ArticlePharmacy practice
A pharmacist-led follow-up program for patients with established coronary heart disease in North Norway - a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Pharmacy practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Medication review in hospitalised patients to reduce morbidity and mortality.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Patient-mediated interventions to improve professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Pharmacist services for non-hospitalised patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy for older people.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Impact of a pharmacist adherence intervention on medication beliefs and drug-related problems in coronary patients - a process evaluation of the MIMeRiC trial.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Prescribing Trends of Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors and Mortality among Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: Insights from the Malaysian National Cardiovascular Disease Registry.Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of the study was twofold; 1) to develop a clinical pharmacist-led 12 month lasting follow-up program for patients with established coronary heart disease (CHD) discharged from the University Hospital of North Norway, and 2) to explore the impact of the program with regards to adherence to a medication assessment tool for secondary prevention of CHD and change in biomedical risk factors.
methodsA total of 102 patients aged 18-82 years were enrolled in a non-blinded randomized controlled trial with an intervention group and a control group. The intervention comprised medication reconciliation, medication review and patient education during three meetings; at discharge, after three months and after twelve months. The control group received standard care from their general practitioner. Primary outcomes were adherence to clinical guideline recommendations concerning prescription, therapy goal achievement and lifestyle education defined in the medication assessment tool for secondary prevention of CHD (MAT-CHDSP). Secondary outcomes included changes in the biomedical risk factors cholesterol, blood pressure and blood glucose.
resultsNinety-four patients completed the trial, 48 intervention group patients and 46 controls. Appropriate prescribing was high, but therapy goal achievement was low in both groups. Overall adherence to MAT-CHDSP criteria increased in both groups and was significantly higher in the intervention group at study end, 78.4% vs. 62.0%, p<0.001. The difference was statistically significant for the documented lifestyle advices in intervention group patients. No significant improvements in biomedical risk factors were observed in favor of the intervention group.
conclusionsThe study showed an increased guideline adherence in both study groups. This indicates that attention to clinical practice guideline recommendations in itself increases adherence - which may be a clinical pharmacist task. A larger adequately powered study is needed to show a significant difference in biomedical risk factor improvements in favor of the intervention. Amendments to the follow-up program are suggested before implementation in standard patient care can be recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.