Srujitha Marupuru

Dr. Srujitha Marupuru

University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
orcid
Associate Director, Outcomes research, Merck

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

8Years (2019-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
28 June 2022 in Healthcare
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Srujitha MarupuruSrujitha Marupuru
Srujitha Marupuru
ARAlexis Roether
Alexis Roether
AGA. J. Guimond
A. J. Guimond
Chris StanleyChris Stanley
Chris Stanley
TPTyler Pesqueira
Tyler Pesqueira
David Rhys AxonDavid Rhys Axon
David Rhys Axon
This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of pharmacist-provided medication therapy management (MTM) services as compared to no MTM services (i.e., standard of care) on outpatient clinical outcomes for patients with diabetes, hypertension, or dyslipidemia. A systematic literature review of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, PsycINFO, Scopus, CINAHL electronic databases, grey literature, websites, and journals, was conducted from 1 January 2005–20 July 2021. The search field contained a combination of keywords and MeSH terms such as: “medication therapy management”, “pharmacist”, “treatment outcomes”. Studies published in United States, included adults ≥18 years old who received at least one pharmacist-provided MTM consultation and at least one group who received no MTM, and reported pre-specified clinical outcomes for diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or dyslipidemia were included. Of 849 studies identified, eight were included (cohort studies = 6, randomized controlled trials = 2). Clinical outcomes improved with MTM interventions, as evidenced by statistically significant changes in at least one of the three chronic conditions in most studies. Improvements were observed for diabetes outcomes (n = 4 studies), hypertension outcomes (n = 4 studies), and dyslipidemia outcomes (n = 3 studies). Overall, this study indicated that pharmacist delivered MTM services (versus no MTM services) can improve clinical outcomes for patients with diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia.

31 August 2022 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Srujitha MarupuruSrujitha Marupuru
Srujitha Marupuru
DADaniel E. Arku
Daniel E. Arku
ACAshley M Campbell
Ashley M Campbell
MSMarion K. Slack
Marion K. Slack
JLJeannie K. Lee
Jeannie K. Lee
To investigate the efficacy of melatonin and/or ramelteon reporting sleep outcomes for older adults with chronic insomnia, a systematic review and a meta-analysis of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, PsycINFO, science citation index, center for reviews and dissemination, CINAHL, grey literature and relevant sleep journal searches were conducted from 1 January 1990 to 20 June 2021. Randomized controlled trials and other comparative studies with melatonin and/or ramelteon use among older patients with chronic insomnia were included. Funnel plot and Egger’s test was used to determine publication bias. A forest plot was constructed to obtain a pooled standardized mean difference using either a fixed or random effects model for each of the two broad categories of sleep outcomes: objective and subjective. Of 5247 studies identified, 17 studies met the inclusion criteria for MA. Study sample size ranged from 10 to 829 with the mean age ≥55 years. There were significant improvements in total sleep time (objective), sleep latency and sleep quality (objective and subjective) for melatonin and/or ramelteon users compared with placebo. Sleep efficiency was not significantly different. The effects of these agents are modest but with limited safe treatment options for insomnia in older adults, these could be the drugs of choice.

22 August 2019 in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Srujitha MarupuruSrujitha Marupuru
Srujitha Marupuru
David Rhys AxonDavid Rhys Axon
David Rhys Axon
MSMarion K. Slack
Marion K. Slack
Use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), including vitamins, minerals, herbals, and other dietary supplements, is widespread in the United States (ranging from 24% in Hispanics to 50% in American Indians). Pharmacists are an accessible source for healthcare information, but little is known about their use of CAM products and to whom they would recommend these products. A cross-sectional survey was sent via email to pharmacists licensed in one state in the United States in 2015. The survey included items about their use of 10 vitamins and minerals, and 21 herbal or other dietary supplements, as well as reasons for use, conditions used to treat, if they would recommend the product to patients, family, or friends, their perception of CAM safety and effectiveness, and four demographic questions. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data, and a chi-square test was used to determine differences between pharmacists’ use of vitamins/minerals and herbals/other dietary supplements. The a priori alpha level was 0.05. A total of 639 pharmacists completed the survey. Female pharmacists used vitamins/minerals (p = 0.031) and herbals/others (p = 0.039) more than male pharmacists. Older pharmacists used herbals/others more than younger pharmacists (p < 0.001). Fifty-nine percent thought the dietary supplements in the survey were safe while 32% reported they were effective. Seventy-eight percent of respondents reported use of any vitamin or mineral product versus 42% who reported use of any herbal or other dietary supplement. Commonly used products included: multivitamins (91%), vitamin C (71%), fish oil (65%), probiotics (53%), and fiber (53%). The most commonly reported reason for use was general health and wellness (17–90%). Pharmacists most commonly recommend fiber/psyllium (94%) and calcium (90%) to patients, family, and friends. Pharmacists in this survey selectively used vitamins, minerals, herbals and other dietary supplements, and recommended some of the more commonly used products to patients, family and friends. This is valuable information given that pharmacists are frontline healthcare professionals who may be asked to provide advice about these products.

