A prospective, multi-center cohort study: investigating the ability of warfarin-treated patients to predict their INR.

BACKGROUND: In practice, warfarin-treated patients may share insight regarding their international normalized ratio (INR) value before it is measured. The accuracy and potential utility of these predictions have not been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To (1) test how accurately patients can predict their INR; (2) identify demographic factors associated with their ability to predict their INR accurately; and (3) identify demographic factors associated with the patient's INR being in the therapeutic range. METHODS: A prospective, multi-center cohort study enrolled patients from eight anticoagulation clinics in Iowa. Inclusion criteria were: age ≥ 18 years, warfarin use ≥ 60 days, INR goal of 2.0-3.0, and expected warfarin use > 6 months. Subjects completed a data collection form during enrollment and before each INR measurement. Data included demographics, a set of medication taking beliefs and practices, self-reported adherence, past INR values, INR prediction and reason(s) for the prediction. RESULTS: There were 87 subjects enrolled with 372 INR measurements. The mean (SD) number of INRs per subject was 4.3 (1.8). Thirty percent of subjects reported they could tell when their INR is out of goal range. Patients predicted that 90.5% of their INRs would be within goal range, although only 65.5% of INRs were therapeutic. Patients correctly predicted a low INR as low or high INR as high in only 9.4% of out of range instances. A set of demographic characteristics and medication beliefs were not associated with prediction accuracy or percentage of INR measurements in range (PINRR). Most patients did not give a reason for their predicted result. For those that did, the most common factor was perceived stability at current dose. CONCLUSION: While some patients believed they could predict when their INR was out of range, only few were able to do so. Most patients assumed a therapeutic INR and missed when their INR was high or low. Patients should be advised against modifying their warfarin dose without consulting the provider that manages their therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT 02764112.

Retrospective Evaluation of ASCVD Risk and Statin Therapy Need in Nondiabetic Patients Based on the 2013 ACC/AHA Cholesterol Guidelines.

PURPOSE: Study goal was to assess the impact of the 2013 American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Cholesterol Guidelines on patients in the fourth statin benefit group which included patients aged 40 to 75 years, without diabetes or clinical atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), and have an ASCVD score ≥7.5%. These patients could benefit from treatment interventions by a pharmacist. METHODS: Patients were identified from electronic health records. A sample of 3503 patients was ascertained from having a lipid panel performed within the 12 months before November 1, 2013. Patients were excluded if we were unable to calculate 10-year ASCVD risk. RESULTS: A total of 3203 patients were included, with 2008 not on statin therapy. Of those, 1507 (75%) had a 10-year ASCVD risk score <7.5% and 501 (25%) had a score > 7.5%. Patient characteristics leading to an increase in risk included advanced age, smoker, male, and hypertension treatment. Of 2008 nonstatin patients, there were 466 (23.2%) who fit criteria for initiation of moderate- or high-intensity statin. CONCLUSION: Widespread adoption of the 2013 ACC/AHA Cholesterol Guidelines will expand prescribing rates of statins. Implementing screening strategies may help identify patients who require treatment in this fourth statin benefit group. A pharmacist can be vital in screening patients, educating patients regarding the need for medication therapy, and monitoring for adherence in these new regimens.

A Retrospective Evaluation of Response to Vitamin D Supplementation in Obese Versus Nonobese Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of body mass index (BMI) on vitamin D status following ergocalciferol therapy. METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of patients aged 18 years and older with a baseline serum 25(OH)D < 30 ng/mL who received prescription ergocalciferol 50 000 IU at any dose between July 2009 and November 2011 was conducted. Patients were included if pre- and posttreatment 25(OH)D levels were available within 3 months of therapy. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirteen patients were included in the study with 52% having a BMI ≥30 kg/m(2). Thirty-eight different ergocalciferol regimens were prescribed, and the majority of patients (66.2%) received a regimen consisting of 50 000 IU once weekly for variable durations. Mean 25(OH)D levels increased from 18.8 ± 6.6 ng/mL at baseline to 35.0 ± 13.8 ng/mL with 61.0% (n = 130) of patients having attained vitamin D sufficiency, 25(OH)D ≥ 30 ng/mL, with their prescribed ergocalciferol regimen. Obese patients with a BMI ≥30 were less likely to attain vitamin D sufficiency following replacement than patients with a BMI <30 kg/m(2) (52% vs 71%; P = .0161). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated an overall moderate response rate to replacement therapy with ergocalciferol and considerable variability in vitamin D replacement strategies initiated by primary care providers. Based on our findings, elevated BMI ≥30 kg/m(2) may impact the likelihood of attaining vitamin D sufficiency with ergocalciferol.

Medication therapy management in the primary care setting: a pharmacist-based pay-for-performance project.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of medication therapy management on chronic disease management and generic drug prescribing in the clinic setting. METHODS: Private insurer initiates Pay-for-Performance (PFP) project for clinic-based pharmacists in Iowa and South Dakota (n = 9 clinics) in 2009. Each pharmacist was assigned ∽300 patients with at least 1 of 4 disease states (diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and asthma). Pharmacists were expected to complete 2 medication reviews for each patient. The primary outcome was frequency of patients achieving goal levels: diabetes: hemoglobin A1c (A1c) <8%, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) <130 mg/dL, and blood pressure (BP) <140/80 mm Hg; hypertension: BP <140/90 mm Hg; hyperlipidemia: LDL <130 mg/dL; and asthma: percentage of persistent asthmatics on controller medication. Generic prescribing rates were evaluated for antihypertensives, cholesterol-lowering agents, proton pump inhibitors, and antidepressants. RESULTS: A total of 827 patients at 3 clinics were included in the analysis. For diabetes, 77.1% had A1c <8%, 83.2% had LDL <130 mg/dL, and 76.3% had BP <140/80 mm Hg. For hypertension, 86.2% had BP <140/90 mm Hg. For hyperlipidemia, 80.6% had LDL <130 mg/dL. For asthma, 100% were on controller medication. One medication review was completed on 88.8% of patients. Generic prescribing rates ranged from 65.8% to 79.4%. IMPLICATIONS/ADAPTABILITY: A high percentage of patients achieved goal levels at clinics with clinical pharmacist services. A multidisciplinary approach to patient care may improve disease state management and medication cost savings.

Management of common opioid-induced adverse effects.

Opioid analgesics are useful agents for treating pain of various etiologies; however, adverse effects are potential limitations to their use. Strategies to minimize adverse effects of opioids include dose reduction, symptomatic management, opioid rotation, and changing the route of administration. Nausea occurs in approximately 25 percent of patients; prophylactic measures may not be required. Patients who do develop nausea will require antiemetic treatment with an antipsychotic, prokinetic agent, or serotonin antagonist. Understanding the mechanism for opioid-induced nausea will aid in the selection of appropriate agents. Constipation is considered an expected side effect with chronic opioid use. Physicians should minimize the development of constipation using prophylactic measures. Monotherapy with stool softeners often is not effective; a stool softener combined with a stimulant laxative is preferred. Sedation and cognitive changes occur with initiation of therapy or dose escalation. Underlying disease states or other centrally acting medications often will compound the opioid's adverse effects. Minimizing unnecessary medications and judicious use of stimulants and antipsychotics are used to manage the central nervous system side effects. Pruritus may develop, but it is generally not considered an allergic reaction. Antihistamines are the preferred management option should pharmacotherapy treatment be required.