What question did this study set out to answer?

Evaluate the effects of pharmacist-led interventions on outcomes in patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD).

April 18, 2026International Journal of COPD0 citationsOpen Access

Pharmacist-Led Integrated Management for Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

XLXinyi LiChinese Academy of Sciences XMXuedi MaChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College WQWangjun Qin

Puntos clave

Evaluate the effects of pharmacist-led interventions on outcomes in patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD).
Conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA 2020 guidelines.
Searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science until June 23, 2025.
Included randomized controlled trials assessing pharmaceutical care in COPD patients.
Used a random-effects model to estimate pooled relative risks and mean differences.
Assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.
Included 11 randomized controlled trials with 2313 participants.
Pharmacist-led interventions reduced risk of exacerbation-related hospital admissions (RR = 0.43).
Observed improvements in medication adherence and higher smoking cessation rates.
Health-related quality of life showed improvement; however, substantial heterogeneity was noted.
No significant effects found on COPD Assessment Test scores or objective disease measures.

Resumen

Purpose: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and suboptimal medication management contributes to exacerbations and preventable healthcare utilization. Pharmacist-led integrated care has the potential to improve medication use and clinical outcomes. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of pharmacist-led interventions in COPD. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted and reported in accordance with PRISMA 2020. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from inception until June 23, 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of pharmaceutical care on clinical outcomes in COPD patients were included. A random-effects model was used to estimate pooled relative risks (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results: A total of 11 randomized controlled trials involving 2313 participants were included. Pharmacist-led interventions were associated with a lower risk of exacerbation-related hospital admissions (RR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.33– 0.55). Improvements in medication adherence and higher smoking cessation rates were also observed. Improvements in health-related quality of life were reported; however, substantial heterogeneity was present. In contrast, effects on COPD Assessment Test scores and objective disease measures, including lung function, were non-significant. Overall study quality was variable, with many trials being small and at high risk of bias. Conclusion: Pharmacist-led interventions in COPD may improve selected medication-related and patient-centered outcomes; however, the available evidence is heterogeneous and limited by study quality and inconsistent effects across outcomes. These findings should be interpreted cautiously, and well-designed, adequately powered trials with standardized outcomes are needed before robust conclusions regarding clinical effectiveness can be drawn. Keywords: COPD, pharmacist-led integrated management, randomized controlled trials, meta-analysis

Preguntar a la IA

Me gusta

Guardar

Ver artículo completo