• YusransyahDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Sumedang, West Java, Indonesia.STIKes Salsabila Serang, Pharmacy Study Program, Banten, Indonesia., Eli Halimah, and Auliya A Suwantika.
• Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Sumedang, West Java, Indonesia.
• Patient Prefer Adher. 2020 Jan 1; 14: 1103-1109.

IntroductionThe prevalence of hypertension in Indonesia is increasing, not least in some peripheral areas, including in Pandeglang District, Banten Province. The government of Indonesia, through the Social Health Insurance Administration Body (BPJS Kesehatan) has launched a chronic disease management program (Prolanis) to achieve more optimal results in treating patients with chronic diseases, including hypertension.ObjectiveThis study aimed to measure the quality of life of Prolanis hypertension patients at the primary healthcare centers (PHCs) using EuroQol-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) instrument and taking pharmacists' counseling intervention into account. This study was conducted in 96 Prolanis patients, consisting of 48 patients from 8 PHCs who did not receive pharmacists' counseling intervention (control group) and 48 other patients from 8 different PHCs who received 4 times intervention (intervention group). This study was conducted in a period of 3 months (June-August 2019) in 16 sub-districts of Pandeglang District.MethodsAn experimental study design was applied by considering a purposive sampling method. Patients' quality of life were measured by using EQ-5D-5L instrument and its Indonesian value set. For data analysis, we applied the Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney, Wilcoxon, and Binomial tests to investigate the differences of patients' quality of life in both groups of control and intervention.Results And ConclusionsThe results showed that the average utility value of the intervention group experienced an improvement at each meeting (m1 = 51.25%; m2 = 66.25%; m3 = 84.17%; and m4 = 91.67%), while the control group experienced a lower and more fluctuative improvement than the intervention group (m1 = 65.42%; m2 = 70.42%; m3 = 80.42%; and m4 = 76.67%). The same results also occurred in the average value of visual analogue scale (VAS). There was a better improvement in the intervention group than in the control group.Clinical Trial Registration Number62/UN6.KEP/EC/2019.© 2020 Yusransyah et al.

6 keywords...

hide…