Development, implementation, and evaluation of a health outcomes and research program at an integrated health-system specialty pharmacy.

PURPOSE: Health-system specialty pharmacies (HSSPs) provide high-quality, efficient, and collaborative care to patients receiving specialty therapy. Despite proven benefits of the integrated model, manufacturer and payer restrictions challenge the viability and utility of HSSPs. Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy developed a health outcomes and research program to measure and communicate the value of this model, drive improvement in patient care delivery, and advocate for recognition of HSSP pharmacists' role in patient care. The purpose of this descriptive report is to describe the development and results of this program. SUMMARY: The health outcomes and research program began as an initiative for pharmacists to evaluate and convey the benefits they provide to patients, providers, and the health system. Early outcomes data proved useful in communicating the value of an integrated model to key stakeholders and highlighted the need to further develop research efforts. The department leadership invested resources to build a research program with dedicated personnel, engaged research experts to train pharmacists, and fostered internal and external collaborations to facilitate research efforts. As of March 2021, the health outcomes and research program team has published 33 peer-reviewed manuscripts, presented 88 posters and 7 podium presentations at national conferences, and received 4 monetary research awards. Further, the program team engages other HSSP teams to initiate and expand their own health outcomes research in an effort to empower all HSSPs in demonstrating their value. CONCLUSIONS: The health outcomes and research program described has pioneered outcomes research among HSSPs nationwide and has proven valuable to specialty pharmacists, the health system, and key specialty pharmacy stakeholders.

Pharmacist Interventions to Improve Specialty Medication Adherence: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of specialty medications in complicated clinical conditions depends on adherence to therapy. However, specialty medications pose unique barriers to adherence. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine whether pharmacist interventions improve specialty medication adherence. METHODS: This is a single-center, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial ongoing since 10 May 2019 at an integrated health system specialty pharmacy. This study evaluates usual care compared with usual care plus patient-tailored adherence interventions. Study design and procedures were informed by focus groups with patients and specialty pharmacists. Patients at Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy with a proportion of days covered (PDC) < 90% in the previous 4 months are identified by a daily query of the electronic pharmacy database. A pharmacist reviews these patients' electronic health records to identify and exclude ineligible patients. Eligible patients are randomized evenly to the control or intervention arm and stratified by historical clinic nonadherence rates. Patients randomized to the intervention arm undergo a baseline assessment to clarify reasons for nonadherence and subsequently receive patient-tailored interventions based on their specific reasons. Interventions and follow-up are provided at the discretion of the intervening pharmacist. The primary outcome is PDC calculated at 8 months post-enrollment. Enrollment of 438 participants will provide 90% power to detect a 5% difference in PDC between the two arms within each nonadherence risk stratum. DISCUSSION: This trial will evaluate the effect of patient-tailored interventions on specialty medication adherence and will inform how often and why patients are misidentified as nonadherent. REGISTRATION: The trial was deemed a quality improvement initiative by the Vanderbilt University Institutional Review Board. It was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03709277) on 17 October 2018.

Pharmacist Interventions to Improve Specialty Medication Adherence: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of specialty medications in complicated clinical conditions depends on adherence to therapy. However, specialty medications pose unique barriers to adherence. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine whether pharmacist interventions improve specialty medication adherence. METHODS: This is a single-center, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial ongoing since 10 May 2019 at an integrated health system specialty pharmacy. This study evaluates usual care compared with usual care plus patient-tailored adherence interventions. Study design and procedures were informed by focus groups with patients and specialty pharmacists. Patients at Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy with a proportion of days covered (PDC) < 90% in the previous 4 months are identified by a daily query of the electronic pharmacy database. A pharmacist reviews these patients' electronic health records to identify and exclude ineligible patients. Eligible patients are randomized evenly to the control or intervention arm and stratified by historical clinic nonadherence rates. Patients randomized to the intervention arm undergo a baseline assessment to clarify reasons for nonadherence and subsequently receive patient-tailored interventions based on their specific reasons. Interventions and follow-up are provided at the discretion of the intervening pharmacist. The primary outcome is PDC calculated at 8 months post-enrollment. Enrollment of 438 participants will provide 90% power to detect a 5% difference in PDC between the two arms within each nonadherence risk stratum. DISCUSSION: This trial will evaluate the effect of patient-tailored interventions on specialty medication adherence and will inform how often and why patients are misidentified as nonadherent. REGISTRATION: The trial was deemed a quality improvement initiative by the Vanderbilt University Institutional Review Board. It was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03709277) on 17 October 2018.

