Assessing provider knowledge of the federal 340B Drug Pricing Program in a federally qualified health center.

DISCLAIMER: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. PURPOSE: The 340B Drug Pricing Program is important to healthcare organizations that serve vulnerable communities. However, it is unknown whether healthcare providers in these organizations understand the 340B program and how it supports enhanced patient services. This study aims to characterize the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of healthcare providers toward the 340B program in a multisite federally qualified health center (FQHC). METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey. A 27-item survey designed to assess prescriber knowledge and perspectives toward the 340B program was developed and administered. Closed-ended items were summarized using descriptive statistics, and open-ended items were analyzed with qualitative methods. RESULTS: A total of 198 healthcare providers with prescribing authority received the survey; of those, 65 (32.8%) participated. The majority of respondents (66.2%) were female; 41.5% were 35 years of age or younger, and 49.2% were physicians. The majority of respondents agreed that patients benefited from access to the organization's 340B pharmacies (95%) and that 340B pricing is important to consider when prescribing medications (78.3%). However, knowledge of the 340B program was limited, with only half of respondents (54%) able to correctly answer at least 4 of 7 knowledge-focused items. Reponses to a patient case suggested that some providers may be unfamiliar with which drugs are available at reduced prices. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that providers believe the 340B program benefits patients and the organization but often lack a complete understanding of the program. Future research should focus on prescriber education as a strategy to help organizations optimize their 340B programs and facilitate patient access to medications.

An Exploration of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Antiracism in Standardized Patient Simulations.

A trending topic in pharmacy education is the importance of educating and exposing student pharmacists to topics of diversity, equity, inclusion, and antiracism (DEIA). Incorporation of diverse patient populations is one emerging learning opportunity for students in the DEIA space. This commentary presents the findings of seven pharmacy programs reporting similarities and differences in standardized patient (SP) recruitment and training, and their use in DEIA simulation learning activities. Common barriers of DEIA-centric SP activities in pharmacy programs were also identified and included recruitment of diverse SPs, lack of faculty knowledge for implementation of DEIA-focused simulations, and emotional protection of SPs involved. While no best practices or standardized processes exist, the authors provide suggestions for addressing barriers, and make a call to action for further research to determine best practices related to recruitment, training, and utilization of diverse SPs in simulation activities in pharmacy education.

Exploring Patient Perceptions of Opioid Treatment Agreements in a Community Health Center Environment.

OBJECTIVE: Describe patient attitudes toward opioid treatment agreements (OTAs) and characterize perceptions of their impact on patient care, behavior, communication with prescribers, and engagement with the health care system. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive study. SETTING: Federally qualified health center with six clinic locations serving a rural population. SUBJECTS: Patients were prescribed long-term opioid therapy and were required to sign an OTA through an in-person office visit with a clinical pharmacist. METHODS: Patients who signed an OTA were recruited to participate in semistructured, in-person, one-on-one interviews. Data were analyzed using immersion-crystallization methods. RESULTS: Among the 20 patients recruited, 50% were men; 70% were insured by the state's Medicaid program; and 85% were using opioids for hip, back, and/or neck pain. Four major themes arose from the interviews. First, individuals who use long-term opioids experience a wide variety of opioid-related fears and stigmas. Second, individuals articulated real or potential benefits from implementing OTAs. Third, opinions differed on whether OTAs affected behavior and reduced opioid misuse and diversion. Finally, individuals provided feedback on the health care system's OTA implementation process. CONCLUSIONS: Patients experienced a wide variety of opioid-related fears and stigmas, including how OTA requirements can perpetuate these issues. Despite these feelings, participants articulated real or potential positive outcomes from the use of OTAs, although they were mixed on whether these agreements translated to any behavior changes. If OTAs are to become standard practice, future research is needed to describe the diversity of patient perspectives and experiences with OTAs and to evaluate their effect on patient outcomes.