Systematic literature review of the impact of psychiatric pharmacists.

Introduction: Pharmacists focusing on psychotropic medication management and practicing across a wide variety of healthcare settings have significantly improved patient-level outcomes. The Systematic Literature Review Committee of the American Association of Psychiatric Pharmacists was tasked with compiling a comprehensive database of primary literature highlighting the impact of psychiatric pharmacists on patient-level outcomes. Methods: A systematic search of literature published from January 1, 1961, to December 31, 2022, was conducted using PubMed and search terms based on a prior American Association of Psychiatric Pharmacists literature review. Publications describing patient-level outcome results associated with pharmacist provision of care in psychiatric/neurologic settings and/or in relation to psychotropic medications were included. The search excluded articles for which there was no pharmacist intervention, no psychiatric disorder treatment, no clinical outcomes, no original research, no access to full text, and/or no English-language version. Results: A total of 4270 articles were reviewed via PubMed, with 4072 articles excluded based on title, abstract, and/or full text in the initial pass and 208 articles selected for inclusion. A secondary full-text review excluded 11 additional articles, and 5 excluded articles were ultimately included based on a secondary review, for a final total of 202 articles meeting the inclusion criteria. A comprehensive database of these articles was compiled, including details on their study designs and outcomes. Discussion: The articles included in the final database had a wide range of heterogeneity. While the overall impact of psychiatric pharmacists was positive, the study variability highlights the need for future publications to have more consistent, standardized outcomes with stronger study designs.

Best practice model for outpatient psychiatric pharmacy practice, part 2: Confirmation of the attribute statements.

Introduction: The American Association of Psychiatric Pharmacists (AAPP) used multiple modalities to develop and refine 28 attribute statements to describe a best practice model for outpatient psychiatric pharmacists. Before addressing implementation, assessment, and field testing, it was necessary to finalize and confirm the statements and their supporting narratives among stakeholders. The objective of this project was to confirm the attribute statements and supporting justifications for a best practice model for outpatient psychiatric pharmacists providing direct patient care. Methods: The 4 phases that resulted in the 28 attribute statements and supporting narratives have been described and published elsewhere. As part of phase 5, the confirmation survey was distributed to pharmacists and resident members of AAPP in November 2021 for 3 weeks. Results: The survey respondents (n = 74; 6.1%) were licensed pharmacists for an average of 15.6 years (SD = 12.0) and had been practicing as psychiatric pharmacists for an average of 11.3 years (SD = 10.4). Slightly more than half (54.2%) of the respondents reported practicing in the outpatient setting and three-fourths (74.3%) were Board Certified Psychiatric Pharmacists. For each of the 28 statements, more than 90% of respondents either agreed or agreed with minimal reservations. Discussion: Given the high degree of agreement on the proposed practice model statements, they will be used as the basis for the outpatient psychiatric pharmacist best practice model. Next steps in developing this model include establishing implementation guidance, determining appropriate metrics for evaluation of these statements in practice, and establishing appropriate field-testing methods.

Survey of prescriptive authority among psychiatric pharmacists in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the high prevalence of those with mental illnesses, there is a critical shortage of psychiatric providers in the United States. Psychiatric pharmacists are valuable members of the health care team who meet patient care needs, especially those practicing with prescriptive authority (PA). METHODS: A cross-sectional electronic survey was administered to Board Certified Psychiatric Pharmacists (BCPPs) and non-BCPP members of the College of Psychiatric and Neurologic Pharmacists. The objective of this study was to compare demographic and practice characteristics between respondents with and without PA. RESULTS: Of the 334 respondents, 155 (46.4%) reported having PA. Those with PA, including those with Veterans Affairs (VA) affiliated PA, had fewer mean number of years of licensure than those without PA (P = .008 and P = .007, respectively). The majority with PA practiced in outpatient settings (53.5%). Respondents with PA (including those with VA-affiliated PA) were more likely to have their positions funded by practice sites (P < .001). The most common referral source for medication management for those with PA were physicians although pharmacists also provided referrals in both VA and non-VA settings. Pharmacists with PA were more likely to track practice outcomes versus those without PA (P < .001). DISCUSSION: The current study confirms the variability in PA among psychiatric pharmacists. Demographics of the respondents reflect changes in residency accreditation and increased numbers of psychiatric residencies within VA facilities. Psychiatric pharmacists with PA reported treating psychiatric and medical conditions, creating added value. Psychiatric pharmacists should be empowered to track outcomes and help meet the critical shortage of psychiatric providers.

Increasing rural patient access using clinical pharmacy specialist providers: Successful practice integration within the Department of Veterans Affairs.

PURPOSE: Access to care is a critical issue facing healthcare and affects patients living in rural and underserved areas more significantly. This led the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to launch a project that leveraged the expertise of the clinical pharmacy specialist (CPS) provider, embedding 180 CPS providers into primary care, mental health, and pain management across the nation. METHODS: This multidimensional project resulted in hiring 111 CPS providers in primary care, 40 CPS providers in mental health, and 35 CPS providers in pain management to serve rural veterans' needs. From October 2017 to March 2020, CPS providers provided direct patient care to 213,477 veterans within 606,987 visits. This was an average of 43,000 additional visits each quarter to support comprehensive medication management services, demonstrating an additional 219,823 visits in fiscal year 2018 and 232,030 visits in fiscal year 2019. Over the course of the project, the team provided mentorship to 164 CPS providers, performed consultative visits at 27 VA facilities, and trained 180 CPS providers in educational boot camps. CONCLUSION: VA funding of rural health initiatives adding CPS providers to primary care, mental health, and pain teams has resulted in positive measures of comprehensive medication management, interdisciplinary team satisfaction, facility leadership acceptance, and multiple positive outcomes.

