were included.The study involved 23 community pharmacies in Catalonia (Spain). Detection criteria for pre-MetS were based on the WHO proposal following IDF and AHA/NHBI consensus. Cardiovascular risk (CVR) was calculated by Regicor and Score methods. Other variables studied were smoking habit, physical activity, body mass index (BMI), and pharmacological treatment of dyslipidemia and hypertension. The data were collected and analysed with the SPSS programme. Comparisons of variables were carried out using the Student's T-test, Chi-Squared test or ANOVA test. Level of significance was 5% (0.05). RESULTS: The overall prevalence of pre-MetS was 21.9% [95% CI 18.7-25.2]. It was more prevalent in men, 25.5% [95% CI 22.1-28.9], than in women, 18.6% [95% CI 15.5-21.7], and distribution increased with age. The most common risk factors were high blood pressure and abdominal obesity. About 70% of people with pre-MetS were sedentary and over 85% had a BMI ≥25 Kg/m2. Some 22.4% had two metabolic criteria and 27.2% of patients with pre-MetS had no previous diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of pre-MetS in our study (21.9%) was similar to that found in other studies carried out in Primary Care in Spain. The results of this study confirm emergent cardiometabolic risk factors such as hypertension, obesity and physical inactivity.Our study highlights the strategic role of the community pharmacy in the detection of pre-MetS in the apparently healthy population.

Cost-effectiveness of a community pharmacist intervention in patients with depression: a randomized controlled trial (PRODEFAR Study).

BACKGROUND: Non-adherence to antidepressants generates higher costs for the treatment of depression. Little is known about the cost-effectiveness of pharmacist's interventions aimed at improving adherence to antidepressants. The study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a community pharmacist intervention in comparison with usual care in depressed patients initiating treatment with antidepressants in primary care. METHODS: Patients were recruited by general practitioners and randomized to community pharmacist intervention (87) that received an educational intervention and usual care (92). Adherence to antidepressants, clinical symptoms, Quality-Adjusted Life-Years (QALYs), use of healthcare services and productivity losses were measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between groups in costs or effects. From a societal perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the community pharmacist intervention compared with usual care was €1,866 for extra adherent patient and €9,872 per extra QALY. In terms of remission of depressive symptoms, the usual care dominated the community pharmacist intervention. If willingness to pay (WTP) is €30,000 per extra adherent patient, remission of symptoms or QALYs, the probability of the community pharmacist intervention being cost-effective was 0.71, 0.46 and 0.75, respectively (societal perspective). From a healthcare perspective, the probability of the community pharmacist intervention being cost-effective in terms of adherence, QALYs and remission was of 0.71, 0.76 and 0.46, respectively, if WTP is €30,000. CONCLUSION: A brief community pharmacist intervention addressed to depressed patients initiating antidepressant treatment showed a probability of being cost-effective of 0.71 and 0.75 in terms of improvement of adherence and QALYs, respectively, when compared to usual care. Regular implementation of the community pharmacist intervention is not recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00794196.

Evaluation of a pharmacist intervention on patients initiating pharmacological treatment for depression: a randomized controlled superiority trial.

Major depression is associated with high burden, disability and costs. Non-adherence limits the effectiveness of antidepressants. Community pharmacists (CP) are in a privileged position to help patients cope with antidepressant treatment. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of a CP intervention on primary care patients who had initiated antidepressant treatment. Newly diagnosed primary care patients were randomised to usual care (UC) (92) or pharmacist intervention (87). Patients were followed up at 6 months and evaluated three times (Baseline, and at 3 and 6 months). Outcome measurements included clinical severity of depression (PHQ-9), health-related quality of life (HRQOL) (Euroqol-5D) and satisfaction with pharmacy care. Adherence was continuously registered from the computerised pharmacy records. Non-adherence was defined as refilling less than 80% of doses or having a medication-free gap of more than 1 month. Patients in the intervention group were more likely to remain adherent at 3 and 6 months follow-up but the difference was not statistically significant. Patients in the intervention group showed greater statistically significant improvement in HRQOL compared with UC patients both in the main analysis and PP analyses. No statistically significant differences were observed in clinical symptoms or satisfaction with the pharmacy service. The results of our study indicate that a brief intervention in community pharmacies does not improve depressed patients' adherence or clinical symptoms. This intervention helped patients to improve their HRQOL, which is an overall measure of patient status.

Community pharmacist intervention in depressed primary care patients (PRODEFAR study): randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of depression, the most prevalent and costly mental disorder, needs to be improved. Non-concordance with clinical guidelines and non-adherence can limit the efficacy of pharmacological treatment of depression. Through pharmaceutical care, pharmacists can improve patients' compliance and wellbeing. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a community pharmacist intervention developed to improve adherence and outcomes of primary care patients with depression. METHODS/DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial, with 6-month follow-up, comparing patients receiving a pharmaceutical care support programme in primary care with patients receiving usual care. The total sample comprises 194 patients (aged between 18 and 75) diagnosed with depressive disorder in a primary care health centre in the province of Barcelona (Spain). Subjects will be asked for written informed consent in order to participate in the study. Diagnosis will be confirmed using the SCID-I. The intervention consists of an educational programme focused on improving knowledge about medication, making patients aware of the importance of compliance, reducing stigma, reassuring patients about side-effects and stressing the importance of carrying out general practitioners' advice. Measurements will take place at baseline, and after 3 and 6 months. Main outcome measure is compliance with antidepressants. Secondary outcomes include; clinical severity of depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (STAI-S), health-related quality of life (EuroQol-5D), satisfaction with the treatment received, side-effects, chronic physical conditions and socio-demographics. The use of healthcare and social care services will be assessed with an adapted version of the Client Service Receipt Inventory (CSRI). DISCUSSION: This trial will provide valuable information for health professionals and policy makers on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a pharmaceutical intervention programme in the context of primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00794196.