Cargando…

Patient Experience Evaluation of the CMO-Based Pharmaceutical Care Model vs Usual Care in People Living with HIV

OBJECTIVE: To compare patient experience in a real-life population of people living with HIV (PLWH) who received pharmaceutical care (PC) based on the Capacity-Motivation-Opportunity (CMO) model versus the traditional model. METHODS: Prospective cohort study in PLWH receiving either CMO-based PC or...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Morillo-Verdugo, Ramón, Lazaro-Lopez, Alicia, Alonso-Grandes, Elena, Martin-Conde, Maria Teresa, Diaz-Ruiz, Pilar, Molina-Cuadrado, Emilio, Huertas-Fernandez, María José, Navarro-Aznares, Herminia, Areas Del Aguila, Vera, Gimeno-Gracia, Mercedes, Margusino-Framiñán, Luis, Martínez-Sesmero, Jose Manuel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9807066/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36601427
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S392398
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To compare patient experience in a real-life population of people living with HIV (PLWH) who received pharmaceutical care (PC) based on the Capacity-Motivation-Opportunity (CMO) model versus the traditional model. METHODS: Prospective cohort study in PLWH receiving either CMO-based PC or traditional PC in Spain between October 2019 and June 2021 (24 weeks), performed by the pharmacy department of 14 Spanish hospitals. Participants were adult patients with a clinical diagnosis of HIV treated with antiretrovirals who had been monitored in the participating hospital pharmacies for >1 year. Patient experience (IEXPAC questionnaire), clinical outcomes (cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL, glycated haemoglobin, and blood pressure), adherence to treatment, virologic control and patient satisfaction were determined. RESULTS: Patient experience in the CMO group at week 24 was significantly better (7.6 vs 6.9) than in the traditional group, with a higher mean improvement. Adherence was better in the CMO group, particularly with regard to concomitant medications (53.2% to 91.7%, p<0.001); no changes were observed in the traditional group. Patient satisfaction improved in the CMO group vs the traditional group (48 vs 44, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare CMO vs traditional methodology. The CMO model showed an overall improvement in real-life patient experience, satisfaction, and adherence to treatment compared to the traditional methodology.