Clinical outcome measures in the assessment of impact of pharmacists in cardiology ambulatory care: A systematic review

Abstract

Aims: Pharmacists are involved in the care of patients with cardiac disease within the ambulatory setting across multiple modes of delivery and practice settings. There is a lack of consensus surrounding the assessments used to measure the impact of pharmacist care. This heterogeneity may undermine confidence and limit utilisation of pharmacists in cardiology ambulatory care. A systematic review was conducted to understand how pharmacist interventions in cardiology ambulatory care were assessed and the impacts of these interventions on patient-centred outcomes.

Methods and results: A comprehensive search was conducted of MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Register of Randomised Controlled Trials and EMBASE from 2000 to 2020 with search terms involving pharmacist interventions among cardiology patients in the ambulatory care setting; with studies restricted to randomised controlled trials. Search results were independently screened by two reviewers. The Cochrane Risk of Bias in Randomised Trials tool was used for quality assessment of the included studies. Assessments of pharmacist impact were analysed and compared to established quality indicators of cardiology care. The search produced 3380 individual studies, following screening, 26 studies involving 9013 participants met inclusion criteria. Across the 26 included studies, eleven different intervention types were identified. Four main outcome measures assessing the impact of these interventions were identified: direct measure of cardiovascular disease risk factor, major adverse cardiovascular events, medication adherence, validated risk score for cardiovascular events. There was a high degree of variance in both the way these interventions influenced the outcome as well the outcome measures selected to assess the impact of the intervention. Of the 26 studies, sixteen listed positive impacts on primary outcomes and the remaining 10 listed neutral effects.

Conclusion: Several outcome measures have been used to assess the impact of pharmacist intervention in cardiology ambulatory care. Aligning outcome measures with known indicators of cardiology care quality, as well as more detailed descriptions of intervention, will provide clinicians vital information in designing effective and measurable interventions in cardiology ambulatory care.