Effect of a pharmacist-managed hypertension program on health system costs: an evaluation of the Study of Cardiovascular Risk Intervention by Pharmacists-Hypertension (SCRIP-HTN).
ABSTRACT To quantify the potential cost savings of a community pharmacy-based hypertension management program based on the results of the Study of Cardiovascular Risk Intervention by Pharmacists-Hypertension (SCRIP-HTN) study in terms of avoided cardiovascular events-myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure hospitalization, and to compare these cost savings with the cost of the pharmacist intervention program.
An economic model was developed to estimate the potential cost avoidance in direct health care resources from reduced cardiovascular events over a 1-year period.
The SCRIP-HTN study found that patients with diabetes mellitus and hypertension who were receiving the pharmacist intervention had a greater mean reduction in systolic blood pressure of 5.6 mm Hg than patients receiving usual care. For our model, published meta-analysis data were used to compute cardiovascular event absolute risk reductions associated with a 5.6-mm Hg reduction in systolic blood pressure over 6 months. Costs/event were obtained from administrative data, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the results. Two program scenarios were evaluated-one with monthly follow-up for a total of 1 year with sustained blood pressure reduction, and the other in which pharmacist care ended after the 6-month program but the effects on systolic blood pressure diminished over time. The cost saving results from the economic model were then compared with the costs of the program. Annual estimated cost savings (in 2011 Canadian dollars) from avoided cardiovascular events were $265/patient (95% confidence interval [CI] $63-467) if the program lasted 1 year or $221/patient (95%CI $72-371) if pharmacist care ceased after 6 months with an assumed loss of effect afterward. Estimated pharmacist costs were $90/patient for 6 months or $150/patient for 1 year, suggesting that pharmacist-managed programs are cost saving, with the annual net total cost savings/patient estimated to be $131 for a program lasting 6 months or $115 for a program lasting 1 year.
Our model found that community pharmacist interventions capable of reducing systolic blood pressure by 5.6 mm Hg within 6 months are cost saving and result in improved patient outcomes. Wider adoption of pharmacist-managed hypertension care for patients with diabetes and hypertension is encouraged.
- SourceAvailable from: aop.sagepub.com[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Hypertension is a major health concern worldwide due to its deleterious impact. Few studies have quantitatively assessed pharmacists' interventions in hypertensive patients. To identify and quantify outcomes sensitive to pharmacists' interventions. International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, and EMBASE were searched from inception through December 2006. Two independent reviewers identified articles; results were compared and resolved through consensus. Data extracted included intervention type, patient numbers, demographics, study characteristics, instruments used, data compared, and outcomes reported. A random effects meta-analysis was used to combine data. Study quality was assessed using the Downs-Black scale. Of 203 potential articles identified, 98 were selected and their abstracts were read. Nine of these were reviewed full-text and 19 more were identified from references, resulting in a total of 28 articles. Research designs included 18 randomized controlled trials, 6 single-arm clinical trials, 3 nonrandomized comparative trials, and 1 database study. Average quality score was 66% +/- 12% (fair). Medication management (82%) and hypertension education (68%) were the interventions most used. Thirty-nine study results (57% of all outcomes evaluated) were sensitive to pharmacists' interventions. Meta-analysis of 2246 patients in 13 studies found that pharmacists' interventions significantly reduced systolic blood pressure (10.7 +/- 11.6 mm Hg; p = 0.002), while controls remained unchanged (3.2 +/- 12.1 mm Hg; p = 0.361). Pharmacists' interventions further reduced systolic blood pressure (6.9 +/- 12.1 mm Hg; p = 0.047) over controls. Nonsensitive results included further reduction in diastolic blood pressure (3.6 +/- 3.7 mm Hg; p = 0.06), quality of life (1 of 8 significant), and adherence (5 of 13 significant). Systolic blood pressure is sensitive to pharmacists' interventions. Other outcomes may also be sensitive; however, more high-quality studies are needed for a comprehensive quantitative assessment.Annals of Pharmacotherapy 12/2007; 41(11):1770-81. · 2.57 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The benefits of reducing blood pressure on the risks of major cardiovascular disease are well established, but uncertainty remains about the comparative effects of different blood-pressure-lowering regimens. We aimed to estimate effects of strategies based on different drug classes (angiotensin-converting-enzyme [ACE] inhibitors, calcium antagonists, angiotensin-receptor blockers [ARBs], and diuretics or beta blockers) or those targeting different blood pressure goals, on the risks of major cardiovascular events and death. We did seven sets of prospectively-designed overviews with data from 29 randomised trials (n=162341). The trial eligibility criteria, primary outcomes, and main hypotheses were specified before the result of any contributing trial was known. In placebo-controlled trials the relative risks of total major cardiovascular events were reduced by regimens based on ACE inhibitors (22%; 95% CI 17-27) or calcium antagonists (18%; 5-29). Greater risk reductions were produced by regimens that targeted lower blood pressure goals (15%; 5-24). ARB-based regimens reduced the risks of total major cardiovascular events (10%; 4-17) compared with control regimens. There were no significant differences in total major cardiovascular events between regimens based on ACE inhibitors, calcium antagonists, or diuretics or beta blockers, although ACE-inhibitor-based regimens reduced blood pressure less. There was evidence of some differences between active regimens in their effects on cause-specific outcomes. For every outcome other than heart failure, the difference between randomised groups in achieved blood pressure reduction was directly related to the observed difference in risk. Treatment with any commonly-used regimen reduces the risk of total major cardiovascular events, and larger reductions in blood pressure produce larger reductions in risk.The Lancet 12/2003; 362(9395):1527-35. · 39.06 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To measure clinical, economic, and humanistic outcomes associated with a pharmacist-managed hypertension clinic compared with physician-managed clinics. Prospective, randomized, comparative study. Managed care organization. A total of 330 patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. Hypertension care provided by either the pharmacist-managed hypertension clinic or physician-managed general medical clinics. Baseline and 6-month evaluations consisted of systolic and diastolic blood pressure measurements, a short-form health survey, and collection of health care utilization information. After treatment, blood pressure measurements were significantly lower (p<0.001) in the pharmacist-managed hypertension clinic group than in the physician-managed clinic group. Patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the hypertension clinic group. Total costs for the hypertension clinic group were not different from those of the physician-managed clinic group ($242.46 vs $233.20, p=0.71), but cost:effectiveness ratios were lower in the hypertension clinic group ($27 vs $193/mm Hg for systolic blood pressure readings, and $48 vs $151/mm Hg for diastolic blood pressure readings). In a hypertension clinic, pharmacists can be a cost-effective alternative to physicians in management of patients, and they can improve clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction.Pharmacotherapy 11/2001; 21(11):1337-44. · 2.31 Impact Factor