Clinical dashboard development and implementation to standardize data capture and reporting across health-system specialty pharmacies.

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: To describe the development and implementation of clinical dashboards to standardize data capturing and reporting across multiple partner health systems. SUMMARY: Between July and September 2020, clinical dashboards were developed and implemented across multiple partner health-system specialty pharmacies (HSSPs) located throughout the United States. The dashboards were developed via collaboration between personnel involved in clinical subcommittees, clinical outcomes, data analytics, information technology, and clinical and central operations. Utilizing a cloud-scale business intelligence service, patient clinical data documented in a shared patient management system was utilized to create customizable dashboards that displayed patient-reported outcome measures, collected laboratory or test results, and completed pharmacist interventions. Separate dashboards were developed for several disease states and/or medication classes. Based on specialty pharmacy recommendations, medical literature, and clinical guidelines, internally developed disease-specific protocols defined data included in the dashboards and ensured consistent data collection amongst partner health systems. Having access to real-time clinical information allows health systems to closely monitor performance metrics, track patient outcomes, and identify operational gaps. CONCLUSION: Accurately capturing and reporting clinical metrics using clinical dashboards can assist HSSPs in delivering high-quality care. Having access to clinical outcome measures allows HSSPs to better understand the impact of their services on patients' health and quality of life. Health systems can utilize this data to analyze trends and recognize areas of opportunity so that measures can be taken to improve patient care.

Health-system specialty pharmacist intervention types, acceptance, and associated actions for patients with multiple sclerosis.

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: Health-system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) pharmacists play an integral role in the care of patients with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) by facilitating medication access, providing counseling, improving adherence, and decreasing provider workload. However, current literature detailing pharmacist interventions and their acceptance rates in this population is limited. The purpose of this study was to identify the types and acceptance rate of clinical interventions completed by pharmacists for PwMS. METHODS: To evaluate the acceptance rate of HSSP pharmacist interventions, we conducted a retrospective, multicenter, observational, descriptive study for the period from October 2019 to August 2022. Intervention types were categorized into reasons for intervention, recommendations from the pharmacists, and their acceptance rates. RESULTS: For 225 patients enrolled in HSSP services, 449 interventions were completed with an average of 2.0 interventions per patient. Most interventions identified were associated with medication adherence (28.7%), medication regimen (27.6%), adverse drug reaction (ADR) (20.7%), and laboratory values (15.1%). The average adherence, defined by the proportion of days covered, was 94%. The most common recommendations were to continue therapy (14.9%), schedule laboratory tests (12.7%), and follow up with providers (11.8%). Recommendations had an acceptance rate of 85.3%, with 3.8% of recommendations declined and 10.9% requiring follow-up with providers. CONCLUSION: P Pharmacists impact patient outcomes through the completion of clinical interventions that improve adherence, identify medication regimen problems, manage ADRs, and coordinate proper laboratory testing. Pharmacist recommendations were most often accepted for interventions related to medication regimen and ADRs. Proper identification and management of medication regimen concerns, as well as tolerability of medications, can positively impact adherence and improve overall patient outcomes.

Biosimilar perceptions among autoimmune prescribers and pharmacists in health system specialty pharmacy.

BACKGROUND: By the end of 2023, 10 self-administered biosimilars indicated for autoimmune conditions are expected to launch in the United States, resulting in alternative treatment options for patients and a potential for cost savings. However, studies about perception and knowledge of self-administered biosimilars among health system prescribers and health system specialty pharmacists are limited. OBJECTIVE: To assesses knowledge and perceptions of biosimilars among autoimmune prescribers and health system specialty pharmacists across the United States. METHODS: An anonymous, cross-sectional self-administered online questionnaire was conducted among prescribers and health system specialty pharmacists practicing in the specialties of rheumatology, dermatology, and gastroenterology across the United States. The survey was available from January 2023 to February 2023. RESULTS: 31 prescribers and 44 pharmacists completed the questionnaire. Only 16.0% of prescribers and 13.4% of pharmacists reported being "very prepared" to have conversations with patients about biosimilar options. 43% of prescribers indicated they would prescribe a biosimilar to biologic naive patients. However, 13.3% of prescribers would be willing to prescribe a biosimilar to patients successfully established on biologic therapy. Among pharmacists, 68.1% were comfortable recommending a biosimilar substitution to a biologic naive patient, but only 18.1% would recommend a biosimilar substitution to an existing patient successfully established on a biologic therapy. Less than half of prescribers (48.0%) and pharmacists (42.0%) understood regulations of interchangeability and substitution. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights several knowledge gaps and hesitancies that exist among health system specialty prescribers and pharmacists regarding biosimilar products. Education efforts are needed to overcome the lack of biosimilar adoption, which will increase affordability of therapy for patients and health care savings.

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.

Health-system specialty pharmacy role and outcomes: A review of current literature.

PURPOSE: Specialty medications can have life-altering outcomes for patients with complex diseases. However, their benefit relies on appropriate treatment selection, patients' ability to afford and initiate treatment, and ongoing treatment optimization based on patient response to therapy. Mounting research demonstrates the benefits of the health-system specialty pharmacies (HSSPs) in improving specialty medication access, affordability, and outcomes. The purpose of this rapid review is to describe the currently reported role and function of HSSP pharmacists and outcomes reported with use of the HSSP model, and to identify gaps in the literature where more information is needed to better understand the HSSP model and outcomes. SUMMARY: Current literature describes the role of HSSP pharmacists in facilitating patient access, affordability, and initiation and maintenance of specialty medications. Though it is clear HSSP pharmacists are involved in treatment monitoring, often through utilizing the electronic health record, more information is needed to elucidate the frequency, method, and extent of monitoring. Despite several valuable continuity of care services reported to be provided by HSSPs, the breadth and degree of standardization of these services remains unclear. There is minimal literature describing HSSP education and research involvement. HSSPs have reported significant benefits of this patient care model, as demonstrated by higher adherence and persistence; better clinical outcomes; financial benefits to patients, payers, and the health system; better quality of care; higher patient and provider satisfaction with services, and highly efficient specialty pharmacy services. More literature comparing clinical and diagnosis-related outcomes in HSSP versus non-HSSP patients is needed. CONCLUSION: HSSPs provide comprehensive, patient-centered specialty medication management that result in improved care across the continuum of the specialty patient journey and act as a valuable resource for specialty clinics and patients beyond medication management. Future research should build on the current description of HSSP services, how services affect patient outcomes, and the impact HSSP network restrictions.