Randomized Trial to Improve Primary Care Patient Management and Patient Outcomes Using a Drug–Drug Interaction Test: Confirmation of the DECART Simulated Patient Clinical Utility Trial Results

Abstract

Drug–drug interactions (DDIs) are a serious problem in the healthcare system, leading to excess healthcare utilization and costs. We conducted a second prospective randomized, controlled trial to further establish the real-world clinical utility of a novel assay that objectively identifies potentially serious DDIs in real-world patients. Re-recruiting primary care physicians (PCPs) from our first randomized, controlled, simulated-patients study on DDIs, we experimentally introduced a definitive, urine-based mass spectrometry test intervention that the physicians could use when caring for their eligible patients. Patients were eligible if taking four or more prescription medications or suspected of taking other non-prescribed substances with potential medication interactions. The primary outcome was whether DDI testing changed clinical care. We explored a secondary outcome to see if the change in practice improved symptoms in patients with potential DDIs. A total of 169 control and 162 intervention patients were enrolled in the study, and their medical records were abstracted. In real-world patients, intervention physicians identified and/or treated a DDI at 3.0x the rate in their patient population compared to controls (21.6% vs. 7.1%, p < 0.001). Intervention physicians were more likely to discontinue or adjust the interacting agent compared to controls (62.9% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.001), and patient-reported symptoms also significantly declined (29.6% vs. 20.1%, p = 0.045). These results were nearly identical to concurrent measurements that used simulated patients, wherein intervention was more likely to both make a DDI diagnosis (56.3% vs. 21.6%, p < 0.001) and stop the interacting medications (58.3% versus 26.6%, p < 0.001). Bringing a new diagnostic test to market, particularly for an under-recognized clinical problem, requires robust data on both clinical validity and clinical utility. The results of this follow-up study showed that the use of DDI testing in real-world patients significantly improved (1) primary care patient management of drug interactions and (2) patient outcomes.

A Randomized Controlled Study on Clinical Adherence to Evidence-Based Guidelines in the Management of Simulated Patients With Barrett's Esophagus and the Clinical Utility of a Tissue Systems Pathology Test: Results From Q-TAB

“…The limitations of this study include the use of simulated patients; however, other research comparing simulated patient research with real-world patient studies indicates that real-world studies would broadly substantiate this study's findings ( 38 , 39 ). We used a national sample of gastroenterologists and GI surgeons.…”

“…As such, it is possible that unexplained heterogeneity may make selected participants systematically different from the national norm or other groups of physicians. This study did not factor in the variability of the histopathology reports that participants evaluated in making their clinical decisions ( 38 , 39 ). Another limiting factor is variable participant interpretation of the educational materials.…”

Clinical utility of a novel test for assessing cardiovascular disease risk in type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial

“…However, multiple studies have shown that the results from simulated patient studies using the validated tool are the same as results from similarly conducted studies in real-world patients. This suggests use of simulated patient studies may accelerate the evaluation of clinical utility [ 36 , 37 ]. Whether these improvements in care due to the CVD-T2D test will translate to real world patients remains to be demonstrated.…”

Clinical Variation in the Treatment Practices for Medication Nonadherence, Drug–Drug Interactions, and Recognition of Disease Progression in Patients with Chronic Cardiometabolic Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Patient Simulation Study among Primary Care Physicians

“…Another study showed that in a selected patient population taking four or more drugs, 78.4% had a moderate to severe DDI [15]. Evidence shows that DDI testing in real-world patients significantly improves the management of polypharmacy, DDIs, and patient outcomes [16].…”