↓ Skip to main content

Using pharmacists to improve risk stratification and management of stage 3A chronic kidney disease: a feasibility study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nephrology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
193 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Using pharmacists to improve risk stratification and management of stage 3A chronic kidney disease: a feasibility study
Published in
BMC Nephrology, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12882-016-0383-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alex R. Chang, Michael Evans, Christina Yule, Larissa Bohn, Amanda Young, Meredith Lewis, Elisabeth Graboski, Bethany Gerdy, William Ehmann, Jonathan Brady, Leah Lawrence, Natacha Antunes, Jamie Green, Susan Snyder, H. Lester Kirchner, Morgan Grams, Robert Perkins

Abstract

Measurement of albuminuria to stratify risk in chronic kidney disease (CKD) is not done universally in the primary care setting despite recommendation in KDIGO (Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes) guidelines. Pharmacist medication therapy management (MTM) may be helpful in improving CKD risk stratification and management. We conducted a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial using seven primary care clinic sites in the Geisinger Health System to evaluate the feasibility of pharmacist MTM in patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 45-59 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and uncontrolled blood pressure (≥150/85 mmHg). In the three pharmacist MTM sites, pharmacists were instructed to follow a protocol aimed to improve adherence to KDIGO guidelines on testing for proteinuria and lipids, and statin and blood pressure medical therapy. In the four control clinics, patients received usual care. The primary outcome was proteinuria screening over a follow-up of 1 year. A telephone survey was administered to physicians, pharmacists, and patients in the pharmacist MTM arm at the end of the trial. Baseline characteristics were similar between pharmacist MTM (n = 24) and control (n = 23) patients, although pharmacist MTM patients tended to be younger (64 vs. 71 y; p = 0.06) and less likely to have diabetes (17 % vs. 35 %; p = 0.2) or baseline proteinuria screening (41.7 % vs. 60.9 %, p = 0.2). Mean eGFR was 54 ml/min/1.73 m(2) in both groups. The pharmacist MTM intervention did not significantly improve total proteinuria screening at the population level (OR 2.6, 95 % CI: 0.5-14.0; p = 0.3). However, it tended to increase screening of previously unscreened patients (78.6 % in the pharmacist MTM group compared to 33.3 % in the control group; OR 7.3, 95 % CI: 0.96-56.3; p = 0.05). In general, the intervention was well-received by patients, pharmacists, and providers, who agreed that pharmacists could play an important role in CKD management. A few patients contacted the research team to express anxiety about having a CKD diagnosis without prior knowledge. Pharmacist MTM may be useful in improving risk stratification and management of CKD in the primary care setting, although implementation requires ongoing education and multidisciplinary collaboration and careful communication regarding CKD diagnosis. Future studies are needed to establish the effectiveness of pharmacist MTM on slowing CKD progression and improvement in cardiovascular outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02208674 Registered August 1, 2014, first patient enrolled September 30, 2014.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 193 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 193 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 13%
Student > Master 22 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 9%
Researcher 16 8%
Student > Postgraduate 12 6%
Other 35 18%
Unknown 64 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 24%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 26 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 9%
Psychology 7 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 2%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 70 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 June 2018.
All research outputs
#18,640,437
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nephrology
#1,900
of 2,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,813
of 313,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nephrology
#19
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,500 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,659 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.