Evaluating Success Factors of a Medication Adherence Tracker Pilot Program in Improving Part D Medication Adherence Metrics in a Medicare Advantage Plan: Importance of Provider Engagement.

BACKGROUND: Health plans and providers can increase quality by improving adherence to chronic disease medications included in star ratings among Medicare Advantage Part D (MAPD) plan enrollees. Research is needed to evaluate effective means of collaboration between health plans and providers. The Medication Adherence Tracker (MAT) is a health plan initiative to help primary care providers use outreach to improve their patients' adherence. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the contribution of structural and process factors on the success of a health plan-initiated tracking system in improving chronic disease medication adherence over 6 months. METHODS: The MAT quality improvement initiative was carried out in South Texas from June to December 2016. Health plan pharmacists used claims data to identify MAPD enrollees at risk of nonadherence to triple-weighted star medications: renin-angiotensin system antagonists, oral diabetes medications, and statins. Actionable reports were delivered biweekly to each provider, either by fax or in person, by embedded health plan nurses. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate sociodemographic and clinical factors as well as the role of provider outreach in increasing paid pharmacy claims and medication adherence as measured by proportion of days covered (PDC) > 0.8. RESULTS: Of 3,542 patients in 5 Texas physician-organized delivery system groups whose 67 providers received tracking reports from June through December 2016, 1,901 (54%) patients had more than 1 related prescription, and 3,064 (87%) received provider outreach on at least 1 prescription. 2,493 (70%) had at least 1 paid pharmacy claim. Provider outreach was associated with greater likelihood of paid prescription claims (relative risk [RR] = 4.59, 95% CI = 3.74-5.62) and greater year-end adherence (PDC > 0.8, RR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.63-2.12) in multivariable predictive models. 95% CIs for age, gender, low-income subsidy eligibility, and number of prescriptions did not exclude the null value. CONCLUSIONS: Provider engagement is critical to effective health plan-provider partnerships to overcome barriers, change behavior, and improve chronic disease care quality and population outcomes. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Cigna. The manuscript was prepared as a work for hire. Hong, Esse, Gallardo, Serna, Fosshat, and Mamvou are employees of CareAllies, a Cigna company. Bruce was employed by Cigna at the time of the study. Vadhariya reports a past internship at Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, unrelated to this work. Abughosh reports grants from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Valeant Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, and BMS/Pfizer, unrelated to this work.

Older Americans' Preferences Between Lower Drug Prices and Prescription Drug Plan Choice, 2019.

Objectives. To assess older Americans' willingness to trade off the possibility of choosing or changing their prescription drug plan for lower drug spending.Methods. We used data from the Kaiser Family Foundation Health Tracking Poll on prescription drugs carried out in February 2019. This nationwide telephone survey oversampled participants aged 65 years and older who, when weighted, were representative of the US older adult population.Results. Older adults were strongly in favor of the government negotiating drug prices in Medicare Part D (82% support); 60% of older adults would trade off the possibility of choosing or switching their drug plan in favor of lower drug prices. All groups preferred lower spending over plan choice, but this preference was stronger among individuals who were in poorer health, had lower education and income, and found it very difficult to afford the drugs they needed.Conclusions. The results suggest that Medicare beneficiaries could support policies that limit plan choice, as long as drug prices actually decrease.

Comprehensive medication reviews: Optimal delivery setting and recommendations for quality assessment.

OBJECTIVES: To propose a metric evaluating the quality of comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs), and to discuss the optimal setting for CMR delivery. SUMMARY: First, we provide a current assessment of the quality of CMRs performed in community, payer, and health system/clinic settings, with recommended opportunities for improvement. Thereafter, a companion metric for CMR quality is discussed, because this is critical to ensuring that patients are not just receiving CMR services, but that CMRs reflect evidence-based recommendations supporting optimal patient outcomes. CONCLUSION: Based on the data currently available, accessibility to electronic medical records would enhance patient-specific recommendations to optimize CMR delivery and patient outcomes. Future studies may help to identify additional factors, such as pharmacist-physician collaboration in clinic and use of evidence-based recommendations, that can further enhance CMR quality.

Beneficiary, Caregiver, and Case Manager Perspectives on the Medication Therapy Management Program Standardized Format.

