User testing and performance evaluation of the Electronic Quality Improvement Platform for Plans and Pharmacies.

OBJECTIVE: To user-test and evaluate a performance information management platform that makes standardized, benchmarked medication use quality data available to both health plans and community pharmacy organizations. SETTING: Multiple health/drug plans and multiple chain and independent pharmacies across the United States. EVALUATION: During the first phase of the study, user experience was measured via user satisfaction surveys and interviews with key personnel (pharmacists, pharmacy leaders, and health plan leadership). Improvements were subsequently made to the platform based on these findings. During the second phase of the study, the platform was implemented in a greater number of pharmacies and by a greater number of payers. User experience was then reevaluated to gather information for further improvements. RESULTS: The surveys and interviews revealed that users found the Web-based platform easy to use and beneficial in terms of understanding and comparing performance metrics. Primary concerns included lack of access to real-time data and patient-specific data. Many users also expressed uncertainty as to how they could use the information and data provided by the platform. CONCLUSION: The study findings indicate that while information management platforms can be used effectively in both pharmacy and health plan settings, future development is needed to ensure that the provided data can be transferred to pharmacy best practices and improved quality care.

Medicare Advantage-pharmacy partnership improves influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of a collaborative effort of a Medicare Advantage and prescription drug (MAPD) plan and community pharmacies to improve vaccination rates for pneumonia and influenza. STUDY DESIGN: This quasiexperimental, cluster-randomized intervention study used MAPD data to assess the impact of community pharmacists on vaccination rates. Pharmacies in specific regions (districts) were randomly assigned to intervention or control groups. Intervention pharmacies received reports of patients with a gap in influenza (aged 19-89 years) and/or pneumococcal (aged 65-89 years) vaccinations based on medical and pharmacy claims history. Vaccine-naïve patients were offered vaccinations. METHODS: The vaccination rates for the previously vaccine-naïve patients utilizing intervention and control pharmacies were compared 6 months post randomization. Inverse probability weighted hierarchical generalized linear models determined the odds of receiving pneumonia and influenza vaccinations for intervention and control groups, controlling for baseline clinical and demographic characteristics. RESULTS: Intervention and control groups had similar ages in the pneumococcal older-adult cohort (mean age, 73.0 vs 73.4 years, respectively; P = .1255). The intervention group was older than the control group in the influenza cohort (mean age, 67.7 vs 66.4 years, respectively; P = .0006). Slightly more than half of each cohort were women, and the proportion of women was not significantly different between the intervention and control groups in each cohort. In multivariable analyses, intervention pharmacies were associated with higher odds of delivering pneumococcal (odds ratio [OR], 1.91; 95% CI, 1.26-2.87) and influenza (OR, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.37-3.46) vaccinations than control pharmacies. CONCLUSIONS: A health plan-enabled, pharmacist-led intervention was effective in increasing the number of older adults receiving pneumococcal vaccination and individuals receiving influenza vaccination.