Effect of Evidence-Based Pharmacy Care on Satisfaction and Cognition in Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Taking Rivaroxaban

Figures & data

Table 1 Classes of Recommendations and Levels of Evidence

Classes of Recommendations	Definition	Wording to Use
Class I	Evidence and/or general agreement that a given treatment or procedure is beneficial, useful, effective.	Is recommended or is indicated
Class II	Conflicting evidence and/or divergence of opinion about the usefulness/efficacy of the given treatment or procedure.
Class IIa	Weight of evidence/opinion is in favour of usefulness/efficacy.	Should be considered
Class IIb	Usefulness/efficacy is less well established by evidence/opinion.	May be considered
Class III	Evidence or general agreement that the given treatment or procedure is not useful/effective, and in some cases may be harmful.	Is not recommended
Level of evidence A	Data derived from multiple randomized clinical trials or meta-analyses.
Level of evidence B	Data derived from single randomized clinical or large non-randomized studies.
Level of evidence C	Consensus of opinion of the experts and/or small studies, retrospective studies, registries.

Figure 1 A decision-making process to establish a pharmacy care plan according to medical/pharmacy evidence that is compatible with national health policy and patient factors.

Abbreviation: EBP, evidence-based pharmacy..

Table 2 Baseline Comparison Between Study Group and Control Group

Items	Indicators	Study Group (n=100)		Control Group (n=99)		P values
		Numerical	Rate	Numerical	Rate
Age mean (±SD)		75.90±8.95	–	75.81±9.11	–	0.07
Gender	Male	55	55.0%	53	53.5%	0.84
Education						0.94
	Primary school and below	58	58.0%	56	56.6%
	Junior high school	15	15.0%	18	18.2%
	Senior High School and Junior College	20	20.0%	19	19.2%
	University degree or above	7	7.0%	6	6.0%
CHA2DS2-VASc score mean (±SD)		4.64±1.44	–	4.68±1.41	–	0.99
Merger disease						0.59
	Previous stroke or TIA	66	66.0%	65	65.7%	0.96
	Congestive heart failure	24	24.0%	27	27.3%	0.60
	Hypertension	70	70.0%	70	70.7%	0.91
	Diabetes	21	21.0%	22	22.2%	0.83
	Previous myocardial infarction	4	4.0%	3	3.0%	1.00
	Peripheral vascular disease	3	3.0%	4	4.0%	0.99
	Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease	4	4.0%	5	5.1%	0.99
Creatinine clearance (mL/min)						0.97
	15–29	5	5.0%	6	6.1%
	30–49	23	23.0%	21	21.2%
	≥50	72	72.0%	72	72.7%
	Mean (±SD)	67.20±27.33	–	67.09±26.87	–

Table 3 Comparison of Satisfaction and Cognition Between Two Groups Before Intervention (±s)

Items		Study Group	Control Group	P
Satisfaction	Degree of problem resolution	2.11±0.42	2.13±0.24	0.72
	Service attitude	2.09±0.35	2.07±0.33	0.69
	Professional level	1.99±0.44	1.97±0.41	0.74
	Detail of response	1.74±0.56	1.70±0.56	0.59
	Response time	2.22±0.44	2.17±0.43	0.43
	Total satisfaction	10.15±1.33	10.04±1.29	0.56
Cognition	Disease	1.72±1.47	1.69±1.45	0.79
	Drug indications	2.70±0.90	2.67±0.94	0.80
	Drug dosage& administration	0.54±1.56	0.55±1.73	0.96
	Drug effectiveness	0.95±1.20	0.91±1.01	0.78
	Drug safety	1.05±1.07	1.08±0.97	0.82
	Monitoring Indicators	0.67±0.53	0.71±0.51	0.61
	Total cognition	9.88±4.09	9.83±3.51	0.92

Table 4 Comparison of Satisfaction and Cognition Between Two Groups After Intervention (±s)

Items		Study Group	Control Group	P
Satisfaction	Degree of problem resolution	2.85±0.36	2.86±0.35	0.87
	Service attitude	2.97±0.17	2.72±0.45	<0.01
	Professional level	2.96±0.20	2.71±0.46	<0.01
	Detail of response	2.94±0.24	2.65±0.48	<0.01
	Response time	2.86±0.35	2.88±0.33	0.70
	Total satisfaction	14.58±0.88	13.81±1.01	<0.01
Cognition	Disease	2.96±0.51	2.83±1.04	0.04
	Drug indications	3.00±0.00	3.00±0.00
	Drug dosage&administration	2.63±1.37	2.27±1.97	<0.01
	Drug effectiveness	2.84±0.57	2.44±0.93	<0.01
	Drug safety	2.85±0.44	2.58±0.62	<0.01
	Monitoring Indicators	2.74±0.59	2.57±0.70	0.06
	Total cognition	22.58±2.19	20.80±3.02	<0.01

Table 5 Comparison of Satisfaction of Two Groups Before and After Intervention (±s)

Items	Study Group		P	Control Group		P
	Before	After		Before	After
Degree of problem resolution	2.11±0.42	2.85±0.36	<0.01	2.13±0.24	2.86±0.35	<0.01
Service attitude	2.09±0.35	2.97±0.17	<0.01	2.07±0.33	2.72±0.45	<0.01
Professional level	1.99±0.44	2.96±0.20	<0.01	1.97±0.41	2.71±0.46	<0.01
Detail of response	1.74±0.56	2.94±0.24	<0.01	1.70±0.56	2.65±0.48	<0.01
Response time	2.22±0.44	2.86±0.35	<0.01	2.17±0.43	2.88±0.33	<0.01
Total satisfaction	10.15±1.33	14.58±0.88	<0.01	10.04±1.29	13.81±1.01	<0.01

Table 6 Comparison of Cognition of Two Groups Before and After Intervention (±s)

Items	Study Group		P	Control Group		P
	Before	After		Before	After
Disease	1.72±1.47	2.96±0.51	<0.01	1.69±1.45	2.83±1.04	<0.01
Drug indications	2.70±0.90	3.00±0.00	<0.01	2.67±0.94	3.00±0.00	<0.01
Drug dosage& administration	0.54±1.56	2.63±1.37	<0.01	0.55±1.73	2.27±1.97	<0.01
Drug effectiveness	0.95±1.20	2.84±0.57	<0.01	0.91±1.01	2.44±0.93	<0.01
Drug safety	1.05±1.07	2.85±0.44	<0.01	1.08±0.97	2.58±0.62	<0.01
Monitoring Indicators	0.67±0.53	2.74±0.59	<0.01	0.71±0.51	2.57±0.70	<0.01
Total cognition	9.88±4.09	22.58±2.19	<0.01	9.83±3.51	20.80±3.02	<0.01