Implementation of an integrated ambulatory care pharmacist collaborative care workflow model in specialty clinics in a large academic health system.

PURPOSE: Ambulatory care and specialty pharmacy practices are rapidly growing in tandem with the accelerated development of advanced therapies for complex disease states. A coordinated and standardized interprofessional team-based approach is critical to providing high-quality care to specialty patients on complex, expensive, and high-risk therapies. Yale New Haven Health System dedicated resources to the creation of a medication management clinic under a unique care model that integrates ambulatory care pharmacists within specialty clinics who coordinate with centralized specialty pharmacists. The new care model workflow encompasses ambulatory care pharmacists, specialty pharmacists, ambulatory care pharmacy technicians, specialty pharmacy liaisons, clinicians, and clinic support staff. The strategies employed to design, implement, and optimize this workflow to meet the increasing demand for pharmacy support in specialty care is discussed. SUMMARY: The workflow incorporated key activities from highly diverse existing specialty pharmacy, ambulatory care pharmacy, and specialty clinic practices. Standard processes were developed for patient identification, referral placement, visit scheduling, encounter documentation, medication fulfillment, and clinical follow-up. Resources were created or optimized to support successful implementation, including an electronic pharmacy referral, specialty collaborative practice agreements to facilitate pharmacist-led comprehensive medication management, and a standardized note template. Communication strategies were developed to facilitate feedback and process updates. Enhancements focused on eliminating documentation redundancies and delegating nonclinical tasks to a dedicated ambulatory care pharmacy technician. The workflow was implemented in 5 ambulatory rheumatology, digestive health, and infectious diseases clinics. Pharmacists utilized this workflow to complete 1,237 patient visits, serving 550 individual patients over 11 months. CONCLUSION: This initiative created a standard workflow to support an interdisciplinary standard of specialty patient care that is robust to accommodate planned expansion. This workflow implementation approach can serve as a road map for other healthcare systems with integrated specialty and ambulatory pharmacy departments undertaking similar models for specialty patient management.

2022 ASHP Survey of Health-System Specialty Pharmacy Practice: Clinical Services.

PURPOSE: Results of the first ASHP national survey of clinical services provided by health-system specialty pharmacies (HSSPs) are presented. METHODS: A survey questionnaire was developed by 26 HSSP contacts after reviewing available literature on the role and services of HSSPs. After pilot and cognitive testing resulting in a final questionnaire of 119 questions, a convenience sample of 441 leaders in HSSPs was contacted using email and invited to participate in the survey. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 29%. Almost half of respondents (48%) had offered pharmacy services for 7 years or more, and most (60%) dispensed more than 15,000 prescriptions annually. Respondents most commonly (42%) reported a specialist model wherein staff are dedicated to specific specialty disease states. Over half of respondents reported providing several medication access, pretreatment assessment, and initial counseling services to patients referred to them, regardless of whether the HSSP was used for medication fulfillment. All HSSP activities were noted to be documented in the electronic health record and visible to providers frequently or always. Almost all respondents noted that HSSP pharmacists have a role in specialty medication selection. Disease-specific outcomes were tracked in 95% of responding HSSPs, with 67% reporting that outcomes were used to drive patient monitoring. HSSPs were often involved in continuity of care services such as transitions of care (reported by 89% of respondents), referral to other health-system services (53%), and addressing social determinants of health (60%). Most respondents (80%) reported providing clinical education to specialty clinic staff, including medicine learners (62%). Though only 12% of respondents had dedicated outcomes research staff, many reported annually publishing (47%) or presenting (61%) outcomes research. CONCLUSION: HSSPs are a clinical and educational resource for specialty clinics and have developed robust patient care services that encompass the patient journey from before specialty medication selection through treatment monitoring and optimization.

Implementation of an integrated pharmacist collaborative care model in specialty disease state clinics.

PURPOSE: To expand health-system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) clinical continuity by implementing a specialty integrated model for clinical services in target sites. SUMMARY: After evaluation of baseline clinical continuity and institutional goals, select clinics were identified as target sites to which to expand this integrated approach of a medication management clinic (MMC). In this MMC model, the key steps included engaging stakeholders, workflow training, optimization of the electronic health record, service evaluation, compliance with regulatory standards, and development of marketing strategies. The initial focus was development of innovative collaborative practice agreements (CPAs) to expand the scope of ambulatory care pharmacists' practice. Analysis of existing specialty and ambulatory workflows and technology was completed before development of the integrated workflow. Existing credentialing policies were updated to support expanded practices, and marketing collaterals were developed to support growth of pharmacy referrals. Meetings with stakeholders took place to ensure smooth transitions into integrated areas. Primary endpoints included clinical continuity, as determined by prescription orders placed within the health system sent to the HSSP, and number of signed referrals to MMC. Secondary endpoints included disease state-specific clinical outcomes as well as overall outcomes such as medication adherence, laboratory test adherence, immunization rates, and patient and clinician satisfaction. An MMC model was successfully implemented in 5 target specialty practices. Specialty clinic CPAs were developed for rheumatology and digestive health (including viral hepatitis). Since implementation, clinical continuity increased 23% and referrals exceeded the target at 165%. Data on secondary endpoints are currently being collected to evaluate quality of pharmacy services. Pharmacy services have enhanced patient care and received positive feedback from clinicians. CONCLUSION: Expansion of integrated decentralized pharmacists into target practices has increased clinical continuity and the number of pharmacist referrals. Clinicians have regarded pharmacists as vital members of the team. Creation of additional specialty CPAs will be needed to support further growth in other clinics.

