Real-World Evaluation of Dosing in Patients Converted From Insulin Glargine (Lantus) to Insulin Glargine (Basaglar).

Background: Basaglar, insulin glargine (BGlar; Eli Lilly, Indianapolis, IN), a follow-on biologic, was developed after the patent for Lantus, insulin glargine (LGlar; Sanofi-Aventis, Paris, France) expired. Objective: To compare the dosing and hemoglobin A1C (A1C)-lowering effects of BGlar compared with LGlar in a real-world setting. Methods: Adult patients, at 5 clinics, with type 1 (T1DM) or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who were converted from LGlar to BGlar were included in this retrospective observational study. The primary outcome compared mean basal insulin dose (U/d) from the date of conversion to 6 months. Basal insulin and total daily insulin doses were also compared from baseline to 3- and 12-months postconversion, as also change in A1C, body weight, and estimated monthly acquisition costs of basal insulin. Results: Of the 225 patients included, 56% were male, and 81% had T2DM. The mean conversion dose (U/d) of LGlar was 46.3 ± 32.7. There was no significant difference in the mean BGlar dose (U/d) at 6 months (45.9 ± 33.5; P = 0.52), nor was there a statistical difference at 3 or 12 months. There were no significant differences in change in A1C at any time point. The estimated monthly acquisition cost of BGlar was significantly less than that for LGlar at conversion ($286 vs $341, P < 0.001) and 6 months ($290 vs $351, P < 0.001) respectively. Conclusion/Relevance: The results of this retrospective study suggest that BGlar resulted in similar glycemic outcomes compared with LGlar in a real-world setting and may be a preferable option in a value-based health care environment.

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.

A collaborative program to increase adult pneumococcal vaccination rates among a high-risk patient population receiving care at urgent care clinics.

OBJECTIVE: We report a project that utilized pharmacy students to increase pneumococcal vaccination rates in patients aged 19-64 years with high-risk medical conditions within urgent care clinics. The study also sought to better identify the number of patients previously vaccinated for pneumococcal disease. A total of 1,178 patients were considered eligible for pneumococcal vaccination during the study period, 287 (24.4%) of whom were determined to be previously vaccinated through chart assessment or patient interview. Of the remaining 891 patients, chart documentation of pneumococcal vaccination administered at the time of the urgent care visit was present for 96 patients (10.7%) in the intervention clinics compared with 6 patients in 2 control clinics who received the usual standard of care (P < .0001).

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.

A multiyear analysis of team-based learning in a pharmacotherapeutics course.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of team-based learning (TBL) in a pharmacotherapeutics course on pharmacy students' ratings of faculty instructors and the course, and to assess students' performance after implementation of team-taught TBL. DESIGN: Teaching methodology in a pharmacotherapeutics course was changed from a lecture with recitation approach in 2 semesters of a 6 credit-hour course to a TBL framework in a 3-semester 3+4+5 credit hour course. The distribution of faculty of instruction was changed from 4 faculty members per week to 1 faculty per 1-credit-hour module. TBL consisted of preclass study preparation, readiness assurance (Individual Readiness Assessment Test and Group Readiness Assessment Test), and in-class application exercises requiring simultaneous team responses. ASSESSMENT: Retrospective analysis of student ratings of faculty and instructional methods was conducted for the 2 years pre-TBL and 4 years during TBL. Final course grades were evaluated during the same time period. Student ratings showed progressive improvements over 4 years after the introduction of team-based learning. When aggregated, ratings in the "excellent teacher" category were unchanged with TBL compared to pre-TBL. Improvements in faculty instructor approaches to teaching were noted during TBL. Group grades were consistently higher than individual grades, and aggregate course grades were similar to those prior to TBL implementation. CONCLUSION: Implementation of TBL in a pharmacotherapeutics course series demonstrated the value of team performance over individual performance, indicated positive student perceptions of teaching approaches by course faculty, and resulted in comparable student performance in final course grades compared to the previous teaching method.

A faculty-led mock residency interview exercise for fourth-year doctor of pharmacy students.

PURPOSE: To determine whether a faculty-led mock-interview activity enhanced pharmacy student preparation for the residency interview process and increased match rates. METHODS: Twenty-eight doctor of pharmacy students volunteered for a 40-minute mock-interview session with 2-person faculty teams. A standard roster of 12 interview questions was derived from published literature and the faculty members' experience. Feedback on the student's interview performance was provided verbally during the session. Following the interview, students were given a 2-part survey instrument. The first part of the survey was administered immediately following the mock-interview session and the second part was administered after the standard date for residency program results (known as "Match Day"). Participant match rates were compared to American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) national rates. RESULTS: 82.5% (23 of 27) of students in the mock-interview group matched a postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) program. Compared to national rates (61.9%), more students in our surveyed mock-interview group matched a PGY1 residency (P = .015; odds ratio [OR] 3.546, 95% CI 1.161-12.116). CONCLUSIONS: Higher match rates were seen in the students completing the mock residency interview compared to ASHP national rates. In general, students completing the mock interview found the process helpful and felt better prepared for their residency interviews.

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.

A guided interview process to improve student pharmacists' identification of drug therapy problems.

