Impact of Clinical Pharmacy Expansion within a Rural Federally Qualified Health Center through Implementation of Pharmacist-Led Medicare Annual Wellness Visits.

Medicare Annual Wellness Visits (AWVs) are annual appointments with the primary care team to prepare personalized prevention plans and focus on gaps in care. Although beneficial, AWVs are often difficult for providers to schedule and complete due to the increased time commitments compared to other visits. The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical, economic and patient-level value of newly implemented pharmacist-led AWVs within a rural Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC). This retrospective, cohort study included patients who completed an AWV between 1 October 2021, and 14 February 2022. The primary objective was to compare the per clinician rate of completed AWVs between pharmacists and providers. The secondary objectives were to compare revenue generated, interventions made, and patient satisfaction between pharmacist- and provider-led AWVs. During the study period, nine providers completed 139 AWVs (15.4/provider) and two pharmacists completed 116 AWVs (58/pharmacist). Proportions of interventions ordered among those due in eligible patients were similar between pharmacists and providers (47.6% vs. 44.5%; p = 0.356). Patient satisfaction was overall positive with no difference between groups. Pharmacist-led AWVs increased completion of AWVs by 83% over a 20-week period, including significantly more initial, compared to subsequent, AWVs than providers. Sustainability of pharmacist-led AWVs at this FQHC is supported by study outcomes.

From Start to Finish: Examining Factors Associated With Higher Likelihood of Publication Among Abstracts Presented at an International Infectious Diseases Scientific Meeting.

Background: The landscape of infectious diseases research by interprofessional teams continues to change in both scope and engagement. Limited information exists regarding publication metrics and factors associated with publication of abstracts presented at professional infectious diseases meetings. Methods: This was a retrospective, observational study evaluating abstracts presented at IDWeek in 2017 and 2018. The primary endpoint was the proportion of abstracts that were subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals. Factors associated with publication were evaluated, and a description of publication metrics was reported. Results: Of the 887 abstracts analyzed from the IDWeek meetings, 236 (26.6%) were published. Significantly more abstracts were published if they were presented as a platform presentation versus poster presentation (35% vs 21%, P < .001). Inclusion of a PhD author significantly increased the likelihood of publication (P = .0014). Prospective studies, greater number of authors, and greater number of study subjects were more common among published abstracts. Median time to publication was 10.9 months, and the majority were published in infectious diseases journals, with an overall average impact factor of 7.7 across all journals. Conclusions: Abstracts from IDWeek presented as oral platforms and those including a PhD author were more likely to be published. Large, diverse authorship teams were common among published abstracts. The high quality of resulting manuscripts is evident by the destination journals and their respective impact factors. These data may be used to inform and motivate clinicians and trainees engaging in infectious diseases-related research.