RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Patients receiving infusions for the treatment of cancer are commonly prescribed supportive care medications which are filled through retail pharmacies. The initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic created hurdles for patients to receive supportive care medications due to concerns related to exposure risk. Meds-to-Chemo Chairs (M2CC) was created allowing an onsite retail pharmacy to dispense and hand-deliver supportive care prescriptions to patients in the infusion suite. The purpose of this study was to assess the value of this program. DATA SOURCES: The volume of prescriptions dispensed through the M2CC service, as well as the financial impact, was tracked through the prescription software system used by the onsite retail pharmacy dispensing and delivering the medications. DATA SUMMARY: Through the first 2.5 years of the program, M2CC has delivered over 13,000 prescriptions with an estimated gross revenue of $3.5 million. CONCLUSIONS: The M2CC medication delivery program has proved to be highly successful and feasible.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: National spending on specialty medications accounted for approximately $193 billion in 2016. The coverage design for Medicare Parts B and D has shifted medication costs to patients, which may prohibit patients from starting or maintaining therapy due to affordability. As a result, patients have enrolled in safety net financial options, such as patient assistance and foundation programs. Safety net options may provide savings not otherwise realized by Medicare; however, they may have a negative financial effect on health systems and pharmaceutical manufacturers. OBJECTIVES: To (a) quantify financial savings to Medicare as a result of patient enrollment in patient assistance programs and (b) quantify the financial effect of safety net options for patients, manufacturers, and the academic medical center that participated in this study. METHODS: A single-center, nonrandomized, retrospective pilot study of Medicare beneficiaries was conducted. Patients who were prescribed hematology/oncology specialty medications and enrolled in safety net options between July 2015 and June 2017 were included. Investigators collected data related to fill history, drug cost, and prescription coverage. The primary outcome was the overall cost savings to Medicare as a result of patient enrollment in patient assistance programs. Secondary outcomes included total patient out-of-pocket savings as a result of foundation copayment support, financial effect on manufacturers as a result of patient assistance programs, and health system revenue impact as a result of safety net options. Descriptive statistics were used. RESULTS: This study included 114 patients. Medicare saved $5,083,816.83 over 2 years as a result of patient assistance programs. Eight foundations provided $240,350.04 in patient insurance copayments. Nine manufacturers provided 2,243 free drug doses, valued at $3,379,032.34. The participating medical center missed the opportunity for $6,481,543.55 in revenue due to patient assistance programs. CONCLUSIONS: The participating medical center's efforts to improve access to oncology care took considerable time and resources. These activities, as well as unreimbursed infusion services, were costs to the medical center that may not be recognized by Medicare. Manufacturers also supported patient access through their sponsored patient assistance programs. The use of these services and safety net options resulted in cost savings to Medicare and their beneficiaries. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. The authors have nothing to disclose. Findings from this study were part of a podium research presentation at the Great Lakes Pharmacy Residency Conference; April 25, 2018; West Lafayette, IN.