Objective.  The 2019 Hospital National Patient Safety Goal 03.05.01 indicates education regarding anticoagulant therapy should be provided to patients and families. Previous studies assessing pharmacist and pharmacy student involvement in oral anticoagulation (OAC) education services have focused on patient-related outcomes, with limited emphasis on the additional benefit to the student. The purpose of this study was to assess the benefit of pharmacy student involvement in anticoagulation education services both clinically and through their perceptions of participating in the service. Methods. This study assessed students’ knowledge and perceptions of providing OAC education before and after a 1-month learning experience, where students provided counseling 2-3 days per week. The primary endpoint was comparing each student’s pre- and post-rotation OAC education knowledge assessments. Secondary endpoints included percentage change in knowledge between the prospective cohort and a historical comparator group, perceived benefit of student participation in the service, percentage of patients able to recall counseling, and number of interventions made related to OAC therapy. Results. A total of 35 pharmacy students were included in this prospective study with 277 patients receiving counseling from June 2020 through March 2021. A total of 32 pharmacy students had assessment data available for retrospective comparison. The mean pharmacy student score within the prospective cohort improved significantly (21.5%) between the pre-assessment and post-assessment. Change in pre- and post-rotation knowledge assessment was also significantly higher in the prospective cohort compared to the retrospective group. Additionally, students gained confidence in their counseling abilities and OAC knowledge through participation. Conclusion. Pharmacy student participation within anticoagulation education services significantly improved student knowledge and confidence in their counseling abilities. It also allowed for over 70% of patients to successfully recall pertinent information about their anticoagulants over a week later and improved patient care through dosing interventions.

Heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) has been classified using various definitions since its first mention in the literature in 2014. This group was most recently defined in the Universal Definition and Classification of Heart Failure (HF) as HF with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 41% to 49%. An increasing emphasis has been placed on HFmrEF over the past several years, with many recent publications suggesting that common therapies used in HF with reduced ejection fraction provide benefit in this population as well. Patients with HFmrEF comprise approximately one-quarter of all patients with HF. The lack of authoritative guidance concerning pharmacotherapeutic approaches in these patients leaves a significant portion of HF patients without an evidence-based approach. Although it remains unclear if HFmrEF is simply a transitional state from preserved to reduced ejection fraction, or a distinct phenotype requiring medical optimization, there are clear cardiovascular benefits to managing this subset appropriately. This publication was created to help serve as a resource for clinicians on this evolving subset of HF and aid in preventing the progression of this disease state through improved therapy optimization. The objective of this article is to briefly discuss the epidemiology and pathophysiology of HFmrEF and review the pharmacology and clinical application of therapies for the management of HFmrEF.

Background Minority populations are often underrepresented in landmark trials for the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Major trials shaping the guidelines sometimes include as few as 5% black patients. Objective The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate the initiation of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for HFrEF on hospital discharge for minority vs white populations and its impact on all-cause 30-day readmission rates to identify areas for larger future research studies and opportunities for pharmacist intervention. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with HFrEF patients discharged over a 3-month period. The primary objective was to compare all-cause 30-day readmissions in minority vs white patients with HFrEF who were discharged on initial GDMT. Results 300 patients were included in this study, with 188 patients in the minority group and 112 patients in the white group. The minority group was predominantly African American (92%). The primary endpoint demonstrated significantly higher 30-day all-cause readmissions in minority patients compared to white patients who received initial GDMT (20.5 vs 7.7%, P = .0144), despite similar rates of GDMT therapy between groups. Conclusion Initial GDMT in minority patients may not reduce readmissions to the same extent seen in white patients. Special emphasis should be placed on evaluating minority patients with HFrEF for additional therapeutic interventions.