Examining the case for direct contracting: A multistakeholder case study.

BACKGROUND: Employers and pharmacies are challenged by a complex system for prescription payment. Cost plus direct contracts for prescriptions and bundled services may yield benefits. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to (1) explore direct contracting using multistakeholder interviews, (2) compare employer costs and employee copays for 6 months of prescription charges under their pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) with projected costs under a pharmacy direct contract, (3) project pharmacy revenue, costs, and net profit had these prescriptions been processed through the direct contract, and (4) assess employee satisfaction under the direct contract. METHODS: Semistructured stakeholder interviews were recorded transcribed and analyzed to identify different perspectives on direct contracting. Employer PBM invoices for 412 employee prescriptions over 6 months were analyzed to calculate employer and employee costs and reanalyzed for the invoice cost plus $12 professional fee direct contract. For the pharmacy financial analysis projection, invoice costs and a $9.82 cost of dispensing were subtracted from total revenue to yield an estimated profit had the parties been under the arrangement. A 34-item satisfaction survey was mailed using a 4-contact design with cash incentives to the 20 employees serviced by the direct contract that were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Eight stakeholder interviews described the benefits and potential challenges of such direct contracts. The financial analysis suggested the employer costs would be $5664 lower and employee copays would have been $1918 lower had all prescriptions been paid using the direct contract. The estimated profit for the pharmacy was projected at $899. Survey respondents were generally satisfied with the direct contract, but few used the bundled services. CONCLUSION: The direct contract may be financially beneficial for all parties. It also may offer more transparent pricing that may be desirable for the employer and pharmacy. Greater uptake of bundled services may increase the value to the employer.

The association between cost sharing, prior authorization, and specialty drug utilization: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Specialty drugs are identified by high monthly costs and complexity of administration. Payers use utilization management strategies, including prior authorization and separate tiers with higher cost sharing, to control spending. These strategies can negatively impact patients' health outcomes through treatment initiation delays, medication abandonment, and nonadherence. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of patient cost sharing on specialty drug utilization and the effect of prior authorization on treatment delay and specialty drug utilization. METHODS: We conducted a literature search in the period between February 2021 and April 2022 using PubMed for articles published in English without restriction on date of publication. We included research papers with prior authorization and cost sharing for specialty drugs as exposure variables and specialty drug utilization as the outcome variable. Studies were reviewed by 2 independent reviewers and relevant information from eligible studies was extracted using a standardized form and approved by 2 reviewers. Review papers, opinion pieces, and projects without data were excluded. RESULTS: Forty-four studies were included in this review after screening and exclusions, 9 on prior authorization and 35 on cost sharing. Patients with lower cost sharing via patient support programs experienced higher adherence, fewer days to fill prescriptions, and lower discontinuation rates. Similar outcomes were noted for patients on low-income subsidy programs. Increasing cost sharing above $100 was associated with up to 75% abandonment rate for certain specialty drugs. This increased level of cost sharing was also associated with higher discontinuation rates and odds. At the same time, decreasing out-of-pocket costs increased initiation of specialty drugs. However, inconsistent results on impact of cost sharing on medication possession ratio (MPR) and proportion of days covered (PDC) were reported. Some studies reported a negative association between higher costs and MPR and PDC; however, MPR and PDC of cancer specialty drugs did not decrease with higher costs. Significant delays in prescription initiation were reported when prior authorization was needed. CONCLUSIONS: Higher levels of patient cost sharing reduce specialty drug use by increasing medication abandonment while generally decreasing initiation and persistence. Similarly, programs that reduce patient cost sharing increase initiation and persistence. In contrast, cost sharing had an inconsistent and bidirectional effect on MPR and PDC. Prior authorization caused treatment delays, but its effects on specialty drug use varied. More research is needed to examine the effect of cost sharing and prior authorization on long-term health outcomes.

Patient preferences and willingness-to-pay for community pharmacy-led Medicare Part D consultation services: A discrete choice experiment.