Adherence to Disease-Modifying Therapies at a Multiple Sclerosis Clinic: The Role of the Specialty Pharmacist.

BACKGROUND: Disease-modifying therapy (DMT) delays disease progression and improves quality of life for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), but adherence to DMT is often suboptimal. Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy (VSP) embeds pharmacists within an outpatient MS clinic to provide medication management and address barriers to adherence. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated rates and predictors of adherence to DMT among patients with MS at an integrated specialty pharmacy. METHODS: We included patients with MS who filled ≥3 DMT prescriptions from VSP during the study period. Adherence was defined as medication possession ratio (MPR) or proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥0.8. Reasons for nonadherence were collected from pharmacy claims and electronic medical records. RESULTS: The study included 653 patients. Average MPR and PDC were 0.93 and 0.94, respectively. Eighty-eight percent of patients achieved MPR ≥0.8; 89% achieved PDC ≥0.8. Using financial assistance and having $0 out-of-pocket cost were associated with higher odds of achieving MPR and PDC ≥0.8 (P < .05). Of the 12% of patients who were nonadherent, most were unreachable for refills. CONCLUSIONS: Ensuring financial assistance and low out-of-pocket costs are associated with high adherence to DMT within an integrated specialty clinic, but more work is needed to address adherence in unreachable patients.

Closing the Gap: Identifying Rates and Reasons for Nonadherence in a Specialty Population.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to specialty and nonspecialty medications is often calculated using pharmacy claims data. However, specialty medication regimens are complex and may require periods of intentional gaps in therapy. Common adherence calculations are insufficient in identifying reasons for gaps in therapy. Because adherence reporting is a growing measure of quality care for specialty pharmacy accreditation and payer and manufacturer contracts, a better understanding of the rates and reasons for nonadherence within a specialty population is needed. OBJECTIVE: To identify rates and reasons for misidentified and true nonadherence in patients who are prescribed specialty medications. METHODS: A single center, retrospective cohort study was conducted using pharmacy claims data between March 2017 and February 2018. Medication adherence was calculated using proportion of days covered (PDC). Electronic medical records of a random 10% sample of nonadherent patients (PDC < 80%) were manually reviewed to identify reasons for nonadherence. Patients were then classified as either (a) misidentified as nonadherent (i.e., a provider-directed discontinuation or disruption of treatment that varies from the prescribed administration schedule or transfer of the prescription to an external pharmacy) or (b) truly nonadherent (discontinuation or disruption of treatment that varies from the prescribed administration instruction that is not directed or recommended by the provider or health care team). RESULTS: Of the 7,488 included prescription records from 18 specialty areas, 1,059 met criteria for nonadherence. 105 prescription records (representing 105 unique patients) were manually reviewed; most of these patients (58%) were truly nonadherent, driven by inability to contact patients for refills (59%). However, 40% were misidentified as nonadherent, most due to provider-directed medication holding (69%). Two percent of patients were nonadherent for unknown reasons. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients classified as nonadherent based on pharmacy claims experienced gaps in therapy due to medically appropriate reasons. Methods to better measure and identify true nonadherence are needed to efficiently and adequately affect specialty medication adherence behavior. DISCLOSURES: This study received funding support from CTSA Award No. UL1 TR002243 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Study findings and conclusions are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent official views of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences or the National Institutes of Health. Zuckerman reports research support from Sanofi and Gilead Sciences, unrelated to this study. The other authors have nothing to disclose. A poster based on the data from this study was presented at AMCP Nexus 2018 on October 24, 2018, in Orlando, FL.

Navigating the Wild West of Medication Adherence Reporting in Specialty Pharmacy.

Estimating medication adherence through the use of pharmacy claims-based adherence calculations such as medication possession ratio (MPR) and proportion of days covered (PDC) plays a significant role in specialty pharmacy practice. Although MPR and PDC are frequently used in clinical practice, calculation methodologies vary, making meaningful comparisons of adherence rates difficult. In addition, MPR and PDC are increasingly used by insurance companies, pharmacies, accrediting bodies, and drug manufacturers to demonstrate quality differences or clinical benefit across the specialty pharmacy industry. Therefore, recognizing the source and effect of calculation variability is necessary to fully understand reported adherence results. This article highlights the challenges in standardizing adherence methodologies, minimum methodology considerations that should be reported with MPR and PDC results, and key elements to consider when interpreting and applying adherence results. Further, recommendations are provided to promote a more consistent description of calculation methods and to aid pharmacies in adherence measure analysis, interpretation, and application to practice, with a focus on specialty pharmacy programs. A detailed description of methodology as outlined in this article must be provided to ensure reproducibility, external validation, and scientific rigor. In the absence of standardization, specialty pharmacies should be prudent in their use of adherence calculations as a clinical benchmarking tool or comparative quality indicator with outside organizations. Furthermore, specialty pharmacies should consider using current adherence measure calculations to identify and provide targeted interventions to patients with potential adherence problems and strive to better demonstrate ties between adherence measures and direct clinical and cost outcomes. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported the writing of this article. Anguiano is a speaker and research consultant for United Therapeutics. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

Development of quality measures for use of self-injectable biologic therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: An integrated specialty pharmacy initiative.

