Key result
Pharmacist-led telehealth significantly improved overall medication adherence (13.9; 95% CI 6.6 to 21.2) over 6 months compared to nurse-led telehealth, but did not improve depression scores.
Why the study?
It was unknown whether a pharmacist-led telehealth disease management program is superior to usual care of nurse-led telehealth in improving diabetes medication adherence, A1C, and depression scores in patients with concomitant diabetes and depression.
Does a pharmacist-led telehealth disease management program improve medication adherence, A1C, and depression scores in veterans with diabetes and depression?
RCT
randomized
Does a pharmacist-led telehealth disease management program improve medication adherence, A1C, and depression scores in veterans with diabetes and depression?
Effect estimate: 13.9 improvement (95% CI 6.6 to 21.2)
A pharmacist-led telehealth program improved medication adherence but was associated with worse glycemic control compared to a nurse-led program in veterans with diabetes and depression.
Pharmacist-led telehealth improves adherence versus nurse-led models in veterans with diabetes and depression; extends telehealth evidence while leaving depression scores unchanged.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to determine whether a pharmacist-led telehealth disease management program is superior to usual care of nurse-led telehealth in improving diabetes medication adherence, haemoglobin A1C (A1C), and depression scores in patients with concomitant diabetes and depression. METHODS: Patients with diabetes and depression were randomized to pharmacist-led or nurse-led telehealth. Veterans with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, an A1C ≥ 7.5%, diagnosis of depression, and access to a landline phone were invited to participate. Patients were randomized to usual care of nurse-led telehealth or pharmacist-led telehealth. Patients were shown how to use the telehealth equipment by the nurse or pharmacist. In the pharmacist-led group, the patients received an in-depth medication review in addition to the instruction on the telehealth equipment. RESULTS: After six months, the pharmacist-led telehealth arm showed significant improvements for cardiovascular medication adherence (14.0; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4 to 27.6), antidepressant medication adherence (26.0; 95% CI 0.9 to 51.2), and overall medication adherence combined (13.9; 95% CI 6.6 to 21.2) from baseline to six-month follow-up. There was a significant difference in A1C between each group at the six-month follow-up in the nurse-led telehealth group (6.9 ± 0.9) as compared to the pharmacist-led telehealth group (8.8 ± 2.0). There was no significance in the change in patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) from baseline to follow-up in both groups. DISCUSSION: Pharmacist-led telehealth was efficacious in improving medication adherence for cardiovascular, antidepressants, and overall medications over a six-month period as compared to nurse-led telehealth. There was no significant improvement in overall depression scores.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cohen et al. (2019) conducted an RCT in diabetes and depression. Pharmacist-led telehealth disease management program vs. Usual care of nurse-led telehealth was evaluated on overall medication adherence combined (13.9 improvement, 95% CI 6.6 to 21.2). Pharmacist-led telehealth significantly improved overall medication adherence (13.9; 95% CI 6.6 to 21.2) over 6 months compared to nurse-led telehealth, but did not improve depression scores.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: