HbA1c Change in Patients With and Without Gaps in Pharmacist Visits at a Safety-Net Resident Physician Primary Care Clinic
HbA1c
The mean change in HbA1c between the 2 groups was not statistically significant (-1.5% ± 2.0% in the CCC vs -1.0% ± 2.1% in the GCC, P = .36) (Table 3). However, an absolute mean HbA1c reduction of 1.3% was observed in both groups combined at the end of the study. Figure 1 shows a D-I-D model of the 2 groups. Based on the output, the P value of .11 on the interaction term (time*group) indicates that the D-I-D in HbA1c change from baseline to final between the CCC and GCC is not statistically different. However, the magnitude of the difference calculated from the LSMEANS results showed a trend. The HbA1c from baseline to final measurement of patients in the GCC declined by 0.97 percentage points (from 9.94% to 8.97%), while those in the CCC saw their HbA1c decline by 1.48 percentage points (from 9.96% to 8.48%), for a D-I-D of 0.51. In other words, those in the GCC had an HbA1c that decreased by 0.51% less than that of patients in the CCC, suggesting that the CCC shows a steeper line declining from baseline to final HbA1c compared to the GCC, whose line declines less sharply.
In the subgroup analysis of patients whose baseline HbA1c was ≥ 8%, about 42% in the CCC and 37% in the GCC achieved an HbA1c < 8% (P = .56) (Table 4). Approximately 83% of patients in the CCC had some degree of HbA1c improvement—the final HbA1c was lower than their baseline HbA1c—whereas this was observed in about 75% of patients in the GCC (P = .19). Of patients whose baseline HbA1c was < 8%, there was no significant difference in proportion of patients maintaining an HbA1c < 8% between the groups (P = .57), although some increases in HbA1c and HbA1c changes were observed in the GCC (Table 5).
Health care utilization
Patients in the CCC visited pharmacists 5 times on average over 12 months, whereas patients in the GCC had an average of 6 visits (5 ± 2.6 in the CCC vs 6 ± 2.6 in the GCC, P = .01) (Table 6). The mean length between any 2 adjacent visits was significantly different, averaging about 33 days in the CCC compared to 64 days in the GCC (33.2 ± 10 in the CCC vs 63.7 ± 39.4 in the GCC, P < .001). As shown in Figure 2, the GCC shows wider ranges between any adjacent pharmacy visits throughout until the 10th visit. Both groups had a similar number of visits with primary care physicians during the same time period (4.6 ± 1.86 in the CCC vs 4.3 ± 2.51 in the GCC, P = .44). About 30% of patients in the CCC and 47% in the GCC had at least 1 visit to the emergency room or urgent care or had at least 1 hospital admission, for a total of 124 acute care utilizations between the 2 groups combined. Only a small fraction of acute care visits with or without hospitalizations were related to diabetes and its complications (23.1% in the CCC vs 22.0% in the GCC).
Discussion
This is a real-world study that describes HbA1c changes in patients who maintained pharmacy visits regularly and in those who had a history of a 3-month or longer gap in pharmacy visits. Although the study did not show statistically significant differences in HbA1c reduction between the 2 groups, pharmacists’ care, overall, provided mean HbA1c reductions of 1.3%. This result is consistent with those from multiple previous studies.10-13 It is worth noting that the final HbA1c was numerically lower in patients who followed up with pharmacists regularly than in patients with gaps in visits, with a difference of about 0.5 percentage points. This difference is considered clinically significant,17 and potentially could be even greater if the study duration was longer, as depicted by the slope of HbA1c reductions in the D-I-D model (Figure 1).
Previous studies have shown that pharmacist visits are conducted in shorter intervals than primary care physician visits to provide closer follow-up and to resolve any medication-related problems that may hinder therapeutic outcome improvements.3-4,7-9 Increasing access via pharmacists is particularly important in this clinic, where resident physician continuity and access is challenging. The pharmacist-driven program described in this study does not deviate from the norm, and this study confirms that pharmacist care, regardless of gaps in pharmacist visits, may still be beneficial.