PURPOSE: The development of a tool to measure medication safety, therapeutic efficacy, and other quality outcomes in patients receiving self-injectable biologic therapy for the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) at a health-system specialty pharmacy is described. SUMMARY: Through a collaborative initiative by pharmacists, gastro-enterologists, and representatives of a pharmacy benefit manager and a pharmaceutical company, a set of clinical and specialty pharmacy quality measures was developed. The clinical measures are intended for use in assessing patient safety, disease status, treatment efficacy, and healthcare resource utilization during 3 assessments (pre-treatment, on-treatment, and longitudinal). The specialty pharmacy measures can be used to assess medication adherence, medication persistence, specialty pharmacy accreditation, and patient satisfaction. The proposed quality measures provide a foundation for evaluating the quality of IBD care and improving patient outcomes within a health-system specialty pharmacy. Future efforts to validate and implement the tool in clinical practice are planned. CONCLUSION: The proposed quality measures provide a foundation for future inquiry regarding the appropriateness and feasibility of integrating the measures into clinical care. Further work is needed to implement and validate these quality measures and determine their impact in optimizing health outcomes.

High rates of medication adherence in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension: An integrated specialty pharmacy approach.

Phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE-5I) have demonstrated improvement in disease symptoms and quality of life for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Despite these benefits, reported adherence to PDE-5I therapy is sub-optimal. Clinical pharmacists at an integrated practice site are in a unique position to mitigate barriers related to PAH therapy including medication adherence and costs. The primary objective of this study was to assess medication adherence to PDE-5I therapy within an integrated care model at an academic institution. The secondary objective was to assess the impact of out-of-pocket (OOP) cost, frequency of dosing, adverse events (AE) and PAH-related hospitalizations on medication adherence. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of adult patients with PAH who were prescribed PDE-5I therapy by the center's outpatient pulmonary clinic and who received medication management through the center's specialty pharmacy. We defined optimal medication adherence as proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥ 80%. Clinical data including AEs and PAH-related hospitalizations were extracted from the electronic medical record, and financial data from pharmacy claims. Of the 131 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 94% achieved optimal adherence of ≥ 80% PDC. In this study population, 47% of patients experienced an AE and 27% had at least one hospitalization. The median monthly OOP cost was $0.62. Patients with PDC<80% were more likely to report an AE compared to patients with PDC≥ 80% (p = 0.002). Hospitalization, OOP cost, and frequency of dosing were not associated with adherence in this cohort. Patients receiving PDE-5I therapy through an integrated model achieved high adherence rates and low OOP costs.

Integrated specialty pharmacy yields high PCSK9 inhibitor access and initiation rates.

BACKGROUND: Access to proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors that lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in patients at high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events has proven challenging. Methods to overcome access barriers are needed to fully realize the benefits of these novel agents. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated medication access rates in patients prescribed a PCSK9 inhibitor at a health care system with integrated specialty pharmacy services. METHODS: We performed a single-center, ambispective cohort study of patients prescribed a PCSK9 inhibitor between September 2015 and December 2016 at Vanderbilt University Medical Center outpatient clinics. The primary end point was the percentage of PCSK9 inhibitor prescriptions resulting in access of the total prescriptions triaged to Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy. Secondary end points assessed among patients approved for therapy included time between benefits investigation and insurance approval, financial assistance use, and treatment initiation rates. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-nine patients met inclusion criteria (average age = 63 years). Forty-six percent were female, 57% held commercial insurance, and 70% had an atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease indication. Overall, 96% of prescriptions resulted in access to a PCSK9 inhibitor. Most patients were approved with an initial prior authorization (58%) or after one appeal (29%). The median time to approval was 8 days. Among patients approved for therapy, 53% received financial assistance and 94% initiated therapy. CONCLUSION: An integrated specialty pharmacy service model in outpatient clinics produced high rates of PCSK9 inhibitor therapy access and initiation. This high level of access supports this model as a best practice for prescribing PCSK9 inhibitor therapy.