ArticleFederal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS2025
Evaluation of Pharmacist-Driven Inhaled Corticosteroid De-escalation in Veterans.
Article in Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS, 2025. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines recommend inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) for patients with elevated eosinophil counts who experience chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations while receiving non-ICS inhaler therapy. The guidelines also encourage de-escalation based on eosinophil counts and adverse events (AEs) associated with ICS use. This quality improvement project sought to determine the impact of pharmacist-driven de-escalation on ICS use in veterans with COPD. Methods: Candidates for ICS de-escalation were identified using a population health database and screened for inclusion. A Computerized Patient Record System progress note was entered recommending ICS de-escalation, initiation of non-ICS alternatives, and/or referral to a pharmacist for management. Patient charts were reviewed at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months after progress note entry. The primary endpoint was the number of patients with de-escalated ICSs. Secondary endpoints included the number of COPD exacerbations and the number of documented ICS AEs. Results: One hundred and six patients received an ICS de-escalation recommendation. At 3 months, 50 patients (47.2%) had their ICS therapy de-escalated; at 6 months, 62 patients (58.5%) de-escalated. More cases of pneumonia occurred in patients using an ICS than in patients not using an ICS. A similar number of COPD exacerbations occurred in patients using an ICS vs those who had been de-escalated. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that pharmacist-driven ICS de-escalation may be an effective way to reduce ICS use in veterans. Controlled studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmacist-driven ICS de-escalation.
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.