» Articles » PMID: 34334142

Effects of a Pharmaceutical Care Intervention on Clinical Outcomes and Patient Adherence in Coronary Heart Disease: the MIMeRiC Randomized Controlled Trial

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2021 Aug 2
PMID 34334142
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: In the treatment of coronary heart disease, secondary prevention goals are still often unmet and poor adherence to prescribed drugs has been suggested as one of the reasons. We aimed to investigate whether pharmaceutical care by a pharmacist at the cardiology clinic trained in motivational interviewing improves clinical outcomes and patient adherence.

Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, controlled, outcomes-blinded trial designed to compare pharmaceutical care follow-up with standard care. After standard follow-up at the cardiology clinic, patients in the intervention group were seen by a clinical pharmacist two to five times as required over seven months. Pharmacists were trained to use motivational interviewing in the consultations and they tailored their support to each patient's clinical needs and beliefs about medicines. The primary study end-point was the proportion of patients who reached the treatment goal for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 12 months after discharge. The key secondary outcome was patient adherence to lipid-lowering therapy at 15 months after discharge, and other secondary outcomes were the effects on patient adherence to other preventive drugs, systolic blood pressure, disease-specific quality of life, and healthcare use.

Results: 316 patients were included. The proportion of patients who reached the target for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were 37.0% in the intervention group and 44.2% in the control group (P = .263). More intervention than control patients were adherent to cholesterol-lowering drugs (88 vs 77%; P = .033) and aspirin (97 vs 91%; P = .036) but not to beta-blocking agents or renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors.

Conclusions: Our intervention had no positive effects on risk factors for CHD, but it increased patient adherence. Further investigation of the intervention process is needed to explore the difference in results between patient adherence and medication effects. Longer follow-up of healthcare use and mortality will determine if the increased adherence per se eventually will have a meaningful effect on patient health.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02102503, 03/04/2014 retrospectively registered.

Citing Articles

Impact of a clinical pharmacy intervention on medication adherence and the quality use of medicines in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a single centre nonrandomised controlled clinical trial.

Bagyawantha N, Coombes I, Gawarammana I, Mohamed F J Pharm Policy Pract. 2025; 18(1):2468782.

PMID: 40041763 PMC: 11878162. DOI: 10.1080/20523211.2025.2468782.


Exploring the effects of an online learning platform in stage III cardiac rehabilitation for individuals with coronary heart disease: Randomized controlled study.

Ma L, Liu J, Jiao C, Du S, Zhang R, Ding X Medicine (Baltimore). 2024; 103(37):e39497.

PMID: 39287309 PMC: 11404953. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000039497.


Improving medication adherence in cardiovascular disease.

Nelson A, Pagidipati N, Bosworth H Nat Rev Cardiol. 2024; 21(6):417-429.

PMID: 38172243 DOI: 10.1038/s41569-023-00972-1.


The interventions to improve medication adherence in coronary heart disease patient: A systematic review.

Marselin A, Amalia L, Dinarti L J Saudi Heart Assoc. 2023; 35(4):259-278.

PMID: 38116401 PMC: 10727132. DOI: 10.37616/2212-5043.1356.


Patients' Beliefs About Their Cardiovascular Medications After Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Prospective Observational Study.

Barry A, Wang E, Chua D, Zhou L, Hong K, Safari A CJC Open. 2023; 5(10):745-753.

PMID: 37876885 PMC: 10591128. DOI: 10.1016/j.cjco.2023.07.004.


References
1.
Foot H, La Caze A, Gujral G, Cottrell N . The necessity-concerns framework predicts adherence to medication in multiple illness conditions: A meta-analysis. Patient Educ Couns. 2015; 99(5):706-17. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.11.004. View

2.
Enders C . Using the expectation maximization algorithm to estimate coefficient alpha for scales with item-level missing data. Psychol Methods. 2003; 8(3):322-37. DOI: 10.1037/1082-989X.8.3.322. View

3.
Dunn S, Birtcher K, Beavers C, Baker W, Brouse S, Page 2nd R . The role of the clinical pharmacist in the care of patients with cardiovascular disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 66(19):2129-2139. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.09.025. View

4.
Griese-Mammen N, Hersberger K, Messerli M, Leikola S, Horvat N, van Mil J . PCNE definition of medication review: reaching agreement. Int J Clin Pharm. 2018; 40(5):1199-1208. DOI: 10.1007/s11096-018-0696-7. View

5.
Ostbring M, Hellstrom L, Martensson J . Trivial or Troublesome: Experience with Coronary Heart Disease Medication from the Patient's Perspective. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2020; 14:411-424. PMC: 7053281. DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S230120. View