Plan sponsors of Medicare Part D must provide beneficiaries who receive a comprehensive medication review (CMR) with a written summary using the Medicare Part D Medication Therapy Management Standardized Format (SF). The SF is a means to advance consistency in the CMR program by providing a template of expected content. However, barriers remain with beneficiary use and integration into existing electronic health records. The current study assessed Medicare beneficiary, caregiver, and case manager perceptions of the SF through five focus group interviews with a total of 23 participants. Qualitative analysis found that beneficiaries and case managers preferred a consolidated SF document to share and update their entire health care team. Beneficiaries suggested adding information to the SF on dosage, timing, drug interactions, cost, and less expensive alternatives. Identifying elements of the SF that are perceived as useful to beneficiaries will allow for a more streamlined SF that may enhance interoperability among the health care team. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 45(4), 7-13.].

Long-acting opioid initiation in US nursing homes.

PURPOSE: To estimate the proportion of residents newly initiating long-acting opioids in comparison to residents initiating short-acting opioids and examine variation in long-acting opioid initiation by region and resident characteristics. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 182 735 long-stay nursing home residents in 13 881 US nursing homes who were Medicare beneficiaries during 2011 to 2013 and initiated a short-acting or long-acting opioid (excluding residents <50 years old, those with cancer, or receiving hospice care). Medicare Part D prescription claims were used to identify residents as newly initiating short-acting or long-acting opioids, defined as having a prescription claim for an opioid with no prior opioid prescriptions in the preceding 60 days. We estimated the overall proportion of initiators prescribed long-acting opioids. Regional variation was examined by mapping results by state and hospital referral regions. Logistic models were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Two percent of opioid initiators were prescribed long-acting opioids. State variation in long-acting opioid initiation ranged from 0.6% to 7.5% (5th-95th percentiles: 0.6-6.4%). Resident characteristics associated with increased long-acting opioid initiation included severe physical limitations (vs none/mild limitations; aOR: 2.13, 95% CI: 1.92-2.37) and pain (staff-assessed vs no pain; aOR: 1.59 95% CI: 1.40-1.80), whereas being non-White was inversely associated (non-Hispanic black vs non-Hispanic white; aOR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.62-0.79). CONCLUSION: United States nursing home residents predominantly initiate short-acting opioids in accordance with Center for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. Documented variation by geographic and resident characteristics suggests that improvements are possible.

County and Physician Variation in Benzodiazepine Prescribing to Medicare Beneficiaries by Primary Care Physicians in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Physicians widely prescribe benzodiazepines (BZD) despite well-recognized harms. OBJECTIVE: To determine county and provider characteristics that predict high-intensity BZD prescribing by primary care physicians (PCPs) to Medicare beneficiaries. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of the 2015 Medicare Part D Public Use Files (PUF). SUBJECTS: n = 122,054 PCPs who prescribed 37.3 billion medication days. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcome was intensity of BZD prescribing (days prescribed/total medication days) at the county- and physician levels. PCP and county characteristics were derived from the Part D PUF, Area Health Resources Files, and County Health Rankings. Logistic regression determined the characteristics associated with high-intensity (top quartile) BZD prescribing. KEY RESULTS: Beneficiaries were prescribed over 1.2 billion days of BZD in 2015, accounting for 2.3% of all medication days prescribed in Part D. Top quartile counties had 3.1 times higher BZD prescribing than the lowest (3.4% vs. 1.1%; F = 3293.8, df = 3, p < 0.001). Adjusting for county-level demographics and health care system characteristics (including supply of mental health providers), counties with more adults with at least some college had lower odds of high-intensity prescribing (per 5% increase, adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.80, 99% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-0.87, p < 0.001), as did higher income counties (per US$1000 increase, AOR 0.93, CI 0.91-0.95, p < 0.001). Top quartile PCPs prescribed at 6.5 times the rate of the bottom (3.9% vs. 0.6%; F = 63,910.2, df = 3, p < 0.001). High-intensity opioid prescribing (AOR 4.18, CI 3.90-4.48, p < 0.001) was the characteristic most strongly associated with BZD prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: BZD prescribing appears to vary across counties and providers and is related to non-patient characteristics. Further work is needed to understand how such non-clinical factors drive variation.

Adjusting Medicare Advantage star ratings for socioeconomic status and disability.