Patient-provider discussions of bariatric surgery and subsequent weight changes and receipt of bariatric surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether patients who discuss bariatric surgery with their providers are more likely to undergo the procedure and to lose weight. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of adults with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 treated between 2000 and 2015 was conducted to analyze the relationship between a discussion of bariatric surgery in the first year after study entry and weight changes (primary outcome) and receipt of bariatric surgery (secondary outcome) over 2 years after study entry. Natural language processing was used to identify the documentation of bariatric surgery discussion in electronic provider notes. RESULTS: Out of 30,560 study patients, a total of 2,659 (8.7%) discussed bariatric surgery with their providers. The BMI of patients who discussed bariatric surgery decreased by 2.18 versus 0.21 for patients who did not (p < 0.001). In a multivariable analysis, patients who discussed bariatric surgery with their providers lost more weight (by 1.43 [change in BMI]; 95% CI: 1.29-1.57) and had greater odds (10.2; 95% CI: 9.0-11.6; p < 0.001) of undergoing bariatric surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians rarely discussed bariatric surgery with their patients. Patients who did have this discussion were more likely to lose weight and to undergo bariatric surgery.

Implementation of a Multimodal Pain Management Order Set Reduces Perioperative Opioid Use after Liver Transplantation.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Nonopioid strategies to optimize pain management in patients after liver transplantation remain underexplored. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the use of a multimodal pain management (MPM) order set would reduce postoperative opioid use in adult patients after liver transplantation. DESIGN: Retrospective pre- and post-order set implementation study. SETTING: Large academic tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS: Thirty-one adults who underwent liver transplantation were included; of these, 18 received provider-managed pain regimens (pre-MPM group: August 20, 2016-January 17, 2018), and 13 received the MPM order set (post-MPM group: January 18-July 31, 2018) after implementation of the order set on January 18, 2018. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The MPM order set included standardized receipt of acetaminophen 650 mg every 6 hours, gabapentin 300 mg every 8 hours (adjusted for renal function), and opioids for breakthrough pain. Patients managed with the MPM order set received, on average, 30.6 fewer opioid morphine milligram equivalents per day after final extubation than patients who did not receive MPM (median 16, interquartile range [IQR] 4.5-45.6 vs median 46.6, IQR 30.1-75.2; Mann-Whitney U test, p=0.031). Although patients in the post-MPM group had significantly worse renal function at baseline, no other statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics, pain scores, or prescribed outpatient opioids were noted between groups. Patients in the pre-MPM group had a shorter intensive care unit and overall length of stay; however, patients in the post-MPM group may have had more complex postoperative courses contributing to these differences. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the MPM order set significantly reduced postoperative opioid use in liver transplant recipients. Our results provide a compelling rationale to further investigate the use of a non-opioid-centered strategy to optimize pain management in patients recovering from liver transplantation, a population vulnerable to the risks of opioid use such as opioid use disorder, increased susceptibility to adverse effects, and poor allograft and survival outcomes.

Curricular and Co-curricular Coverage of Leadership Competencies and the Influence of Extracurricular Engagement on Leadership Development.

Objective. To evaluate coverage of leadership-related competencies in a Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) curriculum and the impact of co-curricular and extracurricular experiences on students' leadership perceptions and self-efficacy. Methods. Course syllabi were used to comprehensively map the PharmD curriculum to 11 competencies related to the Leadership CAPE outcome. A survey was developed and administered to all first year through fourth year pharmacy (P1-P4) students to evaluate their leadership experience and engagement, and to assess their attitudes and self-efficacy in 11 leadership competencies. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate student level of engagement in leadership activities and the Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare students' attitudes and self-efficacy based on the extent of leadership engagement. Results. Curriculum mapping revealed that all competencies were covered in at least one course at the introductory or reinforce levels. There were 362 students (68% of all PharmD students) who completed the survey. When responses from students who reported active engagement in pharmacy student organizations (defined as e-board member or chair of committee, N=142 or 39% of respondents) were compared to the rest of the cohort, statistically significantly better attitudes and self-efficacy were seen in 7 of 11 competencies. Perceptions and self-efficacy of the 72 students (19.9%) who reported active engagement in non-pharmacy organizations did not significantly differ from those not actively involved in any organizations. Conclusion. The leadership competencies curriculum mapping exercise was useful in identifying gaps in coverage and depth of coverage, inconsistencies in course objectives accurately reflecting coverage of leadership topics and competencies, and considerations that should be given to co-curricular leadership development. Active leadership engagement in pharmacy student organizations should be encouraged because of associated improved leadership perceptions and self-efficacy.