INTRODUCTION: Community pharmacies currently offer Medicare Part D consultation services, often at no-cost. Despite facilitating plan-switching behavior, identifying potential cost-savings, and increasing medication adherence, patient uptake of these services remains low. OBJECTIVES: To investigate patient preferences for specific service-offering attributes and marginal willingness-to-pay (mWTP) for an enhanced community pharmacy Medicare Part D consultation service. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) guided by the SERVQUAL framework was developed and administered using a national online survey panel. Study participants were English-speaking adults (≥65 years) residing in the United States enrolled in a Medicare Part D or Medicare Advantage plan and had filled a prescription at a community pharmacy within the last 12 months. An orthogonal design resulted in 120 paired-choice tasks distributed equally across 10 survey blocks. Data were analyzed using mixed logit and latent class models. RESULTS: In total, 540 responses were collected, with the average age of respondents being 71 years. The majority of respondents were females (60%) and reported taking four or more prescription medication (51%). Service attribute levels with the highest utility were: 15-min intervention duration (0.392), discussion of services + a follow-up phone call (0.069), in-person at the pharmacy (0.328), provided by a pharmacist the patient knew (0.578), and no-cost (3.382). The attribute with the largest mWTP value was a service provided by a pharmacist the participant knew ($8.42). Latent class analysis revealed that patient preferences for service attributes significantly differed by gender and difficulty affording prescription medications. CONCLUSIONS: Quantifying patient preference using discrete choice methodology provides pharmacies with information needed to design service offerings that balance patient preference and sustainability. Pharmacies may consider providing interventions at no-cost to subsets of patients placing high importance on a service cost attribute. Further, patient preference for 15-min interventions may inform Medicare Part D service delivery and facilitate service sustainability.

A qualitative exploration of patient preferences for Medicare Part D consultation services offered in a community pharmacy setting.

BACKGROUND: Community pharmacies currently offer Medicare Part D consultation services to help eligible beneficiaries select prescription medication insurance. Despite these service offerings, there is a paucity of information on patient preferences for these service offerings and optimal service delivery from the patient perspective. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to (1) evaluate patient expectations of and willingness-to-pay (WTP) for community pharmacy Medicare Part D consultation services, (2) identify components of Medicare Part D consultation services associated with service quality, and (3) explore differences in preferences and service expectations between services-experienced and service-naive patients. METHODS: This was a qualitative exploratory study, with data collected using interviews and a follow-up supplemental survey with participants recruited from 5 community pharmacies across the state of Iowa participating in the Community Pharmacy Enhanced Services Network. A total of 17 patients contacted the research team for participation. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, with qualitative data analysis performed using template analysis guided by the SERVQUAL framework. Interview participants were invited to complete a supplemental survey. Descriptive statistics and frequencies were generated for survey items. Service-experienced and service-naive survey responses Pearson chi-square and Welch t tests were used to determine significant differences between service-experienced and service-naive responses for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. RESULTS: In total, all 17 patients who contacted the research team agreed to participate in interviews, with 8 service-experienced and 9 service-naive interviews completed. Template analysis identified 14 subdomains across the SERVQUAL domains. Similarities and differences in service preferences between groups were identified, focusing on patient-pharmacist trust, past service experience, and WTP. All interview participants completed supplemental surveys, with no statistically significant differences between service-experienced and service-naive participant characteristics identified. CONCLUSIONS: Service-experienced patients emphasized components of the service that contribute to service quality and generally reported higher WTP values. Many service-naive patients were unaware community pharmacies provided consultation services, suggesting that pharmacists may benefit from considering how services are offered to patients based on the specific preferences and expectations and consider ways to increase awareness of service offerings.

Leadership aspiration: An intersectional analysis of racial and gender equity in pharmacy.

BACKGROUND: The glass ceiling is a metaphor used to describe an invisible barrier that prevents an underrepresented group from rising beyond a certain level. Among pharmacists, underrepresented groups face various barriers and limitations to their successes. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to apply the intersectionality framework to data collected from the 2019 National Pharmacist Workforce Study (NPWS) to understand the association of gender and race with leadership aspiration among pharmacists, including differences in perceived barriers and attractors for pursuing leadership. METHODS: The 2019 NPWS was conducted using an electronic Qualtrics survey. Three e-mails containing the survey link were sent to a systematic random sample of 94,803 pharmacists through the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy Foundation e-profile system. The 2019 NPWS had an overall response rate of 6% (5705/94,803). A total of 8466 pharmacists clicked on the survey link, resulting in a usable response rate of 67.3% (5705/8466). Data were analyzed in SPSS software using descriptive and Pearson's r and chi-square test statistics. RESULTS: Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) pharmacists reported holding 10.7% of all leadership positions. Leadership positions included manager, assistant manager, executive, dean, director, chief pharmacy officer, owner or partner, and other leadership position types. White men and women reported the lowest interest in leadership (38.8% and 37.7%), whereas Black men (65.1%), Latinas (59.2%), Black women (58.5%), and Latinos (57.1%) had the highest interest in leadership. "The ability to make an impact" was the most frequently selected attractor for wanting to pursue leadership, selected by 92.5% and 79.6% of Black men and women, respectively, 77.8% of Other women, and 76.9% of Latinos. At graduation from pharmacy school, the student debt loan average of all graduation years ranged from $63,886 (± $73,701) for Other men to $112,384 (± $105,417) for Black women. Higher student loan debt was positively correlated with wanting to pursue a leadership position (r = 0.22, P < 0.001). Black women graduating 2011-2019 had the highest student loan debt at graduation ($194,456 ± $88,898). CONCLUSION: Interest in leadership positions by BIPOC pharmacists compared with reported leadership roles were inversely correlated. Understanding the discrepancy in interest in leadership and reported leadership positions held, particularly with relation to race and gender, is essential to understanding equity in pharmacy leadership. Further research is warranted to understand the factors that impede the ascension of women and underrepresented pharmacists into leadership positions.