OBJECTIVES: Studies have identified potential unintended effects of not adjusting clinical performance measures in value-based purchasing programs for socioeconomic status (SES) factors. We examine the impact of SES and disability adjustments on Medicare Advantage (MA) plans' and prescription drug plans' (PDPs') contract star ratings. These analyses informed the development of the Categorical Adjustment Index (CAI), which CMS implemented with the 2017 star ratings. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analyses of MA and PDP performance using 2012 Medicare beneficiary-level characteristics and performance data from the Star Rating Program. METHODS: We modeled within-contract associations of beneficiary SES (Medicaid and Medicare dual eligibility [DE] or receipt of a low-income subsidy [LIS]) and disability with performance on 16 clinical measures. We estimated variability in contract-level DE/LIS and disability disparities using mixed-effects regression models. We simulated the impact of applying the CAI to adjust star ratings for DE/LIS and disability to construct the 2017 star ratings. RESULTS: DE/LIS was negatively associated with performance for 12 of 16 measures and positively associated for 2 of 16 measures. Disability was negatively associated with performance for 11 of 15 measures and positively associated for 3 of 15 measures. Adjusting star ratings using the CAI resulted in half-star rating increases for 8.5% of MA and 33.3% of PDP contracts that exceeded 50% DE/LIS beneficiaries. CONCLUSIONS: Increases in star ratings following adjustment of clinical performance for SES and disability using the CAI focused on contracts with higher percentages of DE/LIS beneficiaries. Adjustment for enrollee characteristics may improve the accuracy of quality measurement and remove incentives for providers to avoid caring for more challenging patient populations.

Variation in Medication Therapy Management Delivery: Implications for Health Care Policy.

BACKGROUND: Medication therapy management (MTM) program evaluations have revealed mixed outcomes, with some studies finding favorable outcomes and others finding no differences between patients who received MTM versus those who did not. One possible reason for outcomes variability is differences in delivery of MTM programs. The Chronic Care Model (CCM) provides a framework for how health care organizations can improve care for the chronically ill through 6 elements: organization of health care, delivery system design, clinical information systems, decision support, self-management, and linkages to community resources. OBJECTIVE: To apply the CCM to understand variation in MTM delivery and formulate policy recommendations. METHODS: This study used a mixed-methods descriptive analysis of MTM delivery. Investigators conducted visits to a purposeful sample of MTM practices to observe MTM and interview participants. The pharmacists and staff of these practices completed a modified Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (ACIC). Pairs of investigators analyzed interview transcripts to identify themes. Demographics and ACIC scores were summarized using descriptive statistics. After analysis, investigators discussed overarching themes and policy implications organized by CCM elements. RESULTS: Seven practices participated, and 87 participants were interviewed. Based on ACIC scores, MTM patient volume, and payer mix, practices were categorized as Early Maturity Level or Later Maturity Level. From the model, organization of health care themes included whether MTM was the practice's core competence, belief/confidence in the MTM process, lack of formal rewards, and the influence of organizational goals and external environment. Delivery system design themes pertained to the extent that MTM processes were formalized. Clinical information systems themes were the extent to which systems were influenced by payers, efficiency strategies, and the accuracy and availability of information. In considering clinical decision support themes, alert design limitations and variation in user approaches to alerts based on experience were noted. We observed strong support for patient self-management; when present, barriers were attributed to the patient, MTM provider, or payer. Referral to community resources was minimal. Numerous policy implications were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Our research identified numerous ways by which MTM delivery varies, particularly by MTM practice maturity level. These findings provide evidence for several policy changes that could be considered to optimize MTM delivery, encourage alignment with the CCM, and promote practice maturation. DISCLOSURES: This research and a portion of Snyder's salary were supported by grant number K08HS022119 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Snyder reports consulting fees from Westat for an evaluation of the CMS Enhanced MTM program. The other authors have nothing to disclose. Portions of this research have been presented as abstracts at the following conferences: (a) 2017 Academy Health Annual Research Meeting; June 25-27, 2017; New Orleans, LA; (b) 2015 American Society of Health-System Pharmacists Clinical Midyear Meeting; December 4-8, 2015; New Orleans, LA; and

What Patients Know About Services to Help Manage Chronic Diseases and Medications: Findings from Focus Groups on Medication Therapy Management.

BACKGROUND: Managing and treating patients with multiple chronic conditions presents challenges on many levels. Pharmacist-delivered medication therapy management (MTM) services, mandated as part of the Medicare Part D drug benefit, are designed to help patients manage their chronic conditions and medications. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that influence patient understanding and use of MTM services and potential strategies to educate individuals about MTM. METHODS: Participants who had at least 2 chronic conditions, were taking 2 or more prescription medications, and were aged 18 years or older were recruited from community-based settings to participate in focus groups. The focus groups aimed to identify participants' perceptions and use of MTM services, barriers and facilitators to utilization, and medication problems. Participants were asked to complete a 14-item health care questionnaire and view a brief, 3-minute video introducing the topic of MTM before the group discussion. The health care questionnaire data were analyzed in Microsoft Excel. The focus group responses were transcribed and entered into the computer program ATLAS.ti for thematic analysis. Two independent reviewers qualitatively coded the discussion question responses; a third reviewer investigated discrepancies and facilitated consensus among the reviewers. RESULTS: Participants (N = 27) were mostly female (70.4%), college educated (62.9%), and had Medicare insurance (81.5%). Seven themes were identified: (1) new proposed names for MTM, (2) mechanisms to gain interest in and to promote the value of MTM, (3) familiarity with MTM, (4) pharmacists' training and expertise in MTM, (5) experience with MTM, (6) reasons for nonparticipation in MTM, and (7) preferred method to learn about MTM. Participants did not understand the term "medication therapy management" and felt the interpretation of "therapy"' differed between health care professionals and the public. Some participants used MTM services to learn about appropriate use of their medications, while others were unsure about their eligibility, associated costs, and how to access the services. Participants had limited pharmaceutical knowledge but felt pharmacist-provided MTM services were helpful. Participants were unfamiliar with pharmacists' skills and training. Participants' experiences with MTM services ranged from disregarding the invitation to participate to having pharmacists identify drug-drug interactions. Reasons for nonparticipation in MTM services included being unaware of their eligibility, failing to read excessive information from insurance companies, and being uncertain of the identity of the telephone caller. Preferred methods for learning more about MTM services included the Internet, e-mail, information availability at physician's office, and television advertisements. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the lay public remains largely unaware of MTM services and that the term "MTM" is not well understood. Clearly, tailored public health campaigns and patient engagement strategies are needed to promote MTM in chronic disease management, pharmacists as respected providers, and the importance of the prescriber-MTM pharmacist collaborative relationship in managing medications for patients with multiple chronic conditions. DISCLOSURES: Grant funding from SinfoniaRx to Taylor, Axon, Campbell, Fair, and Warholak was used to help conduct this project. Boesen is employed by SinfoniaRx. The other authors have nothing to disclose. This original research was presented as a poster at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy 27th Annual Meeting and Expo; April 7-10, 2015; San Diego, CA.

The impact of Medicare Part D on cognitive functioning at older ages.

Research has shown that the establishment of Medicare prescription drug benefit in 2006 leads to improvement in medication adherence and mortality outcomes. Despite a clear connection between physical/mental health and the risk of dementia, little is known about the extent to which this reform has affected the cognitive functioning of the elderly. Using data from the Health and Retirement Study and difference-in-differences approach, this study provides the first evidence on the cognition-enhancing effects of Medicare Part D. Our estimates show that Part D implementation is associated with 1.6% increase in cognitive functioning or 1.1-year delay of cognitive aging among benefit-eligible persons. Further analyses indicate that most of the cognitive benefits accrue to the vulnerable populations who previously lacked prescription drug coverage, and that a reduction in cardiovascular mortality is the most likely pathway through which the expansion improved cognitive functioning.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Support for Medication Therapy Management (Enhanced Medication Therapy Management): Testing Strategies for Improving Medication Use Among Beneficiaries Enrolled in Medicare Part D.

In 2006, Medicare beneficiaries began receiving prescription coverage benefits through Part D of the Medicare benefit. Medicare Part D plans must provide medication therapy (MTM) services. MTM services aim to improve medication use and are targeted toward eligible beneficiaries, determined by morbidity, prescription use, and anticipated cost of prescription use. Now, 10 years after the start of Medicare Part D, several changes have been made to the program's design. This article focuses on changes related to MTM and the impact that these changes have and will continue to have on Medicare beneficiaries and medication use.

Does the Medicare Part D Decision-Making Experience Differ by Rural/Urban Location?

PURPOSE: Although much has been written about Medicare Part D enrollment, much less is known about beneficiaries' personal experiences with choosing a Part D plan, especially among rural residents. This study sought to address this gap by examining geographic differences in Part D enrollees' perceptions of the plan decision-making process, including their confidence in their choice, their knowledge about the program, and their satisfaction with available information. METHODS: We used data from the 2012 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey and included adults ages 65 and older who were enrolled in Part D at the time of the survey (n = 3,706). We used ordered logistic regression to model 4 outcomes based on beneficiaries' perceptions of the Part D decision-making and enrollment process, first accounting only for differences by rurality, then adjusting for sociodemographic, health, and coverage characteristics. FINDINGS: Overall, half of all beneficiaries were not very confident in their Part D knowledge. Rural beneficiaries had lower odds of being confident in the plan they chose and in being satisfied with the amount of information available to them during the decision-making process. After adjusting for all covariates, micropolitan residents continued to have lower odds of being confident in the plan that they chose. CONCLUSIONS: Policy-makers should pay particular attention to making information about Part D easily accessible for all beneficiaries and to addressing unique barriers that rural residents have in accessing information while making decisions, such as reduced Internet availability. Furthermore, confidence in the decision-making process may be improved by simplifying the Part D program.

Association of Part D coverage gap with COPD medication adherence.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the association of the Medicare Part D coverage gap with medication adherence among beneficiaries with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective observational study based on Medicare claims data. METHODS: A 5% random sample of Medicare claims data (2006-2010) was used in this study. Beneficiaries diagnosed with COPD and treated with long-acting bronchodilators (LABDs) were assigned to an exposure cohort (at risk of the coverage gap) or a control cohort (otherwise). The exposure and control cohorts were matched using high-dimensional propensity scores. Adherence was defined as ≥80% of the proportion of days covered by LABDs. Logistic regressions controlling for unbalanced covariates post matching were applied to assess the association of the coverage gap with adherence. RESULTS: The final matched exposure and control cohorts each included 4147 patient-year observations with about 42% and 46% of them adherent to LABDs, respectively. About 17% of the exposure cohort hit the coverage gap after October 31. Logistic regression showed that, compared with the control cohort, the beneficiaries in the exposure cohort had a significantly lower likelihood of being adherent if they hit the coverage gap later in the year (odds ratio [OR], 0.603; 95% CI, 0.493-0.738), or had a lower likelihood without statistical significance if otherwise (OR, 0.931; 95% CI, 0.846-1.024). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that the Part D coverage gap was associated with lower adherence in patients with COPD, which may serve as evidentiary support for phasing out the coverage gap by 2020.

Coverage for hepatitis C drugs in Medicare Part D.

OBJECTIVES: The recent arrival of new hepatitis C virus (HCV) drugs has brought fiscal pressures onto Medicare Part D; spending on HCV drugs in Part D jumped from $283 million in 2013 to $4.5 billion in 2014. We examined the current benefit designs for HCV drugs in Part D plans and analyzed patients' financial burden for those drugs. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional analysis of CMS' July 2015 Part D Plan Formulary File and the Wolters Kluwer Health Medi-Span Electronic Drug File v.2. METHODS: We analyzed the type and amount of cost sharing for HCV drugs and the extent to which plans apply utilization management tools. We then estimated total out-of-pocket spending for beneficiaries to complete a course of treatment. RESULTS: All Part D plans covered at least 1 recently introduced HCV drug, as of July 2015. Nearly all plans charged relatively high coinsurance and required prior authorization for new HCV drugs. For enrollees with no subsidy, the mean out-of-pocket spending needed to complete a course of treatment is substantial, ranging from $6297 to $10,889. For enrollees with a low-income subsidy, out-of-pocket spending varies between $10.80 and $1191. CONCLUSIONS: Under the current Part D benefits, HCV drug users with no subsidy face sizable financial burdens, even with catastrophic coverage and the recent in-gap discount for brand name drugs. As baby boomers-the group most likely to have HCV-join Medicare, efforts should be made to ensure patient access to these needed drugs.

