College of pharmacy-based medication therapy management program for a university system.

OBJECTIVE: To document and evaluate the design and operation of a medication therapy management (MTM) benefit and associated MTM clinic developed by the University of Minnesota College of Pharmacy as a covered health plan benefit for University of Minnesota, Duluth (UMD) employees, early retirees, and their dependents. SETTING: Office-based, nondispensing pharmacy at UMD. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: College of Pharmacy, Duluth faculty developed and provided MTM services as a covered health benefit for UMD beneficiaries. PRACTICE INNOVATION: Partnership between a university campus and a college of pharmacy to design and implement an MTM benefit as part of the university health plan covering current employees, early retirees, and dependents. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: MTM benefit design, MTM clinic implementation, patient complexity comparisons, and drug therapy problems identified and addressed. RESULTS: Of 1,000 eligible beneficiaries, 68 (∼7%) took advantage of the MTM benefit, consistent with national participation rates but lower than the 25% goal for participation. Beneficiaries receiving MTM services were three times more complex in terms of health resource use than the "typical" UMD beneficiary and were experiencing 7.22 drug therapy problems per patient. CONCLUSION: The UMD MTM clinic was successful in providing UMD beneficiaries access to MTM services. The MTM benefit was subsequently offered throughout the entire University of Minnesota system (Crookston, Duluth, Minneapolis-St. Paul, and Morris).

Evaluating Patient Preferences for Different Incentive Programs to Optimize Pharmacist-Provided Patient Care Program Enrollment.

BACKGROUND: Employers have increased efforts to engage employees in health and wellness programs. Providing employees with incentives to participate in these programs has been shown to improve overall enrollment and engagement. One program that has had challenges with enrollment and engagement is medication therapy management (MTM). OBJECTIVES: To (a) determine how individuals evaluate different financial incentives to improve participation in an MTM program and (b) measure the effect of participant characteristics on incentive preference. METHODS: This study was composed of a paper-based survey administered to participants after focus group sessions. Participants included MTM-eligible beneficiaries from 2 employer groups and included MTM-naive and MTM-experienced participants. Incentive preference was measured based on 3 bipolar scales that compared 3 incentives: $100 gift certificates, $8 copay reduction for 6 months, and $100 added to paycheck. RESULTS: A total of 72 participants completed the survey: 34 participants were MTM experienced, and 38 were MTM naive. Overall participant preference reporting resulted in inconsistencies. Copay reduction was preferred to a gift certificate (55.6% vs. 37.5%); money in paycheck was preferred over copay reduction (48.6% vs. 40.3%); and gift certificates were preferred over money in paycheck (56.9% vs. 22.2%). However, subgroup analysis resulted in a more consistent preference reporting, with MTM-experienced participants consistently preferring copay reduction over gift certificates (67.6% vs. 23.5%) and money in paycheck (55.9% vs. 29.4%). MTM-naive participants preferred a gift certificate over copay reduction (51.4% vs. 44.7%) and cash in paycheck (68.4% vs. 23.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that gift certificates were preferred by MTM-naive participants, which supports the use of gift certificates as an incentive for MTM-naive patients to enroll in an MTM program. Conversely, the use of a copay reduction program was preferred by MTM-experienced participants, suggesting that it may be ideal for participants already enrolled in an MTM program. The results suggest the potential value of using multiple forms of incentives to attract MTM-naive and experienced beneficiaries. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. All authors contributed to study concept and design. Cernohous and Vaidyanathan collected the data, and Tomaszewski took the lead in data interpretation, along with Cernohous. The manuscript was written and revised primarily by Tomaszewski, along with Cernohous and Vaidyanathan.