Pharmaceutical care of elderly patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

The pharmacist intervention program provided pharmaceutical services that improved long-term, safe control of blood sugar levels for ambulatory elderly patients with diabetes and did not increase medical expenses.

The role of the pharmacist in the care of patients with cardiovascular diseases

“…Similar conclusions can be drawn from a randomised study conducted by Chen et al [29] in which the group covered by the pharmaceutical intervention had significantly better glycaemic control. In this study the mean HbA1c level significantly decreased (0.83%) after six months in the intervention group compared with an increase of 0.43% in the control group (p ≤ 0.001) [29]. The DIabetes in ADolescence Engagement and Monitoring by pharmacists (DIADEMA) study, conducted simultaneously in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Germany, also lead to similar conclusions -the improvement in HbA1c levels was significantly greater in the intervention group vs. the control group at six months (change from baseline -0.54 vs. +0.32%, p = 0.0075) [30].…”

“…Improvement in blood glucose was observed, however, in another study conducted in China, where the haemoglobin A1c (HA1c) levels were significantly reduced in the intervention group compared with the control group (-1.57 ± 1.50% vs. -0.40 ± 1.19%, p < 0.001) after intervention based on a medicine use review obtained during hospitalisation of patients with type 2 diabetes [28]. Similar conclusions can be drawn from a randomised study conducted by Chen et al [29] in which the group covered by the pharmaceutical intervention had significantly better glycaemic control. In this study the mean HbA1c level significantly decreased (0.83%) after six months in the intervention group compared with an increase of 0.43% in the control group (p ≤ 0.001) [29].…”

Efficacy of Pharmacist Based Diabetes Educational Interventions on Clinical Outcomes of Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Network Meta-Analysis

“…Among the studies included in this review, n = 3 were cluster-randomized controlled trials, (Armour et al, 2004; Krass et al, 2007; Mehuys et al, 2011) whereas rest of the studies, n = 40 were parallel randomized controlled trials (Sarkadi and Rosenqvist, 2004; Clifford et al, 2005; Hayward et al, 2005; Odegard et al, 2005; Rothman et al, 2005; Suppapitiporn et al, 2005; Taylor et al, 2005; Fornos et al, 2006; Scott et al, 2006; Ko et al, 2007; Al Mazroui et al, 2009; Doucette et al, 2009; Jameson and Baty, 2010; Kang et al, 2010; Taveira et al, 2010; Cohen et al, 2011; Farsaei et al, 2011; Sriram et al, 2011; Ali et al, 2012; Chan et al, 2012; Jacobs et al, 2012; Jarab et al, 2012; Mahwi and Obied, 2013; Mourão et al, 2013; Samtia et al, 2013; Castejón et al, 2014; Chung et al, 2014; Ahmad et al, 2015; Cani et al, 2015; Chow et al, 2015; Jahangard-Rafsanjani et al, 2015; Wishah et al, 2015; Butt et al, 2016; Chen et al, 2016; Lim et al, 2016; Nascimentoa et al, 2016; Tourkmani et al, 2016; Korcegez et al, 2017; Shao et al, 2017; Siaw et al, 2017). Most of the included studies ( n = 20) were conducted in Asia (Suppapitiporn et al, 2005; Ko et al, 2007; Kang et al, 2010; Farsaei et al, 2011; Sriram et al, 2011; Chan et al, 2012; Jarab et al, 2012; Mahwi and Obied, 2013; Samtia et al, 2013; Chung et al, 2014; Chow et al, 2015; Jahangard-Rafsanjani et al, 2015; Wishah et al, 2015; Butt et al, 2016; Chen et al, 2016; Lim et al, 2016; Tourkmani et al, 2016; Shao et al, 2017; Siaw et al, 2017), followed by North America ( n = 11) (Hayward et al, 2005; Odegard et al, 2005; Rothman et al, 2005; Scott et al, 2006; Doucette et al, …”

“…Most of the included studies ( n = 20) were conducted in Asia (Suppapitiporn et al, 2005; Ko et al, 2007; Kang et al, 2010; Farsaei et al, 2011; Sriram et al, 2011; Chan et al, 2012; Jarab et al, 2012; Mahwi and Obied, 2013; Samtia et al, 2013; Chung et al, 2014; Chow et al, 2015; Jahangard-Rafsanjani et al, 2015; Wishah et al, 2015; Butt et al, 2016; Chen et al, 2016; Lim et al, 2016; Tourkmani et al, 2016; Shao et al, 2017; Siaw et al, 2017), followed by North America ( n = 11) (Hayward et al, 2005; Odegard et al, 2005; Rothman et al, 2005; Scott et al, 2006; Doucette et al, 2009; Jameson and Baty, 2010; Taveira et al, 2010; Cohen et al, 2011; Jacobs et al, 2012; Castejón et al, 2014; Korcegez et al, 2017), Europe ( n = 5) (Sarkadi and Rosenqvist, 2004; Fornos et al, 2006; Mehuys et al, 2011; Ali et al, 2012; Nascimentoa et al, 2016), Australia ( n = 4) (Armour et al, 2004; Clifford et al, 2005; Taylor et al, 2005; Krass et al, 2007), South America ( n = 2) (Mourão et al, 2013; Cani et al, 2015), and Africa ( n = 1) (Ahmad et al, 2015). …”

Untitled

“…[20] Moreover, pharmacist involvement in multidisciplinary healthcare team may promote quality improvement in safe medication management [21] and reduce medical cost. [22] The pharmacist may also use a checklist tool to assist them to identify issues in therapy and management of their Type 2 diabetes patients systematically and enable earlier intervention to improve metabolic control. [23] The intervention may lead to better therapeutic outcomes by rationalizing drug therapy.…”