Is There a Relationship Between Part D Medication Adherence and Part C Intermediate Outcomes Star Ratings Measures?

BACKGROUND: Improvements in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) star ratings Part D medication adherence measures may affect performance in Part C intermediate outcome measures for which the Part D targeted medication classes are prescribed. OBJECTIVE: To determine if Part D medication adherence measures are associated with corresponding Part C intermediate outcome measures. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional analysis using the CMS 2015 star ratings report (based on 2013 benefit year plan data) for Medicare contracts. The measures of interest included the Part D adherence measures for diabetes medications, antihypertensive agents, and statins and the Part C intermediate outcome measures for controlled blood sugar, blood pressure, and cholesterol. All Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug (MAPD) contracts with complete data for all Part C and D measures of interest were included. Contracts with ≥ 25% of total enrollment with MA-only benefit were excluded. Linear and logistic regression models were used to assess the association between 2015 Part D adherence measures and Part C intermediate outcome measures (n = 366). The regression models were adjusted for low-income subsidy (LIS) beneficiary enrollment and log-transformed (natural logarithm) total contract enrollment. RESULTS: Bivariate linear regression models demonstrated moderate positive associations between each of the 2015 Part D adherence scores and related 2015 Part C measures that explained 27%-29% (R(2)) of variance. Including LIS and total contract enrollment in the regression models increased the R2 to 30%-36%. The multivariate logistic regression models showed that each percentage point of improvement in the 2015 Part D adherence measures was associated with a 4.13 to 4.69 greater odds of performing in the top quartile in corresponding 2015 Part C measures. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate positive associations were observed between the Part D and Part C scores in the same benefit year. MAPD plans may observe improved Part C intermediate outcome measures with strategies that improve Part D medication adherence measures. DISCLOSURES: This study was conducted by MedImpact Healthcare Systems, San Diego, California, without external funding. All authors are employees of MedImpact Healthcare Systems. Erickson reports advisory board fees from Sanofi and AstraZeneca. Ta, Erickson, and Patel were responsible for study concept and design and data interpretation, with assistance from Qiu. Qiu and Ta took the lead in data collection, assisted by Erickson. Ta wrote the manuscript, which was revised by Erickson and Patel.

Impact of Environmental Factors on Differences in Quality of Medication Use: An Insight for the Medicare Star Rating System.

BACKGROUND: The Medicare star ratings system incentivizes health plan sponsors based on their performance across a measurement system that contains quality measures related to medication use. As health plan sponsors seek to further engage their network providers, specifically network pharmacies, to improve performance on these measures, it is important to consider the effect of environmental factors on the performance of network pharmacies. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of environmental factors on pharmacy quality as measured by (a) medication adherence for noninsulin diabetes medications, (b) medication adherence for renin angiotensin receptor antagonists (RASA), (c) medication adherence for cholesterol medications (statins), and (d) use of high-risk medications (HRM) in the elderly. METHODS: The EQuIPP database, which contains performance information for pharmacies for a nationwide sample of Medicare beneficiaries, was used for this analysis. Environmental factors included regions or characteristics of a community or county. County-level data was obtained from the Area Health Resource Files, a resource product available from the Health Resources & Service Administration. A logistic regression model was developed with performance as the dependent variable and regions and environmental factors as independent variables. Performance and county characteristics, such as proportion of patients in an age group, race, income, or number of outpatient visits, were classified as high and low based on a median cutoff of nationwide performance scores. RESULTS: A total of 28,950 pharmacies were included in this analysis. For most measures, the proportion of low-performing pharmacies was significantly higher in the East South Central, Mid-Atlantic, Mountain, Pacific, and West South Central regions. Pharmacies in counties with high median income, high proportion of elderly population (aged > 84 years), high proportion of elderly patients who were white or Hispanic, high proportion of elderly males, and high proportion of elderly urban patients were less likely to have low performance, whereas those with high proportion of elderly African Americans and high density of independent pharmacies were more likely to have low performance (P < 0.05-0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study found that environmental characteristics of a region, including pharmacy and sociodemographic characteristics, explained regional variation in quality measures related to medication use for patient populations served by pharmacies. This evaluation serves to further inform the discussion regarding case-mix adjustment of quality measures and provides information that may be important to further refine intervention strategies for pharmacies and pharmacists who serve certain regional populations. Additionally, pharmacies in greatest need of support for quality improvement may be those who serve populations that are predominantly low income and elderly African American. DISCLOSURES: Desai's postdoctoral fellowship was funded by Pharmacy Quality Solutions for conducting this study and writing the manuscript. Nau and Conklin are employed by Pharmacy Quality Solutions. An earlier version of this research was presented as a poster at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy; San Diego, CA; April 7-10, 2015. Study concept and design were contributed by Conklin, Nau, Desai, and Heaton. Desai and Conklin took the lead in data collection, assisted by Nau and Heaton. The manuscript was primarily written by Desai and Heaton, with assistance from Conklin and Nau. All authors contributed to data interpretation and manuscript revision.

