Increasing the detection and response to adherence problems with cardiovascular medication in primary care through computerized drug management systems: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Adherence with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapy is poor, resulting in an almost 2-fold increase in hospitalization. Treatment side effects, cost, and complexity are common reasons for nonadherence, and physicians are often unaware of these potentially modifiable problems. OBJECTIVE: To determine if a cardiovascular medication tracking and nonadherence alert system, incorporated into a computerized health record system, would increase drug profile review by primary care physicians, increase the likelihood of therapy change, and improve adherence with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering drugs. METHODS: There were 2293 primary care patients prescribed lipid-lowering or antihypertensive drugs who were randomized to the adherence tracking and alert system or active medication list alone to determine if the intervention increased drug profile review, changes in cardiovascular drug treatment, and refill adherence in the first 6 months. An intention to treat analysis was conducted using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering within physician. RESULTS: Overall, medication adherence was below 80% for 36.3% of patients using lipid-lowering drugs and 40.8% of patients using antihypertensives at the start of the trial. There was a significant increase in drug profile review in the intervention compared to the control group (44.5% v. 35.5%; P < 0.001), a nonsignificant increase in drug discontinuations due to side effects (2.3% v. 2.0%; P = 0.61), and a reduction in therapy increases (28.5% v. 29.1%; P = 0.86). There was no significant change in refill adherence after 6 months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: An adherence tracking and alert system increases drug review but not therapy changes or adherence in prevalent users of cardiovascular drug treatment. Targeting incident users where adverse treatment effects are more common and combining adherence tracking and alert tools with motivational interventions provided by multidisciplinary primary care teams may improve the effectiveness of the intervention.

A randomized trial of the effectiveness of on-demand versus computer-triggered drug decision support in primary care.

OBJECTIVES: Prescribing alerts generated by computerized drug decision support (CDDS) may prevent drug-related morbidity. However, the vast majority of alerts are ignored because of clinical irrelevance. The ability to customize commercial alert systems should improve physician acceptance because the physician can select the circumstances and types of drug alerts that are viewed. We tested the effectiveness of two approaches to medication alert customization to reduce prevalence of prescribing problems: on-physician-demand versus computer-triggered decision support. Physicians in each study condition were able to preset levels that triggered alerts. DESIGN: This was a cluster trial with 28 primary care physicians randomized to either automated or on-demand CDDS in the MOXXI drug management system for 3,449 of their patients seen over the next 6 months. MEASUREMENTS: The CDDS generated alerts for prescribing problems that could be customized by severity level. Prescribing problems included dosing errors, drug-drug, age, allergy, and disease interactions. Physicians randomized to on-demand activated the drug review when they considered it clinically relevant, whereas physicians randomized to computer-triggered decision support viewed all alerts for electronic prescriptions in accordance with the severity level they selected for both prevalent and incident problems. Data from administrative claims and MOXXI were used to measure the difference in the prevalence of prescribing problems at the end of follow-up. RESULTS: During follow-up, 50% of the physicians receiving computer-triggered alerts modified the alert threshold (n = 7), and 21% of the physicians in the alert-on-demand group modified the alert level (n = 3). In the on-demand group 4,445 prescribing problems were identified, 41 (0.9%) were seen by requested drug review, and in 31 problems (75.6%) the prescription was revised. In comparison, 668 (10.3%) of the 6,505 prescribing problems in the computer-triggered group were seen, and 81 (12.1%) were revised. The majority of alerts were ignored because the benefit was judged greater than the risk, the interaction was known, or the interaction was considered clinically not important (computer-triggered: 75.8% of 585 ignored alerts; on-demand: 90% of 10 ignored alerts). At the end of follow-up, there was a significant reduction in therapeutic duplication problems in the computer-triggered group (odds ratio 0.55; p = 0.02) but no difference in the overall prevalence of prescribing problems. CONCLUSION: Customization of computer-triggered alert systems is more useful in detecting and resolving prescribing problems than on-demand review, but neither approach was effective in reducing prescribing problems. New strategies are needed to maximize the use of drug decision support systems to reduce drug-related morbidity.

The development and evaluation of an integrated electronic prescribing and drug management system for primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate the acceptability and use of an integrated electronic prescribing and drug management system (MOXXI) for primary care physicians. DESIGN: A 20-month follow-up study of MOXXI (Medical Office of the XXIst Century) implementation in 28 primary care physicians and 13,515 consenting patients. MEASUREMENT: MOXXI was developed to enhance patient safety by integrating patient demographics, retrieving active drugs from pharmacy systems, generating an automated problem list, and providing electronic prescription, stop order, automated prescribing problem alerts, and compliance monitoring functions. Evaluation of technical performance, acceptability, and use was conducted using audit trails, questionnaires, standardized tasks, and information from comprehensive health insurance databases. RESULTS: Perceived improvements in continuity of care and professional autonomy were associated with physicians' expected use of MOXXI. Physician speed in using MOXXI improved substantially in the first three months; however, only the represcribing function was faster using MOXXI than by handwritten prescription. Physicians wrote electronic prescriptions in 36.9 per 100 visits and reviewed the patient's drug profile in 12.6 per 100 visits. Physicians rated printed prescriptions, the current drug list, and the represcribing function as the most beneficial aspects of the system. Physicians were more likely to use the drug profile for patients who used more medication, made more emergency department visits, had more prescribing physicians, and lower continuity of care. CONCLUSION: Primary care physicians believed an integrated electronic prescribing and drug management system would improve continuity of care, and they were more likely to use the system for patients with more complex, fragmented care.