Provider perspectives and experiences following the integration of the prescription drug monitoring program into the electronic health record.

Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are a public health tool for prescribers and pharmacists to monitor controlled substance use at the patient level. The objectives of this study were to (1) assess attitudes about the PDMP and perceived changes in experience and decision-making following integration into the electronic health record (EHR), and (2) identify barriers to optimal PDMP use and user recommendations for improvement. This descriptive study used an electronic survey to obtain feedback from prescribers and pharmacists at a single academic medical center. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and textual data were analyzed. Of 1480 PDMP users 208 responded (14.1%). Responses demonstrated the integration of the PDMP into the EHR simplified log-in and access to PDMP information resulting in more frequent access and perceived improvement of care quality. Barriers included technical issues accessing the PDMP within the EHR and the lack of integration of other state PDMPs. Overall, the benefit of integrating the PDMP into the EHR was positive but largely limited to streamlining log-in and patient selection. Recommendations for improvement include addressing technological issues and education on PDMP interpretation and integrating new features that may modify prescribing, referral, and co-prescribing behaviors.

National Pharmacist Workforce Study (NPWS): Description of 2019 Survey Methods and Assessment of Nonresponse Bias.

National Pharmacist Workforce Studies (NPWS) have been conducted in the U.S. every five years since 2000. This article describes the online survey methods used for the latest NPWS conducted in 2019 and provides an assessment for nonresponse bias. Three waves of emails containing a link to the online survey were sent to a random sample of about 96,000 pharmacists licensed in the United States. The survey asked about pharmacist employment, work activities, work-life balance, practice characteristics, pharmacist demographics and training. A total of 5467 usable responses were received, for a usable response rate of 5.8%. To assess for nonresponse bias, respondent characteristics were compared to the population of U.S. pharmacists and a benchmark, while a wave analysis compared early and late respondents. The pharmacist sample-population comparison and the benchmark comparison showed that the NPWS respondents had a higher percentage of female pharmacists and a lower proportion of young pharmacists compared to the population of U.S. pharmacists and the benchmark sample. In some contrast, the wave analysis showed that the early respondents had a higher percentage of males and older pharmacists compared to the late respondents. Both the wave analysis and the benchmark comparison showed that the NPWS respondents (and early respondents) had a lower percent of pharmacists with a PharmD degree than did the late respondents and the benchmark group. These differences should be considered when interpreting the findings from the 2019 NPWS.

Any questions? Yes, do pharmacists monitor medications at refill?

OBJECTIVES: To describe pharmacists' self-reported refill monitoring activities and test for demographic and work setting differences that contribute to variation. METHODS: This study used a cross-sectional survey design. A 4-contact survey was mailed to 599 community pharmacists randomly selected from a list provided by the state board of pharmacy. Surveys were mailed in June and July 2013. Descriptive statistics and analysis of variance were used to characterize these data. RESULTS: Of the 599 surveys mailed, 269 complete responses were received for a 44.9% response rate. Pharmacists reported reviewing the patient's medication profile for 40% of refills. Of the 29% of refills handed off, pharmacists asked 70% of patients if they had any questions and 23% a specific question about drug therapy. Pharmacists at mass merchandisers and those in smaller towns were least likely to examine the profile, whereas pharmacists working at independent stores, owners, and pharmacists with a BS Pharm degree were most likely to hand off refills to patients. Demographic and work-setting characteristics factors were not associated with the rate of asking specific questions about the patient's drug therapy, although pharmacists with a BS Pharm, at an independent store, or working in the smallest towns were least likely to ask "Any questions?" when handing off the prescription. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists reported reviewing patient profiles, handing off prescriptions, and asking medication-specific questions to fewer than one-half of patients picking up refills. Pharmacists were more likely to inquire if patients had any questions than to ask specific questions, and other researchers have reported that the former phrasing may inadvertently serve to reduce patient engagement.

The Veteran-Initiated Electronic Care Coordination: A Multisite Initiative to Promote and Evaluate Consumer-Mediated Health Information Exchange.