Evaluation of Comprehensive Medication Review Completion Rates Using 3 Patient Outreach Models.

BACKGROUND: Medication therapy management (MTM) programs were first introduced as a result of the 2003 Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act. Since then, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) have established minimum requirements for health plans to follow in establishing patient eligibility for enrollment in these programs. The eligibility criteria are based on projected annual Part D medication costs, number of chronic disease states, and number of chronic Part D covered medications. Patients meeting these criteria are automatically enrolled in an MTM program so must ask to be disenrolled from the program if they wish to not participate (opt-out). CMS rates the quality of health plans using the Five-Star Quality Rating System. Star ratings for various metrics are given to health plans based on a scale of 1 to 5 stars, with 5 stars being the highest quality rating that health plans can achieve. The "Medication Therapy Management Program Completion Rate for Comprehensive Medication Reviews (Part D)" was a display measure and is now a performance measure as of 2016. Consumers can view the star ratings and display measures for their health plans during the enrollment period, so these ratings can affect patient enrollments. Additionally, star ratings may also determine bonus payments awarded to health plans. To address the comprehensive medication review (CMR) measure, different outreach models are used by health plans and vendors to complete CMRs. Comparison of the effectiveness of these outreach models has not been sufficiently studied. OBJECTIVE: To compare the completion rate of CMRs by the University of Florida Medication Therapy Management Communication and Care Center (MTMCCC) for 3 models of patient outreach (cold calling, the initial offer and acceptance of a CMR from the health plan before contact by the MTMCCC, and scheduling of a CMR after mailing a welcome letter from the health plan) used for 3 different health plans. METHODS: This study is a retrospective chart analysis using data obtained from completed CMRs at the MTMCCC for health insurance beneficiaries enrolled in 3 different health plans. The CMR completion rate for 3 models of patient outreach used for 3 different health plans over the service period was compared. The CMR completion rate for this study was calculated using the number of completed CMRs and the total number of beneficiaries who were contacted at least once for the provision of a CMR for each respective model by the MTMCCC. The CMR completion rate calculated for this study is modified slightly from the CMS definition because of limitations in patient population assignment to the MTMCCC. RESULTS: The model in which patients were previously offered and subsequently completed a CMR from their health plans before contact by the MTMCCC had the highest CMR completion rate at 49.8%, compared with 40.5% and 23.8% for the other 2 outreach models. CONCLUSIONS: Offering patients a CMR, and subsequent completion, before provision of MTM services may increase CMR completion rate for health plans. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this research. The University of Florida (UF) Medication Therapy Management Communication and Care Center (MTMCCC) receives grant funding from the Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) for services. Roane and Hardin are currently employed by UF as faculty with their practice sites at the UF MTMCCC. Salo is currently employed at UF as a clinical pharmacist with her practice site at the UF MTMCCC. Miller is currently employed as a transition of care clinical pharmacist at St. Joseph's Hospital in Tampa, Florida. The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Miller and Roane were primary contributors to study concept and design, along with Salo and Hardin. Miller and Roane took the lead in data collection, assisted by Salo and Hardin, and data interpretation was performed by all the authors. The manuscript was written by all the authors and revised primarily by Roane and Miller, along with Salo and Hardin.

