Pharmacists need to participate and pay closer attention to the Medicare for All discussion.

It has been a decade since the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was signed into law. The ACA's reception remains mixed, despite its moderate success in increasing insurance coverage, and discussions of health care reform have not abated. Among ongoing efforts to reform or repeal the ACA, "Medicare for All" appears in several prominent policy proposals. Public opinion polls from across the United States have demonstrated the growing popularity of reform proposals, which has encouraged legislators to be stronger advocates for such changes. Between 2017 and 2020, the 115th and 116th U.S. Congress introduced more than a dozen legislative proposals aimed at health care reform. Unfortunately, the variety and nuance of these legislative proposals have resulted in considerable confusion and division across the nation among health care providers and patients regarding definitions and implications of Medicare for All. This commentary aims to improve pharmacists' understanding of Medicare for All, discuss the possible impact of Medicare for All on pharmacy practice, and serve as a call for U.S. pharmacists to participate in advocacy and reform of the health care system in which they practice. We argue that only through proactive participation in legislative advocacy will the pharmacists' role in patient care continue to evolve. This brief commentary is divided into 5 major sections: (1) support for Medicare for All, (2) definitions of existing Medicare for All policy proposals, (3) estimation of the impact of Medicare for All proposals on the health care system, (4) the pharmacist perspective on the impact of Medicare for All, and (5) recommendations for pharmacy practice and advocacy.

Naloxone Accessibility Under the State Standing Order Across Mississippi.

Importance: Naloxone is a life-saving medication for individuals experiencing an opioid overdose. Naloxone standing orders aim to make naloxone more available by allowing patients improved access to this medication at community pharmacies; however, lawful availability does not mean that this life-saving intervention is accessible to patients. Objective: To characterize naloxone availability and out-of-pocket cost under the state standing order in Mississippi. Design, Setting, and Participants: This telephone-based, mystery-shopper census survey study included Mississippi community pharmacies open to the general public in Mississippi at the time of data collection. Community pharmacies were identified using the Hayes Directories April 2022 complete Mississippi pharmacy database. Data were collected from February to August 2022. Exposures: Mississippi House bill 996, the Naloxone Standing Order Act, signed into law in 2017, allowing pharmacists to dispense naloxone under a physician state standing order at a patient's request. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were naloxone availability under Mississippi's state standing order and the out-of-pocket cost of available formulations. Results: There were 591 open-door community pharmacies surveyed for this study, with a 100% response rate. The most common pharmacy type was independent (328 [55.50%]), followed by chain (147 [24.87%]) and grocery store (116 [19.63%]). When asked, "Do you have naloxone that I can pick up today?" 216 Mississippi pharmacies (36.55%) had naloxone available for purchase under the state standing order. Of the 591 pharmacies, 242 (40.95%) were unwilling to dispense naloxone under the state standing order. Among the 216 pharmacies with naloxone available, the median out-of-pocket cost for naloxone nasal spray (n = 202) across Mississippi was $100.00 (range, $38.11-$229.39; mean [SD], $105.58 [$35.42]) and the median out-of-pocket cost of naloxone injection (n = 14) was $37.70 (range, $17.00-$208.96; mean [SD], $66.62 [$69.27]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of open-door Mississippi community pharmacies, availability of naloxone was limited despite standing order implementation. This finding has important implications for the effectiveness of the legislation in preventing opioid overdose deaths in this region. Further studies are needed to understand pharmacists' unwillingness to dispense naloxone and the implications of lack of availability and unwillingness for further naloxone access interventions.

Impact of patient and provider nudges on addressing herpes zoster vaccine series completion.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the combined impact of provider-facing and text message-based, patient nudges on herpes zoster vaccine series completion. METHODS: Following a period during which Kroger Health implemented provider facing nudges, select US patients that initiated herpes zoster vaccination were randomized to receive timed text messages when the second dose was due and available as part of a quality improvement exercise. Main comparisons were between patients intervened by provider nudge only and those intervened by both provider and patient nudges. Data were assessed by GEE-basedlogistic and linear regression, controlling for available patient- and store-level characteristics, and geospatial analyses. RESULTS: During the baseline period, 100,627 adults received at least one HZ vaccine dose and 83.9% completed the series within 6 months over 88.6 days (SD: 26.53) on average. In the intervention period, 120,339 adults were vaccinated at least once and series completion was 88.3% (both provider nudges and text messaging) and 85.3% (not texted) during this observation window (both p < 0.0001). Time between doses was shorter for those who received text messages compared to both the baseline period and those in the intervention period that were not texted (both p < 0.001). Controlling for multiple characteristics, the odds of completion improved in the intervention period compared to baseline (OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.033-1.111), but a noticeably higher completion odds was observed amongst patients who received a text message in the intervention period (OR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.286-1.414). Adjusting for patient and pharmacy factors, those who were texted received their second herpes zoster vaccine dose 8.6 days sooner (95% CI: -9.08 - -8.17, p < 0.0001) compared to those intervened by the provider nudge only. CONCLUSION: The combined use of clinical and patient-focused nudges is a simple mechanism by which pharmacies and other health care access points can address the multi-dose vaccine needs of diverse patient populations.

COVID-19 Vaccination Engagement and Barriers among Mississippi Pharmacists.

After the emergency use authorization of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations in the United States, existing pharmacy infrastructure was leveraged to disseminate vaccines. However, the national uptake of COVID-19 vaccines remains poor. This survey study of Mississippi pharmacists aimed to identify barriers to providing COVID-19 vaccination among pharmacists in practice settings that provided other vaccines. A thematic analysis was used to analyze open-ended survey responses. This study found that the greatest identified barrier to COVID-19 vaccination for pharmacists was patient willingness. The thematic analysis revealed logistical barriers, vaccine hesitancy, and rural pharmacy distribution concerns. These findings suggest that pharmacists require further training in overcoming vaccine hesitancy, and potentially indicate a need for the distribution of vaccination responsibilities to additional pharmacy staff members.

Interventions to increase uptake of the human papillomavirus vaccine in unvaccinated college students: A systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize the best available evidence on interventions that could be implemented in the college environment to increase HPV vaccination uptake in college students who were not previously vaccinated. METHODS: Pubmed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and EBSCO were searched in December 2017 to identify all literature meeting the following criteria: human subjects, English language, HPV, HPV vaccination, and college. PRISMA recommendations were followed. We focused only on manuscripts that reported vaccine uptake, excluding studies that only reported vaccine intentions. We identified 2989 articles; 101 relevant after screening; nine eligible for final qualitative review. RESULTS: Vaccine uptake rates ranged from 5% to 53%. Theory-based variables (e.g., perceived susceptibility and self-efficacy) were associated with vaccine uptake in most studies. A study exposing participants to a narrative video about HPV vaccination led by a combination of peers and medical experts produced the greatest difference in HPV vaccination initiation compared to a control group (21.8% vs 11.8%) of all the studies reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: Few interventions resulted in substantial HPV vaccine uptake. A combination of peer and provider encouragement may be the most effective method to increase vaccine uptake in this population.