Assessment of factors influencing blood pressure control in a managed care population.

We attempted to determine the percentage of patients meeting Health Plan Employer Data Information Set (HEDIS) criteria for blood pressure control (< or = 140/90 mm Hg), to identify factors contributing to differences in blood pressure control among those who met HEDIS criteria and those who did not, and to assess compliance with blood pressure management recommendations established by the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC-VI) for diabetes mellitus and myocardial infarction. In this retrospective analysis, we randomly selected 502 patient records from three primary care clinics in southeast Michigan. All patients were commercial members of one health maintenance organization, 74% of whom met HEDIS criteria for blood pressure control. These patients took fewer blood pressure drugs throughout the year (p=0.023) and had lower antihypertensive drug costs than those who did not achieve HEDIS blood pressure goals (p=0.016). According to JNC-VI criteria, 46% of diabetic patients were at their blood pressure goal of below 130/85 mm Hg and 71.6% were managed with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers. Eighty-five percent of patients were taking beta-blockers after myocardial infarction. The percentage of patients achieving target blood pressure exceeded the national average and was associated with few antihypertensive drugs and low drug cost. Effective and appropriate management of blood pressure in people with diabetes remains a challenge.

Detection of medication nonadherence through review of pharmacy claims data.

The utility of pharmacy claims data in detecting improper medication use, medication changes, and formulary adherence was assessed. Pharmacists provided six months of pharmacy claims data to primary care physicians for patients on the day of their scheduled clinic appointments. Similar data, not supplied to physicians, were generated for a matched population of patients on the day of their scheduled clinic appointments. A blinded pharmacist abstracter reviewed dictated office notes for both control and treatment groups. Medication adherence and medication changes were assessed by the abstracter as well as the difference in total medication costs for each of the groups before and after the pharmacy claims data were supplied. Surveys were distributed to physicians to determine whether pharmaceutical care was improved by the pharmacy claims data. In the treatment group, physicians detected medication nonadherence in 30.5% of their patients, while the abstracter noted nonadherence in 58.1% of patients. Physicians failed to detect any nonadherence in the control group, but the abstractor detected nonadherence in 57.1% of these patients. Changes in medication regimens occurred more often in the treatment group (p < 0.001). The mean percentage of patients switched to formulary agents significantly differed between the treatment and control groups (27.7% versus 0.0%, respectively) (p < 0.001). There were no differences in median drug costs for either group before or after the pharmacy claims data were provided. Provision of pharmacy claims data to physicians helped them detect medication nonadherence, evaluate therapeutic duplication or omissions, increase formulary use, and reduce the time required to obtain an accurate medication history.

Combined budesonide/formoterol turbuhaler treatment of asthma.

OBJECTIVE: To provide product information; review and analyze the clinical literature studying combination therapy, budesonide, and formoterol in asthmatics; and to define the role for this therapy in asthma treatment. DATA SOURCES: A MEDLINE search (1990-September 2001) was conducted to identify the primary literature. Bibliographies were reviewed for further relevant citations. STUDY SELECTION/DATA EXTRACTION: All randomized, blinded, controlled studies at least 3 months in duration exploring the efficacy of the combination of budesonide and formoterol (in 1 or separate formulations) compared with other treatments were selected to be included in the review of clinical studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: The combination of budesonide and formoterol was more effective than increasing the dose of budesonide in patients with moderate or severe persistent asthma and in patients with mild asthma not previously controlled with inhaled corticosteroids. Milder corticosteroid-naïve asthmatics did not derive benefit compared with inhaled corticosteroids alone. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy in 1 device is a preferred treatment option in patients with moderate to severe persistent asthma and in those with milder asthma not controlled with inhaled corticosteroids. Advantages of this product include rapid onset of action, long duration of action, and a wide dosing range to assist with titration. Further research is required to evaluate this therapy in asthmatic children <5 years old and in patients with oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma. Investigations into the effect of this combination product on other disease outcomes, such as quality of life and productivity, will further define the role for this drug therapy.