Effectiveness of Pharmacist Interventions on Cardiovascular Risk in Patients With CKD: A Subgroup Analysis of the Randomized Controlled RxEACH Trial

5 years ago

Effectiveness of Pharmacist Interventions on Cardiovascular Risk in Patients With CKD: A Subgroup Analysis of the Randomized Controlled RxEACH Trial

Affecting a substantial proportion of adults, chronic kidney disease (CKD) is considered a major risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) events. It has been reported that patients with CKD are underserved when it comes to CV risk reduction efforts.

Study Design

Prespecified subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

Setting & Participants

Adults with CKD and at least 1 uncontrolled CV risk factor were enrolled from 56 pharmacies across Alberta, Canada.

Intervention

Patient, laboratory, and individualized CV risk assessments; treatment recommendations; prescription adaptation(s) and/or initiation as necessary; and regular monthly follow-up for 3 months.

Outcomes

The primary outcome was change in estimated CV risk from baseline to 3 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes were change between baseline and 3 months after randomization in individual CV risk factors (ie, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, blood pressure, and hemoglobin A1c), risk for developing end-stage renal disease, and medication use and dosage; tobacco cessation 3 months after randomization for those who used tobacco at baseline; and the impact of rural versus urban residence on the difference in change in estimated CV risk.

Measurements

CV risk was estimated using the Framingham, UK Prospective Diabetes Study, and international risk assessment equations depending on the patients’ comorbid conditions.

Results

290 of the 723 participants enrolled in RxEACH had CKD. After adjusting for baseline values, the difference in change in CV risk was 20% (P <0.001). Changes of 0.2mmol/L in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration (P =0.004), 10.5mmHg in systolic blood pressure (P <0.001), 0.7% in hemoglobin A1c concentration (P <0.001), and 19.6% in smoking cessation (P =0.04) were observed when comparing the intervention and control groups. There was a larger reduction in CV risk in patients living in rural locations versus those living in urban areas.

Limitations

The 3-month follow-up period can be considered relatively short. It is possible that larger reduction in CV risk could have been observed with a longer follow up period.

Conclusions

This subgroup analysis demonstrated that a

-Abstract Truncated-

Publisher URL: www.sciencedirect.com/science

DOI: S0272638617308909