ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Four-Year Evaluation of a Pharmacists-Providers Collaborative Iron Deficiency Clinic in Heart Failure Care.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the performance of the pharmacists-providers collaborative iron deficiency treatment clinic in the heart failure service. Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate the performance of the iron deficiency pharmacists-providers collaborative care clinic during the induction and maintenance phases of intravenous (IV) iron therapy. The study included patients who were seen by HF providers (advanced HF cardiologists or advanced practice providers) and received the IV iron consultation with HF pharmacists. The study included patients aged 18 years or older who were diagnosed with HF or PH and received at least one dose of either ferric carboxymaltose or iron sucrose in outpatient settings. It was managed by the pharmacists-providers collaborative IV iron clinic. The primary outcome was adherence to the IV iron appropriate use criteria, laboratory requirements, and dosing during the induction course. The primary and secondary outcomes were compared with those of the previously reported control group, which received the usual iron deficiency treatment care at the HF clinic prior to the implementation of the pharmacists-providers collaborative IV iron deficiency treatment clinic. The use of oral iron therapy was evaluated over four years. Results: A total of 187 patients were included in the final cohort. The median follow-up period of the IV iron consulting team was 372 (176, 623) days. Compared to the pre-implementation group, the primary outcome was significantly higher in the post-implementation group (81.3 vs. 40%, p<0.001). The most common reasons for nonadherence were the absence of maintenance laboratory requirements (15.5%), failure to administer all induction doses (1.6%), inappropriate use (1.1%), and incorrect dose (0.5%). Ferritin, iron saturation, and hemoglobin values at cycle one were significantly increased after the IV iron induction course compared to baseline values and remained numerically stable throughout the follow-up periods. Serum phosphorus levels remained within the normal range throughout the follow-up period. Among 57 patients on oral iron therapy, the consulting team discontinued it in 19 patients (33.3%) during follow-up. Conclusion: The pharmacists-providers collaborative IV iron clinic significantly improved the performance of IV iron therapy in rural heart failure care settings compared to the usual care. These results highlight the importance of multidisciplinary care management for iron deficiency in the real-world heart failure practice.
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.