Cost-Utility Analysis of a Medication Adherence Management Service Alongside a Cluster Randomized Control Trial in Community Pharmacy.

BACKGROUND: It is necessary to determine the cost utility of adherence interventions in chronic diseases due to humanistic and economic burden of non-adherence. PURPOSE: To evaluate, alongside a cluster-randomized controlled trial, the cost-utility of a pharmacist-led medication adherence management service (MAMS) compared with usual care in community pharmacies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The trial was conducted over six months. Patients with treatments for hypertension, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were included. Patients in the intervention group (IG) received a MAMS based on a brief complex intervention, whilst patients in the control group (CG) received usual care. The cost-utility analysis adopted a health system perspective. Costs related to medications, healthcare resources and adherence intervention were included. The effectiveness was estimated as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), using a multiple imputation missing data model. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was calculated on the total sample of patients. RESULTS: A total of 1186 patients were enrolled (IG: 633; CG: 553). The total intervention cost was estimated to be €27.33 ± 0.43 per patient for six months. There was no statistically significant difference in total cost of medications and healthcare resources per patient between IG and CG. The values of EQ-5D-5L at 6 months were significantly higher in the IG [IG: 0.881 ± 0.005 vs CG: 0.833 ± 0.006; p = 0.000]. In the base case, the service was more expensive and more effective than usual care, resulting in an ICUR of €1,494.82/QALY. In the complete case, the service resulted in an ICUR of €2,086.30/QALY, positioned between the north-east and south-east quadrants of the cost-utility plane. Using a threshold value of €20,000/QALY gained, there is a 99% probability that the intervention is cost-effective. CONCLUSION: The medication adherence management service resulted in an improvement in the quality of life of the population with chronic disease, with similar costs compared to usual care. The service is cost-effective.

The medication discrepancy detection service: A cost-effective multidisciplinary clinical approach.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effectiveness of a Medication Discrepancy Detection Service (MDDS), a collaborative service between the community pharmacy and Primary Care. DESIGN: Non-controlled before-and-after study. SETTING: Bidasoa Integrated Healthcare Organisation, Gipuzkoa, Spain. PARTICIPANTS: The service was provided by a multidisciplinary group of community pharmacists (CPs), general practitioners (GPs), and primary care pharmacists, to patients with discrepancies between their active medical charts and medicines that they were actually taking. OUTCOMES: The primary outcomes were the number of medicines, the type of discrepancy, and GPs' decisions. Secondary outcomes were time spent by CPs, emergency department (ED) visits, hospital admissions, and costs. RESULTS: The MDDS was provided to 143 patients, and GPs resolved discrepancies for 126 patients. CPs identified 259 discrepancies, among which the main one was patients not taking medicines listed on their active medical charts (66.7%, n=152). The main GPs' decision was to withdraw the treatment (54.8%, n=125), which meant that the number of medicines per patient was reduced by 0.92 (9.12±3.82 vs. 8.20±3.81; p<.0001). The number of ED visits and hospital admissions per patient were reduced by 0.10 (0.61±.13 vs 0.52±0.91; p=.405 and 0.17 (0.33±0.66 vs. 0.16±0.42; p=.007), respectively. The cost per patient was reduced by €444.9 (€1003.3±2165.3 vs. €558.4±1273.0; p=.018). CONCLUSION: The MDDS resulted in a reduction in the number of medicines per patients and number of hospital admissions, and the service was associated with affordable, cost-effective ratios.

Defining and characterising age-friendly community pharmacies: a qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: The Global Network of Age-friendly Cities is a project promoted by the World Health Organization as a response to demographic ageing and urbanization process. San Sebastian, Spain, is one of these Age-friendly Cities and community pharmacies of the city joined the initiative. OBJECTIVE: To define and implement the Age-friendly Pharmacy concept to promote active ageing, optimize the contribution of community pharmacies of San Sebastian to the friendliness of the city and to the improvement of quality of life of the ageing population. METHOD: A bottom-up participative approach was undertaken. A focus group was conducted to determine elderly people's opinions and expectations of community pharmacy. The information obtained was analysed using content analysis and validated for reliability, usefulness and applicability through three expert groups of community pharmacy owners and staff. KEY FINDINGS: Fifteen requirements were agreed, covering four main areas: relationships, pharmacy layout, pharmaceutical services and communication of services. Initially, 18 community pharmacies committed to become Age-friendly Pharmacies by pledging to these requirements and the Official Pharmacist Association of Gipuzkoa supported pharmacies in the implementation of the initiative. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that there is demand for a patient-centred community pharmacy to support older people, in which pharmaceutical care services are required. The 18 Age-friendly Pharmacies together with the Official Pharmacist Association of Gipuzkoa have publicly committed to actively work on social and patient-centred care to meet the needs of the ageing population.

Cost analysis for the implementation of a medication review with follow-up service in Spain.

Background Medication review with follow-up (MRF) is a professional pharmacy service proven to be cost-effective. Its broader implementation is limited, mainly due to the lack of evidence-based implementation programs that include economic and financial analysis. Objective To analyse the costs and estimate the price of providing and implementing MRF. Setting Community pharmacy in Spain. Method Elderly patients using poly-pharmacy received a community pharmacist-led MRF for 6 months. The cost analysis was based on the time-driven activity based costing model and included the provider costs, initial investment costs and maintenance expenses. The service price was estimated using the labour costs, costs associated with service provision, potential number of patients receiving the service and mark-up. Main outcome measures Costs and potential price of MRF. Results A mean time of 404.4 (SD 232.2) was spent on service provision and was extrapolated to annual costs. Service provider cost per patient ranged from €196 (SD 90.5) to €310 (SD 164.4). The mean initial investment per pharmacy was €4594 and the mean annual maintenance costs €3,068. Largest items contributing to cost were initial staff training, continuing education and renting of the patient counselling area. The potential service price ranged from €237 to €628 per patient a year. Conclusion Time spent by the service provider accounted for 75-95% of the final cost, followed by initial investment costs and maintenance costs. Remuneration for professional pharmacy services provision must cover service costs and appropriate profit, allowing for their long-term sustainability.