OBJECTIVE: To measure agreement between advanced pharmacy practice experience students using a guided interview process and experienced clinical pharmacists using standard practices to identify drug therapy problems. METHODS: Student pharmacists enrolled in an advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) and clinical pharmacists conducted medication therapy management interviews to identify drug therapy problems in elderly patients recruited from the community. Student pharmacists used a guided interview tool, while clinical pharmacists' interviews were conducted using their usual and customary practices. Student pharmacists also were surveyed to determine their perceptions of the interview tool. RESULTS: Fair to moderate agreement was observed on student and clinical pharmacists' identification of 4 of 7 drug therapy problems. Of those, agreement was significantly higher than chance for 3 drug therapy problems (adverse drug reaction, dosage too high, and needs additional drug therapy) and not significant for 1 (unnecessary drug therapy). Students strongly agreed that the interview tool was useful but agreed less strongly on recommending its use in practice. CONCLUSIONS: The guided interview process served as a useful teaching aid to assist student pharmacists to identify drug therapy problems.

Knowledge and attitudes of American pharmacists concerning sulfonamide allergy cross-reactivity.

OBJECTIVE: Pharmacists are commonly confronted with patients with a history of sulfonamide allergy. Basic immunologic and clinical data suggest a low likelihood of a patient with a history of sulfonamide hypersensitivity developing an allergic reaction to a non-antimicrobial sulfonamide drug. We conducted a survey to describe the knowledge and attitudes of licensed pharmacists concerning sulfonamide allergy cross-reactivity. METHODS: A survey instrument was developed and sent to all licensed pharmacists in the state of Iowa. The survey recorded demographic information and included six patient scenarios designed to elicit responses concerning sulfonamide allergy cross-reactivity with a number of non-antimicrobial sulfonamides. RESULTS: A total of 421 surveys were returned for a 39% response rate. There was a wide discrepancy in approaches to patients with a history of sulfonamide allergy prescribed a sulfonamide containing non-antibiotic. Differences depended on previous history of tolerating the medication in question, the degree of cautionary statements in product literature, and the familiarity the pharmacist had with the product. CONCLUSION: Our survey suggests a significant diversity in knowledge and attitudes of pharmacists concerning cross-reactivity of sulfonamide antimicrobials and other drugs with a sulfonamide moiety. Depth of training in this area may be an associative factor.

Adherence to treatment guidelines in two primary care populations with gout.

Published guidelines for the treatment of gout aim to improve the evidenced-based management of this disorder. Unfortunately, several studies suggest that these guidelines are not routinely followed in clinical practice. Limited data exist comparing different groups of primary care providers regarding compliance with published gout guidelines. We conducted a retrospective study comparing two different general internal medicine (IM) practices and evaluated compliance with these guidelines. All patients with a billing code for gout seen in two large IM clinics (Clinic A, an inner-city urban clinic, and Clinic B, a suburban clinic) between January 2004 and December 2007 were selected for chart review. Patients referred to a rheumatologist for management of gout were excluded. The care received by these patients for gout was compared to recommendations from published guidelines, with the primary outcome assessing the percentage of patients who received at least yearly monitoring of serum uric acid (SUA) levels. In both clinics, yearly monitoring of SUA levels occurred in approximately one quarter of the patients with gout (Clinic A 27.5% vs. Clinic B 28.9%, P = 0.87). Compared to SUA, renal function was monitored more frequently in each of the groups. Listed indications for antihyperuricemic therapy were similar between groups, although gouty flares were reported more frequently in clinic B (P = 0.005). In this retrospective review of gout management in two IM clinics, general care for patients with this condition did not differ significantly. However, overall compliance with recommendations from published guidelines was low.

Bone health screening, education, and referral project in northwest Iowa: creating a model for community pharmacies.

OBJECTIVE: To identify women 60 years of age or older at risk for osteoporosis, provide education, and refer at-risk women to physicians through a community pharmacy screening program and to develop a model in community pharmacies for this service. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Northwest Iowa between August 2005 and October 2005. PARTICIPANTS: 159 women 60 years of age or older screened at five pharmacies. INTERVENTIONS: Five pharmacies completed education on osteoporosis, received training on use of the Achilles InSight by GE Lunar, and screened women 60 years of age or older for osteoporosis. Patients received education on osteoporosis and risk factors during the screening and were stratified as low, moderate, or high risk based on a T-score. Patients at risk were referred to their physician for further evaluation. Pharmacists telephoned patients at 3 and 6 months after screening to determine self-initiated or provider-initiated changes in their treatment plan. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive population characteristics, proportion of participants with medical risk factors for osteoporosis, proportion of patients screened at risk, and proportion of physician or patient self-initiated changes instituted as a result of the screening. RESULTS: Of the 159 women screened, 53% were rated as moderate or severe risk and referred to their physicians. Three- and 6-month follow-up results revealed a high proportion of self-initiated lifestyle or medication changes and a small proportion of physician-initiated changes. CONCLUSION: The majority of women 60 years of age or older who attended a community pharmacy osteoporosis screening were at moderate or high risk for osteoporosis. A fee-for-service model was created for community pharmacists to improve recognition and treatment of patients at risk. A toolkit will be created for pharmacists to promote their role in improving the bone health of older patients.

Organizing a community advanced pharmacy practice experience.

Setting up a community advanced pharmacy practice experience can be an overwhelming task for many pharmacy preceptors. This article provides guidance to pharmacist preceptors in developing a complete and effective community advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE). When preparing for the APPE, initial discussions with the college or school of pharmacy are key. Benefits, training, and requirements should be addressed. Site preparation, including staff education, will assist in the development process. The preceptor should plan orientation day activities and determine appropriate evaluation and feedback methods. With thorough preparation, the APPE will be rewarding for both the student and the pharmacy site.