31 May 2023 in Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Srujitha MarupuruSrujitha Marupuru
Srujitha Marupuru
DADaniel Arku
Daniel Arku
DADavid R. Axon
David R. Axon
LVLorenzo Villa-Zapata
Lorenzo Villa-Zapata
MYMohsen Yaghoubi
Mohsen Yaghoubi
TWTerri Warholak
Terri Warholak
Nivolumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, was approved by the United States (US) Food and Drug administration as a first-line systemic therapy for locally advanced/metastatic gastric cancer patients. The current study aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab-chemotherapy combination versus chemotherapy alone as a first-line therapy from a US payer perspective. An economic evaluation was conducted using a partitioned survival model in Microsoft Excel® using data from the CheckMate 649 trial. Three discrete mutually exclusive health states (progression-free, post-progression, and death) were included in the model. The health state occupancy was calculated using the overall survival and progression-free survival curves derived from the CheckMate 649 trial. Cost, resource use, and health utility estimates were estimated from a US payer perspective. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses assessed the uncertainty of the model parameters. Nivolumab-chemotherapy provided additional 0.25 life years compared to chemotherapy alone and the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were 0.701 and 0.561, respectively, producing a gain of 0.140 QALYs and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $574,072/QALY. From the US payer perspective, at a willingness to pay threshold of $US150,000/QALY, nivolumab-chemotherapy was not found to be cost-effective as a first-line therapy for locally advanced/metastatic gastric cancer.

Srujitha MarupuruSrujitha Marupuru
Srujitha Marupuru
MBMelanie L Bell
Melanie L Bell
Michael GrandnerMichael Grandner
Michael Grandner
Ruth E. Taylor-PiliaeRuth E. Taylor-Piliae
Ruth E. Taylor-Piliae
Poor sleep quality constitutes one of the most common difficulties faced by stroke survivors. Physical activity has been shown to improve sleep quality among healthy adults. The study objective was to examine the effect of physical activity on sleep outcomes in community-dwelling stroke survivors previously enrolled in a randomized clinical trial (RCT). Secondary analysis of data collected in the RCT was used to examine the effects of physical activity (PA) on sleep outcomes using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), compared to usual care (controls). Unadjusted and adjusted mixed effects models were used to model changes in sleep quality between groups. At baseline, poor sleep quality (PSQI > 5) was reported by about half of the participants (PA group = 48.5%, n = 47/97; controls = 56.3%, n = 27/48). Results from the unadjusted and adjusted models for sleep quality were similar and showed no statistically significant differences between groups (p > 0.05). In the unadjusted model, the difference between groups (change from baseline to 24 weeks) showed that the PA group had better sleep quality than the controls (difference= −1.02 points, 95% CI −2.12, 0.07, p = 0.07). In the model adjusted for age, social support, and marital status, the difference between groups (change from baseline to 24 weeks) showed that the PA group had better sleep quality than the controls (difference= −1.07 points, 95% CI −2.19, 0.05, p = 0.06). PA did not significantly improve sleep quality in older community-dwelling stroke survivors. Further research is needed to confirm or refute these findings.

21 April 2021 in Journal of Aging and Health
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Srujitha MarupuruSrujitha Marupuru
Srujitha Marupuru
DADavid R Axon
David R Axon
Objectives: This cross-sectional study compared the healthcare expenditures associated with multimorbidity (having ≥2 chronic conditions) versus no multimorbidity among older United States (US) adults (aged ≥ 50 years) with self-reported pain in the past 4 weeks. Methods: This research used data from the 2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Adjusted linear regression models evaluated group differences in various annual healthcare expenditures. Results: Descriptive statistics indicated multimorbidity was associated with all personal characteristics (p < 0.05) except gender and smoking status (p > 0.05). Multimorbidity had 75.8% greater annual total health expenditures (p = 0.0083), 40.6% greater office-based expenditures (p = 0.0224), 100.6% greater prescription medication costs, (p = 0.0268), yet 47.3% lower inpatient expenditures (p = 0.0158), and 56.6% lower home healthcare expenditures (p < 0.0001) than no multimorbidity. Discussion: This study found greater healthcare expenditures among older US adults with pain and multimorbidity, which captures the financial burden of comorbidity in this population.