ObjectiveTo determine the economic impact of medication non-adherence across multiple disease groups.DesignSystematic review.Evidence reviewA comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and Scopus in September 2017. Studies quantifying the cost of medication non-adherence in relation to economic impact were included. Relevant information was extracted and quality assessed using the Drummond checklist.ResultsSeventy-nine individual studies assessing the cost of medication non-adherence across 14 disease groups were included. Wide-scoping cost variations were reported, with lower levels of adherence generally associated with higher total costs. The annual adjusted disease-specific economic cost of non-adherence per person ranged from $949 to $44 190 (in 2015 US$). Costs attributed to ‘all causes’ non-adherence ranged from $5271 to $52 341. Medication possession ratio was the metric most used to calculate patient adherence, with varying cut-off points defining non-adherence. The main indicators used to measure the cost of non-adherence were total cost or total healthcare cost (83% of studies), pharmacy costs (70%), inpatient costs (46%), outpatient costs (50%), emergency department visit costs (27%), medical costs (29%) and hospitalisation costs (18%). Drummond quality assessment yielded 10 studies of high quality with all studies performing partial economic evaluations to varying extents.ConclusionMedication non-adherence places a significant cost burden on healthcare systems. Current research assessing the economic impact of medication non-adherence is limited and of varying quality, failing to provide adaptable data to influence health policy. The correlation between increased non-adherence and higher disease prevalence should be used to inform policymakers to help circumvent avoidable costs to the healthcare system. Differences in methods make the comparison among studies challenging and an accurate estimation of true magnitude of the cost impossible. Standardisation of the metric measures used to estimate medication non-adherence and development of a streamlined approach to quantify costs is required.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42015027338.

Background Primary health professionals are well positioned to support the delivery of patient self-management in an evidence-based, structured capacity. A need exists to better understand the active components required for effective self-management support, how these might be delivered within primary care, and the training and system changes that would subsequently be needed. Objectives (1) To examine self-management support interventions in primary care on health outcomes for a wide range of diseases compared to usual standard of care; and (2) To identify the effective strategies that facilitate positive clinical and humanistic outcomes in this setting. Method A systematic review of randomized controlled trials evaluating self-management support interventions was conducted following the Cochrane handbook & PRISMA guidelines. Published literature was systematically searched from inception to June 2019 in PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Eligible studies assessed the effectiveness of individualized interventions with follow-up, delivered face-to-face to adult patients with any condition in primary care, compared with usual standard of care. Matrices were developed that mapped the evidence and components for each intervention. The methodological quality of included studies were appraised. Results 6,510 records were retrieved. 58 studies were included in the final qualitative synthesis. Findings reveal a structured patient-provider exchange is required in primary care (including a one-on-one patient-provider consultation, ongoing follow up and provision of self-help materials). Interventions should be tailored to patient needs and may include combinations of strategies to improve a patient’s disease or treatment knowledge; independent monitoring of symptoms, encouraging self-treatment through a personalized action plan in response worsening symptoms or exacerbations, psychological coping and stress management strategies, and enhancing responsibility in medication adherence and lifestyle choices. Follow-up may include tailored feedback, monitoring of progress with respect to patient set healthcare goals, or honing problem-solving and decision-making skills. Theoretical models provided a strong base for effective SMS interventions. Positive outcomes for effective SMS included improvements in clinical indicators, health-related quality of life, self-efficacy (confidence to self-manage), disease knowledge or control. An SMS model has been developed which sets the foundation for the design and evaluation of practical strategies for the construct of self-management support interventions in primary healthcare practice. Conclusions These findings provide primary care professionals with evidence-based strategies and structure to deliver SMS in practice. For this collaborative partnership approach to be more widely applied, future research should build on these findings for optimal SMS servic...

The AFasma study focused on the important outcomes of asthma management, and showed that through the designed intervention, community pharmacists can increase controlled asthma patients compared to usual care. Trial registration NCT01085474.

BackgroundThe concept of Pharmaceutical Care is operationalized through pharmaceutical professional services, which are patient-oriented to optimize their pharmacotherapy and to improve clinical outcomes. ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of a medication review with follow-up (MRF) service for older adults with polypharmacy in Spanish community pharmacies, against the alternative of having their medication dispensed normally. MethodsThe study was designed as a cluster randomized controlled trial, and was carried out over a time horizon of six months. The target population was older adults with polypharmacy, defined as individuals taking five or more medicines per day. The study was conducted in 178 community pharmacies in Spain. Costutility analysis adopted a health service perspective. Costs were in euros at 2014 prices and the effectiveness of the intervention was estimated as QALYs. In order to analyze the uncertainty of ICER results, we performed a nonparametric bootstrapping with 5,000 replications. ConclusionMRF service is an effective intervention for optimizing prescribed medication and improving the quality of life in older adults with polypharmacy in community pharmacies. The results from the cost-utility analysis suggest that MRF service is cost effective. Key points for decision makers-Polypharmacy is a particular concern in older adult populations, and is associated with negative health outcomes.-Medication review with follow-up is a service that attempts to optimize pharmacotherapy, not just by focusing on the process of the use of medication, but also by improving clinical outcomes for older adults.-Medication review with follow-up service is an effective intervention for optimizing prescribed medication and improving the quality of life of older adults with polypharmacy in community pharmacies. Compared with usual dispensing, this service is cost effective.3

The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the impact of pharmacists' interventions on clinical asthma outcomes on adult patients and to identify the outcome indicators used.PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Scielo were searched. Studies addressing pharmacists' interventions on adult asthma patients reporting clinical asthma outcomes were incorporated.11 clinical outcomes were identified in 21 studies. 10 studies measured the impact of the intervention on asthma control. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) and non-RCTs found positive results in percentages of controlled patients and Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) scores. Discordant results were found for Asthma Control Test results. Asthma severity was assessed in four studies. One RCT found a significant decrease in the percentage of severe patients; two non-RCTs found significant improvements in severity scores. 11 studies reported pulmonary function indicators, showing inconsistent results. Eight studies measured asthma symptoms; three RCTs and four non-RCTs showed significant improvements.RCTs and non-RCTs generated similar results for most outcomes. Based on the evidence generated by RCTs, pharmacists' have a positive impact on the percentage of controlled patients, ACQ scores, severity and symptoms. Future research should report using the core outcome set of indicators established for asthma (PROSPERO CRD42014007019).