INTRODUCTION: Information continuity is critical to person-centered care when patients receive care from multiple healthcare systems. Patients can access their electronic health record data through patient portals to facilitate information exchange. This pilot was developed to improve care continuity for rural Veterans by (1) promoting the use of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) patient portal to share health information with non-VA providers, and (2) evaluating the impact of health information sharing at a community appointment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Veterans from nine VA healthcare systems were trained to access and share their VA Continuity of Care Document (CCD) with their non-VA providers. Patients and non-VA providers completed surveys on their experiences. RESULTS: Participants (n = 620) were primarily older, white, and Vietnam era Veterans. After training, 78% reported the CCD would help them be more involved in their healthcare and 86% planned to share it regularly with non-VA providers. Veterans (n = 256) then attended 277 community appointments. Provider responses from these appointments (n = 133) indicated they were confident in the accuracy of the information (97%) and wanted to continue to receive the CCD (96%). Ninety percent of providers reported the CCD improved their ability to have an accurate medication list and helped them make medication treatment decisions. Fifty percent reported they did not order a laboratory test or another procedure because of information available in the CCD. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot demonstrates feasibility and value of patient access to a CCD to facilitate information sharing between VA and non-VA providers. Outreach and targeted education are needed to promote consumer-mediated health information exchange.

Community pharmacists, medication monitoring, and the routine nature of refills: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the attitudes, contextual factors, and behaviors associated with medication monitoring in the dispensing process by community pharmacists. DESIGN: Descriptive qualitative research with semistructured interviews. SETTING: Midwestern community pharmacies or telephone. PARTICIPANTS: 12 licensed community pharmacists from chain, independent, and grocery pharmacies. INTERVENTION: 45-minute, semistructured interviews were conducted to gather detailed live experiences and perspectives pertinent to the study objective. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Transcripts were coded descriptively and interpretively, originating with the input and monitoring process domains of the Health Collaboration Model. RESULTS: A thematic dichotomy was interpreted in the analysis. All participants discussed both (1) the technical and routine nature of their work, and (2) the problem-solving and relational aspects of practice. More specifically, medication monitoring was constrained by busyness, lack of patient interest, and the routine nature of refills, although to varying extents. Some predominantly responded to unique circumstances such as patient question-asking, prior memory of a patient interaction or service utilization, or technical issues such as medication cost. Others added unprompted questions of varying specificity when handing off the prescription to understand patient medication experiences. Pharmacists felt challenged by nonadherence monitoring because workflows made this information difficult to access and late refills were prevalent. CONCLUSION: Community pharmacies seeking to increase medication monitoring in the dispensing process may target the routine nature of refills and the availability of monitoring information.

Evaluation of the pharmaceutical case management program implemented in a private sector health plan.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the drug-related problems (DRPs) identified by pharmacists providing pharmaceutical case management (PCM), describe the effect of PCM on medication appropriateness, and compare the findings from this evaluation of private insurance beneficiaries with a previous evaluation of PCM provided to Iowa Medicaid beneficiaries. METHODS: A pharmacy chart review was used to calculate medication appropriateness index (MAI) scores for patients before and after receiving PCM. Changes in MAI scores were calculated. DRPs identified by pharmacists during PCM services were characterized using online summaries submitted by pharmacists following each PCM encounter. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients received 195 PCM services from 29 pharmacies (2.14 services/patient). On average, pharmacists providing PCM were able to identify 2.6 DRPs per patient. The most frequently identified problems were the need for additional therapy, adverse drug reactions, and inappropriate adherence. Compared with baseline, mean MAI scores did not improve significantly following PCM (1.53 vs. 1.24, P = 0.34). MAI scores for this group were significantly lower than in a previous study of Medicaid beneficiaries receiving PCM. CONCLUSION: The lower number of medications and lower MAI scores for the private beneficiaries compared with Medicaid beneficiaries suggested that these two groups have different characteristics that could translate into different needs from medication therapy management services.

Obtaining patient test results from clinical laboratories: a survey of state law for pharmacists.

OBJECTIVES: To identify states with laws that restrict to whom clinical laboratories may release copies of laboratory test results and to describe how these laws may affect pharmacists' ability to obtain patient laboratory test results. METHODS: Researchers examined state statutes and administrative codes for all 50 states and the District of Columbia at the University of Iowa Law Library between June and July 2007. Researchers also consulted with lawyers, state Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments officers, and law librarians. Laws relating to the study objective were analyzed. RESULTS: 34 jurisdictions do not restrict the release of laboratory test results, while 17 states have laws that restrict to whom clinical laboratories can send copies of test results. In these states, pharmacists will have to use alternative sources, such as physician offices, to obtain test results. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists must consider state law before requesting copies of laboratory test results from clinical laboratories. This may be an issue that state pharmacy associations can address to increase pharmacist access to important patient information.