The Influence of a Community Pharmacy Automatic Prescription Refill Program on Medicare Part D Adherence Metrics.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) include measures of medication adherence within its Medicare Part D star ratings program. These adherence measures have motivated the development of new methods to improve patient adherence. Automatic prescription refill programs in community pharmacies are an intervention that has seen widespread adoption in recent years. These automatic refill programs anticipate and initiate prescription refills on a standardized, recurrent basis. As a result, prescription refills may be filled before a patient typically might initiate a refill. This study measures the effect of an automatic prescription refill program on 3 adherence metrics used by CMS within Medicare Part D star ratings. OBJECTIVE: To compare the value of Medicare Part D adherence metrics for an automatic prescription refill program relative to standard prescription refills. METHODS: Prescription dispensing data (January 1, 2014-December 31, 2014) from a chain of 29 pharmacies in a midwestern state were used to conduct this analysis. A post-only, quasi-experimental design separated patients into automatic and standard prescription refill cohorts. Refill adherence was calculated using proportion of days covered (PDC) for each of the 3 adherence metrics used by CMS for statins, renin angiotensin aldosterone system antagonists (RASA), and noninsulin diabetes medications. The adherence rate was defined as the proportion of patients with a PDC ± 80%. Inclusion criteria for patients followed the Pharmacy Quality Alliance technical specifications. Chi-square analysis and multiple logistic regression were used to examine differences in PDC > 80% between the 2 study cohorts. RESULTS: There were 1,018, 1,006, and 368 patients for the automatic refill cohort and 3,928, 3,409, and 1,207 patients for the standard refill cohort in the statin, RASA, and diabetes adherence metrics, respectively. The mean age [SD] of patients was between 79.2 [±8.5] and 80.8 [±9.9] years across all cohorts. Patients in the automatic prescription refill program tended to take less than 1 additional chronic medication compared with the standard refill prescription cohort. The proportion of adherent patients ranged from 73.6% to 76.4% for standard refill cohorts and 77.5% to 83.6% for automatic refill cohorts. Differences between study cohorts were statistically significant for all the adherence metrics based on the chi-square test (P < 0.05). Patients enrolled in the automatic prescription refill program were more likely to be adherent to the statin (OR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.26-1.82), RASA (OR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.01-1.42), and diabetes (OR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.06-1.96) metrics. CONCLUSIONS: Patients enrolled in the automatic prescription refill program were more likely to be adherent to their medications. Enrollment in automatic prescription refill programs could be encouraged by health plans and pharmacists because of their potential effect on Medicare Part D star ratings. DISCLOSURES: The project described was supported by the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program through the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), grant UL1TR000427. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. Lester is employed as a pharmacist in the participating pharmacy chain. The authors report no other relevant conflict of interest. Study concept and design were primarily contributed by Lester, with assistance from the other authors. Lester took the lead in data collection, along with Chui, and data interpretation was performed by Lester, Mott, and Chui. The manuscript was written primarily by Lester, along with Mott, and revised by Lester, Mott, and Chui.

An Assessment of Performance Between Medicare Advantage and Stand-Alone Prescription Drug Plans on Two Quality Assurance Measures.

The purpose of our study was to compare performance between Medicare Advantage and stand-alone prescription drug plans on the two quality assurance measures of drug-disease interaction and drug-drug interaction for elderly heart failure beneficiaries. Performance on the drug-disease interaction measure appeared more problematic for stand-alone plan enrollees compared with Medicare Advantage plan enrollees. No statistical difference existed between the plans regarding drug-drug interactions. It appears there may be considerable room for more sophisticated use of disease profiling in the processing of drug claims. The provision of richer clinical data is an essential step to improving performance on the drug-disease interaction measure.

An Assessment of Three Post-Discharge Drug-Based Quality Assurance Events for Elderly Medicare Beneficiaries Enrolled in a Stand-Alone Part D Plan.

This article examines the distribution of drug-based quality assurance events (QAEs) post-discharge across five-day increments and identifies characteristics associated with post-discharge QAEs. Data were obtained through a cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries age 65 and over enrolled in stand-alone Part D plans during calendar year 2010. Our findings suggest an even more compressed timeframe than previously identified in the literature for addressing medication issues among elderly beneficiaries. Specifically, medication reconciliation is needed within two to three days of discharge instead of within 14 days as the literature suggests. To decrease inadvertent readmissions, an immediate in-community medication reconciliation following hospital discharge is needed.