Cost analysis and cost-benefit analysis of a medication review with follow-up service in aged polypharmacy patients.

BACKGROUND: Drug related problems have a significant clinical and economic burden on patients and the healthcare system. Medication review with follow-up (MRF) is a professional pharmacy service aimed at improving patient's health outcomes through an optimization of the medication. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the economic impact of the MRF service provided in community pharmacies to aged polypharmacy patients comparing MRF with usual care, by undertaking a cost analysis and a cost-benefit analysis. METHODS: The economic evaluation was based on a cluster randomized controlled trial. Patients in the intervention group (IG) received the MRF service and the comparison group (CG) received usual care. The analysis was conducted from the national health system (NHS) perspective over 6 months. Direct medical costs were included and expressed in euros at 2014 prices. Health benefits were estimated by assigning a monetary value to the quality-adjusted life years. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis was undertaken in order to analyse the uncertainty. RESULTS: The analysis included 1403 patients (IG: n = 688 vs CG: n = 715). The cost analysis showed that the MRF saved 97 € per patient in 6 months. Extrapolating data to 1 year and assuming a fee for service of 22 € per patient-month, the estimated savings were 273 € per patient-year. The cost-benefit ratio revealed that for every 1 € invested in MRF, a benefit of 3.3 € to 6.2 € was obtained. CONCLUSION: The MRF provided health benefits to patients and substantial cost savings to the NHS. Investment in this service would represent an efficient use of healthcare resources.

The impact of a medication review with follow-up service on hospital admissions in aged polypharmacy patients.

AIMS: The aims were to assess the impact of a medication review with follow-up (MRF) service provided in community pharmacy to aged polypharmacy patients on the number of medication-related hospital admissions and to estimate the effect on hospital costs. METHODS: This was a sub-analysis of a cluster randomized controlled trials carried out in 178 community pharmacies in Spain. Pharmacies in the intervention group (IG) provided a comprehensive medication review during 6 months. Pharmacists in the comparison group (CG) delivered usual care. For the purposes of this sub-analysis, an expert panel of three internal medicine specialists screened the hospitalizations occurring during the main study, in order to identify medication-related hospitalizations. Inter-rater reliability was measured using Fleiss's kappa. Hospital costs were calculated using diagnosis related groups. RESULTS: One thousand four hundred and three patients were included in the main study and they had 83 hospitalizations. Forty-two hospitalizations (50.6%) were medicine-related, with a substantial level of agreement among the experts (kappa = 0.65, 95% CI 0.52, 0.78, P < 0.01). The number of medication-related hospitalizations was significantly lower in patients receiving MRF (IG 11, GC 31, P = 0.042). The probability of being hospitalized was 3.7 times higher in the CG (odds ratio 3.7, 95% CI 1.2, 11.3, P = 0.021). Costs for a medicine-related hospitalization were €6672. Medication-related hospitalization costs were lower for patients receiving MRF [IG: €94 (SD 917); CG: €301 (SD 2102); 95% CI 35.9, 378.0, P = 0.018]. CONCLUSION: MRF provided by community pharmacists might be an effective strategy to balance the assurance of the benefit from medications and the avoidance of medication-related hospitalizations in aged patients using polypharmacy.

Cost-utility analysis of a medication review with follow-up service for older adults with polypharmacy in community pharmacies in Spain: the conSIGUE program.

BACKGROUND: The concept of pharmaceutical care is operationalized through pharmaceutical professional services, which are patient-oriented to optimize their pharmacotherapy and to improve clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of a medication review with follow-up (MRF) service for older adults with polypharmacy in Spanish community pharmacies against the alternative of having their medication dispensed normally. METHODS: The study was designed as a cluster randomized controlled trial, and was carried out over a time horizon of 6 months. The target population was older adults with polypharmacy, defined as individuals taking five or more medicines per day. The study was conducted in 178 community pharmacies in Spain. Cost-utility analysis adopted a health service perspective. Costs were in euros at 2014 prices and the effectiveness of the intervention was estimated as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). In order to analyze the uncertainty of ICER results, we performed a non-parametric bootstrapping with 5000 replications. RESULTS: A total of 1403 older adults, aged between 65 and 94 years, were enrolled in the study: 688 in the intervention group (IG) and 715 in the control group (CG). By the end of the follow-up, both groups had reduced the mean number of prescribed medications they took, although this reduction was greater in the IG (0.28 ± 1.25 drugs; p < 0.001) than in the CG (0.07 ± 0.95 drugs; p = 0.063). Older adults in the IG saw their quality of life improved by 0.0528 ± 0.20 (p < 0.001). In contrast, the CG experienced a slight reduction in their quality of life: 0.0022 ± 0.24 (p = 0.815). The mean total cost was 977.57 ± 1455.88 for the IG and 1173.44 ± 3671.65 for the CG. In order to estimate the ICER, we used the costs adjusted for baseline medications and QALYs adjusted for baseline utility score, resulting in a mean incremental total cost of -250.51 ± 148.61 (95 % CI -541.79 to 40.76) and a mean incremental QALY of 0.0156 ± 0.004 (95 % CI 0.008-0.023). Regarding the results from the cost-utility analysis, the MRF service emerged as the dominant strategy. CONCLUSION: The MRF service is an effective intervention for optimizing prescribed medication and improving quality of life in older adults with polypharmacy in community pharmacies. The results from the cost-utility analysis suggest that the MRF service is cost effective.