A Systematic Review of the Evidence for Pharmacist Care of Patients With Dyslipidemia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of pharmacist care on patients with dyslipidemia. DESIGN: Systematic review of 21 randomized controlled trials. PATIENTS: A total of 5416 patients who received enhanced pharmacist care or standard care as part of a research study. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Nineteen databases and four trial registries were systematically searched from inception through February 21, 2010, with an update in September 2011. In addition, Web sites of relevant professional associations, scientific meetings, and research groups were reviewed, and manual searches of select journals were performed. A total of 8771 articles were identified, and 21 studies included. Data from the studies were analyzed using a random-effects model. The primary outcome measure assessed was the difference between the groups (pharmacist intervention vs standard care) in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) level at the end of follow-up. Secondary outcome measures included the difference between the groups at the end of follow-up in total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglyceride levels; and the proportion of patients who achieved target lipid parameters, underwent lipid panel measurements, adhered to therapy, and/or were instructed to change their lipid-lowering therapy. At the end of follow-up, the mean LDL level was 10.7 mg/dl lower in the enhanced pharmacy care groups compared with the standard care groups (95% confidence interval [CI] -16.9 to -4.6 mg/dl), with moderate heterogeneity. The mean total cholesterol level was significantly lower in the enhanced pharmacy care groups compared with the standard care groups; however, these results were highly heterogeneous. Patients who received enhanced pharmacist care were also more likely than those receiving standard care to achieve target lipid parameters (odds ratio [OR] 2.46, 95% CI 1.43-4.25) and to have a lipid panel ordered or recommended by a pharmacist during the study (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.30-3.24). Patients in the pharmacist intervention groups were almost twice as likely as patients in the standard care groups to have a change in lipid-lowering therapy (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.09-3.06). Adherence data could not be analyzed. CONCLUSION: This systematic review showed that enhanced pharmacist care improves lipid parameters, notably LDL levels, in patients with dyslipidemia. These results point to the benefit that pharmacist care can provide across the spectrum of dyslipidemia management, from screening patients to treating them to assisting them in the attainment of clinical targets.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,019 | 0,081 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,013 | 0,010 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,008 | 0,008 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».