Strategies to optimize medication use in the physician group practice: the role of the clinical pharmacist.

OBJECTIVES: To (1) describe the role of clinical pharmacists in providing population-based pharmaceutical care as employees of a physician group practice, (2) describe the strategies used by pharmacists to optimize medication use, (3) quantify improvements in care, and (4) illustrate the calculations used to quantify cost savings. SETTING: Community-based, multispecialty, physician group practice located in the north Puget Sound area between 2003 and 2007. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: Using four cornerstones (evidence-based medicine, therapeutic interchange, academic detailing, and a local pharmacy and therapeutics committee), the pharmacists provided population-based pharmaceutical care, leading generic switches, target drug programs, and prescription to over-the-counter medication switches. They also led disease management programs, managed drug recalls, implemented electronic health records, negotiated budgets with health plans, and led patient assistance programs and prior authorization programs to improve patient satisfaction. PRACTICE INNOVATION: Implementing these strategies from the vantage point of a physician group presents a seldom-realized employment opportunity for pharmacists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The impact of these strategies is measured by process, use, and clinical outcomes metrics. These, in turn, are linked to incentive payments in the pay-for-performance environment or to a lowered per member, per month cost in the capitated environment. RESULTS: In 2006-2007, 71% of our hypertensive patients received generic agents compared with a network average for receiving generic agents of 43%, while the proportion of patients with controlled blood pressure increased from 45% to 60%. We saved $450,000 in inpatient costs for deep venous thrombosis. CONCLUSION: Clinical pharmacists employed in a physician group practice can optimize medication use, improve care, and reduce costs.

Cost effectiveness of evidence-based treatment guidelines for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer in the community setting.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Level I Pathways, a program designed to ensure the delivery of evidence-based care, among patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated in the outpatient community setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included patients with NSCLC initiating a chemotherapy regimen between July 1, 2006, and December 31, 2007, at eight practices in the US Oncology network. Patients were characterized with respect to age, sex, stage, performance status, and line of therapy and were classified by whether they were treated according to Level I Pathways guidelines. Twelve-month cost of care and overall survival were compared between patients treated on Pathway and off Pathway. A net monetary benefit approach and corresponding cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Level I Pathways. RESULTS: Overall, outpatient costs were 35% lower for on-Pathway versus off-Pathway patients (average 12-month cost, $18,042 v $27,737, respectively). Costs remained significantly less for patients treated on Pathway versus off Pathway in the adjuvant and first-line settings, whereas no difference in overall cost was observed in patients in the second-line setting. No difference in overall survival was observed overall or by line of therapy. In the net monetary benefit analysis, after adjusting for potential confounders, we found that treating patients on Pathway was cost effective across a plausible range of willingness-to-pay thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study suggest that treating patients according to evidence-based guidelines is a cost-effective strategy for delivering care to those with NSCLC.