Assessment of the current practice of psychiatric pharmacists in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: A comprehensive review of psychiatric pharmacy practice has never been performed in the United States. As psychiatric pharmacists become more involved in mental illness treatment, determining the current state of practice is important to help advance the specialty. The Professional Affairs Committee of the College of Psychiatric and Neurologic Pharmacists (CPNP) was charged with performing this review to define current psychiatric pharmacy practice. METHODS: An electronic survey was sent to all pharmacist members of CPNP and all nonmember Board Certified Psychiatric Pharmacists (BCPPs) in the United States in late summer 2019. The survey consisted of 36 questions across multiple domains to obtain information about respondents' education and training background, practice setting and type, and information about prescriptive authority and other areas. An initial e-mail invitation was sent along with 2 reminder e-mails over the subsequent 2 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 334 of 1015 pharmacists completed the survey (32.9%). Responders completed a postgraduate residency 77.8% of the time, and 88.3% were BCPP. Practice settings were split evenly between inpatient and outpatient practices or a combination of the 2. Among respondents, 46.5% reported having prescriptive authority as part of their practice, and 41.3% reported treating nonpsychiatric as well as psychiatric illnesses. Prescriptive authority was more likely in outpatient practices and in those treating nonpsychiatric illnesses. DISCUSSION: The current practice of psychiatric pharmacy is incredibly varied in terms of practice setting, activities performed, and services provided. Further exploration is needed to help determine the optimal role of psychiatric pharmacists.

Impact of pharmacists on outcomes for patients with psychiatric or neurologic disorders.

INTRODUCTION: Psychiatric and neurologic illnesses are highly prevalent and are often suboptimally treated. A 2015 review highlighted the value of psychiatric pharmacists in improving medication-related outcomes. There is a need to describe areas of expansion and strengthened evidence regarding pharmacist practice and patient care impact in psychiatric and neurologic settings since 2015. METHODS: A systematic search of literature published from January 2014 to June 2019 was conducted. Publications describing patient-level outcome results associated with pharmacist provision of care in a psychiatric/neurologic setting and/or in relation to central nervous system (CNS) medications were included. RESULTS: A total of 64 publications were included. There was significant heterogeneity of published study methods and data, prohibiting meta-analysis. Pharmacists practicing across a wide variety of health care settings with focus on CNS medication management significantly improved patient-level outcomes, such as medication adherence, disease control, and avoidance of hospitalization. The most common practice approach associated with significant improvement in patient-level outcomes was incorporation of psychiatric pharmacist input into the interprofessional health care team. DISCUSSION: Pharmacists who focus on psychiatric and neurologic disease improve outcomes for patients with these conditions. This is important in the current health care environment as most patients with psychiatric or neurologic conditions continue to have unmet needs. Additional studies designed to measure pharmacists' impact on patient-level outcomes are encouraged to strengthen these findings.

Eplerenone: a selective aldosterone receptor antagonist for hypertension and heart failure.

Aldosterone has been implicated for many years as an important substance in the pathogenesis of heart disease. Elevated aldosterone concentrations have been documented in patients with hypertension and heart failure, leading to the use of aldosterone antagonists for the treatment of these conditions. Spironolactone has been used for nearly 2 decades for the treatment of hypertension, and more recently, has become a standard agent for the treatment of systolic heart failure. Spironolactone, however, is a nonselective antagonist of the aldosterone receptor, binding also to other steroid receptors and causing a significant percentage of patients to have sex hormone-related adverse effects such as gynecomastia. Eplerenone is the first of a new class of drugs known as selective aldosterone receptor antagonists, which selectively block the aldosterone receptor with minimal effect at other steroid receptors, thereby minimizing many of the hormonal side effects seen with spironolactone. Eplerenone has been shown to be beneficial both as monotherapy and combination therapy for lowering elevated blood pressure in patients with hypertension. The antihypertensive efficacy of eplerenone is roughly similar to that of other antihypertensive agents, although in 1 study black patients responded better with eplerenone than losartan. In addition, eplerenone has demonstrated some renoprotective effects in diabetic patients with hypertension. Recently, eplerenone was shown to significantly reduce mortality and cardiovascular morbidity in post-myocardial infarction patients with systolic heart failure currently taking standard heart failure medications. Eplerenone is generally well tolerated, although hyperkalemia with this agent is of some concern. Eplerenone is metabolized by CYP3A4 and administration with potent inhibitors of this enzyme is contraindicated because of the risk of hyperkalemia. In summary, eplerenone has proven to be beneficial in treating hypertension and post-myocardial infarction heart failure. Its exact place in therapy will in large part be determined by its cost and whether or not future studies will be able to demonstrate a clinical benefit of this agent over spironolactone or other currently available treatments.