Savings on High-Cost Drugs Such as Atypical Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics: Switching to Billing Under the Pharmacy Benefit in Outpatient Settings.

OBJECTIVE: Access to health care can be improved by controlling and optimizing expenditures, specifically the high-cost drugs such as atypical long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics. This type of LAI is usually covered under the medical benefit and/or pharmacy benefit. We sought to compare financial outcomes of the medical benefit billing option with the pharmacy benefit billing option for atypical LAIs in an adult outpatient psychiatric clinic and to determine insurance companies' reasons for nonpayment when the medical benefit billing model was utilized. METHODS: A retrospective chart review with patients 18 years of age and older who were receiving atypical LAI antipsychotics in the outpatient psychiatric department during two time periods--January 7 through February 6, 2016 and August 15 through September 14, 2016--to evaluate medical (N = 31) and pharmacy (N = 23) benefit study periods, respectively. RESULTS: The estimated loss when using the medical benefit billing option was $14,520 per month. Switching to billing under the pharmacy benefit resulted in a monthly gain of $2,100. The net savings from the switch were estimated at $16,620 per month. No patient lost access to treatment or was switched to another medication solely because of the change in billing option. The reasons for nonpayment (N = 10) provided by medical insurance companies were prior authorization/step therapy required (40%), insurance terminated (30%), and coverage through Medicaid Rx only (30%). CONCLUSION: This study revealed a significant financial loss related to atypical LAI antipsychotics when the medical benefit model was utilized. By switching to billing under the pharmacy benefit, potential savings for high-cost drugs such as LAIs can be realized.

Sofosbuvir: a new oral once-daily agent for the treatment of hepatitis C virus infection.

Sofosbuvir: A new oral oncedaily agent for the treatment of hepatitis C virus infection.

Enoxaparin Use in Hospitalized SARS-CoV-2-Positive Patients with Elevated D-Dimer: A Pilot Study.

Introduction: The SARS-CoV-2 is a human pathogenic coronavirus that causes a respiratory tract infection, which may lead to systemic hyper-inflammation that is associated with a hypercoagulable state. Anticoagulation as an adjunct may decrease thrombi formation. Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of enoxaparin for the prevention of thrombotic events in hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 patients with elevated D-dimer. Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate three enoxaparin dosing regimens: full treatment (1 mg/kg SC Q12H or 1.5 mg/kg SC Q24H), intermediate (.5 mg/kg SC Q12H or 1 mg/kg SC Q24H), and prophylaxis (40 mg SC Q24H). The primary endpoint evaluated the percentage of patients who developed a venous thromboembolism (VTE). The secondary endpoints evaluated the development of a major bleed, mechanical ventilation need, and death. Results: Forty-five patients were included with 27, 8, and 10 participants in the full treatment, intermediate, and prophylaxis arms, respectively. Six patients developed a VTE: 3, 1, and 2 in the listed above groups, respectively (P = .83). Twenty patients died: 11, 3, and 6, respectively (P = .64). Four patients developed a major bleed: 1, 1, and 2, respectively (P = .17). Six patients required intubation: 1, 2, and 3 in the arms, respectively (P = .043). Conclusion: The study did not find a difference in respect to the development of a VTE between the three investigated doses of anticoagulation. However, our findings suggest that treatment dose of enoxaparin might be associated with lower risk for mechanical ventilation in hospitalized COVID-19-positive patients with elevated D-dimer.

Monitoring of Metabolic Adverse Effects Associated With Atypical Antipsychotics Use in an Outpatient Psychiatric Clinic.

BACKGROUND: Atypical antipsychotics are associated with metabolic complications that contribute to a higher risk of cardiovascular disease. Current evidence reveal suboptimal adherence to the complex and variable official recommendations on metabolic monitoring in the corresponding patient population. A study evaluating metabolic monitoring at guideline-recommended intervals may help identify areas for intervention. OBJECTIVE: Describe the frequency of monitoring metabolic adverse effects in patients receiving atypical antipsychotics in an outpatient psychiatric clinic with respect to the specific guideline-recommended intervals. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted in the outpatient psychiatric clinic. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of patients monitored for metabolic parameters at the current guideline-recommended intervals. The secondary end points were the percentage of patients with documented primary care physician, untreated metabolic comorbidities, and treated metabolic comorbidities by disease state. RESULTS: The most assessed parameters were family history (98%), blood pressure (81%), and body mass index/body weight (83%) at the baseline interval. The least assessed parameters were lipids (14%) at the 12-week interval and waist circumference (0%) at any interval. CONCLUSION: Interventions are needed to encourage higher compliance with current recommendations. The complexity of the recommendations is the most likely reason for the suboptimal compliance.

Daptomycin-induced hyperkalemia in a patient with normal renal function.

PURPOSE: A case of episodic hyperkalemia associated with daptomycin administration is reported. SUMMARY: A 46-year-old African-American woman was hospitalized for treatment of a shoulder abscess. Initially treated with i.v. vancomycin, the patient was switched to daptomycin 9 mg/kg i.v. (500 mg daily) after three days. On day 10 of daptomycin therapy, she was noted to have a serum potassium concentration of 5.4 meq/L, with an increase to 6.1 meq/L on day 11. Reversal of hyperkalemia was achieved with oral sodium polystyrene sulfonate and other agents, and daptomycin was withheld for one day, during which time the patient's serum potassium level normalized. One day after daptomycin therapy was resumed at a lower dose (7 mg/kg), the potassium concentration increased again (to 5.5 meq/L). With a further dosage reduction and continued administration of sodium polystyrene sulfonate, the patient completed the full course of daptomycin therapy. There was a close temporal relationship between daptomycin administrations and the serum potassium fluctuations; other potential causes of hyperkalemia were ruled out. Evaluation of this case using the algorithm of Naranjo et al. yielded a score of 6, indicating that the serum potassium elevations probably constituted an adverse reaction to daptomycin. A literature search identified no other reports of hyperkalemia associated with daptomycin use in a patient with normal renal function. CONCLUSION: A 46-year-old women with normal renal function developed hyperkalemia after receiving high-dose daptomycin therapy. The potassium levels normalized when daptomycin was withheld but increased again when the patient was rechallenged with the drug.