Frequency and characteristics of cognitive services provided in response to a financial incentive

Implementation of an animated medication information tool in community pharmacies, with a special focus on patients with limited health literacy

OBJECTIVES

The animated medication information tool 'Watchyourmeds' provides information in an accessible manner through animated videos and therefore appears to be especially suitable for people with limited health literacy. This study aimed to assess the implementation of this animated medication information tool in Dutch community pharmacies, with a special focus on patients with limited health literacy.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey based on the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework was sent to approximately 75% of the ±1900 community pharmacies in the Netherlands through email newsletters of pharmacy networks.

KEY FINDINGS

140 pharmacists (⁓10%) completed the survey and 125 of them (89%) indicated that they offered the animated medication information tool to their patients. 108 pharmacists indicated that the tool was offered to all patients, not only to patients with limited health literacy. The distribution method was primarily passive (patients were given a leaflet and were not explicitly pointed to or informed about the tool). Two frequently cited motivations for offering the tool were that it complemented other sources of information and that the health insurer provided a financial incentive. The main reasons patients refused to use the tool were that they had no access to or no affinity for the required technology.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that the tool is used in community pharmacies and that it is offered to all patients, regardless of their presumed health literacy level. A more active method of offering the tool may be warranted to better reach patients with limited health literacy.

A conceptual framework for evaluation of community pharmacy pay-for-performance programs

BACKGROUND

Recent interest in initiating pay-for-performance (P4P) programs indicates an underlying belief that economic incentives will have a direct impact on health care quality and efficiency. Evaluations of the impact of P4P programs on health care organizations and providers have been presented in the literature; however, none have focused on the impact of an incentive targeting community pharmacies.

OBJECTIVE

To propose a theory-derived conceptual framework of how a financial incentive might work in a community pharmacy.

METHODS

Studies from the fields of economics (agency theory), psychology (intrinsic and extrinsic motivators; expectancy theory), and organizational theory (ownership, institutional layers, organizational culture, and change management; quality improvement) were reviewed to inform the framework's components. This proposed conceptual framework also integrated and expanded on previous health care-related P4P models.

RESULTS

P4P programs inherently use financial incentives to catalyze change; however, elements from psychology and organizational theories along with economic theory were identified as important considerations in how a financial incentive may operate when targeting a community pharmacy. Through the incorporation of these theories along with other P4P frameworks in health care, a conceptual framework was derived comprising 4 domains: incentive, pharmacy, other influencing factors, and P4P program measures. Hypothesized relationships among these domains were depicted.

CONCLUSION

As focus on improving the quality of health care provision develops, opportunities for pharmacists to provide patient care services beyond dispensing will continue to advance, along with expanded reimbursement mechanisms extending beyond traditional product dispensing. The proposed theory-derived conceptual framework serves to depict how the integration of P4P and other factors may affect the pharmacy environment and subsequently affect a pharmacy's capability to perform well on medication-related quality measures. This framework may be used as a foundation on which to design studies to investigate the association between community pharmacy factors and performance in a P4P program.

Payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings

BACKGROUND

Changes to the method of payment for healthcare providers, including pay-for-performance schemes, are increasingly being used by governments, health insurers, and employers to help align financial incentives with health system goals. In this review we focused on changes to the method and level of payment for all types of healthcare providers in outpatient healthcare settings. Outpatient healthcare settings, broadly defined as 'out of hospital' care including primary care, are important for health systems in reducing the use of more expensive hospital services.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of different payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings on the quantity and quality of health service provision, patient outcomes, healthcare provider outcomes, cost of service provision, and adverse effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase (searched 5 March 2019), and several other databases. In addition, we searched clinical trials platforms, grey literature, screened reference lists of included studies, did a cited reference search for included studies, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. We screened records from an updated search in August 2020, with any potentially relevant studies categorised as awaiting classification.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series, and repeated measures studies that compared different payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient care settings.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We conducted a structured synthesis. We first categorised the payment methods comparisons and outcomes, and then described the effects of different types of payment methods on different outcome categories. Where feasible, we used meta-analysis to synthesise the effects of payment interventions under the same category. Where it was not possible to perform meta-analysis, we have reported means/medians and full ranges of the available point estimates. We have reported the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the relative difference (as per cent change or mean difference (MD)) for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 studies in the review: 12 randomised trials, 13 controlled before-and-after studies, one interrupted time series, and one repeated measure study. Most healthcare providers were primary care physicians. Most of the payment methods were implemented by health insurance schemes in high-income countries, with only one study from a low- or middle-income country. The included studies were categorised into four groups based on comparisons of different payment methods. (1) Pay for performance (P4P) plus existing payment methods compared with existing payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings P4P incentives probably improve child immunisation status (RR 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.36; 3760 patients; moderate-certainty evidence) and may slightly increase the number of patients who are asked more detailed questions on their disease by their pharmacist (MD 1.24, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.54; 454 patients; low-certainty evidence). P4P may slightly improve primary care physicians' prescribing of guideline-recommended antihypertensive medicines compared with an existing payment method (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.12; 362 patients; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effects of extra P4P incentives on mean blood pressure reduction for patients and costs for providing services compared with an existing payment method (very low-certainty evidence). Outcomes related to workload or other health professional outcomes were not reported in the included studies. One randomised trial found that compared to the control group, the performance of incentivised professionals was not sustained after the P4P intervention had ended. (2) Fee for service (FFS) compared with existing payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings We are uncertain about the effect of FFS on the quantity of health services delivered (outpatient visits and hospitalisations), patient health outcomes, and total drugs cost compared to an existing payment method due to very low-certainty evidence. The quality of service provision and health professional outcomes were not reported in the included studies. One randomised trial reported that physicians paid via FFS may see more well patients than salaried physicians (low-certainty evidence), possibly implying that more unnecessary services were delivered through FFS. (3) FFS mixed with existing payment methods compared with existing payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings FFS mixed payment method may increase the quantity of health services provided compared with an existing payment method (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.76; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of FFS mixed payment on quality of services provided, patient health outcomes, and health professional outcomes compared with an existing payment method due to very low-certainty evidence. Cost outcomes and adverse effects were not reported in the included studies. (4) Enhanced FFS compared with FFS for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings Enhanced FFS (higher FFS payment) probably increases child immunisation rates (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.48; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether higher FFS payment results in more primary care visits and about the effect of enhanced FFS on the net expenditure per year on covered children with regular FFS (very low-certainty evidence). Quality of service provision, patient outcomes, health professional outcomes, and adverse effects were not reported in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings, P4P or an increase in FFS payment level probably increases the quantity of health service provision (moderate-certainty evidence), and P4P may slightly improve the quality of service provision for targeted conditions (low-certainty evidence). The effects of changes in payment methods on health outcomes is uncertain due to very low-certainty evidence. Information to explore the influence of specific payment method design features, such as the size of incentives and type of performance measures, was insufficient. Furthermore, due to limited and very low-certainty evidence, it is uncertain if changing payment models without including additional funding for professionals would have similar effects. There is a need for further well-conducted research on payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings in low- and middle-income countries; more studies comparing the impacts of different designs of the same payment method; and studies that consider the unintended consequences of payment interventions.

Characterization and analysis of the basic elements of health payment mechanisms and their most frequent types

Introduction Healthcare systems are developed in imperfect scenarios, in which there are constant failures (uncertainty, information asymmetry, agency relationship problem, and supply-induced demand). These failures, based on the imperfection of the sector, determine the relationships and incentives between the actors. It is within this context that payment mechanisms regulate aspects of the system behavior and incentives, acting as instruments for the purchasing of health care from providers, mediated by health insurance on behalf of users. Objective To characterize the basic elements of most frequent payment mechanisms to help providers in their relationship with payers. Methods A review of the evidence was conducted in PubMed, Google, Google Scholar, and strategic snowball selection. Payment mechanisms consist of three classical microeconomics variables, fixed or variable: price, quantity, and expense. Time dimensions are used to analyze their attributes and effects. Different mechanisms emerge from the combination of these variables. Results Among the most used are: Fee-For-Service, Global Budget, Bundled Payments, Diagnosis-Related Groups, Per-capita, Performance Pay, and Risk-Sharing Agreements. A fourth has also gained importance: Financial Risk. Conclusions Payment mechanisms are essential to link health efforts with clinical practice. They make it possible to regulate relationships between insurers, providers, and users, which, depending on the architecture of the mechanism, can become beneficial or hinder the fulfillment of the objectives of the health system.

The measurement and improvement of maternity service performance through inspection and rating: An observational study of maternity services in acute hospitals in England

•

The performance of maternity departments varies and is a policy concern.

•

Inspection and ratings is a possible means to increase performance.

•

Routinely collected data may help measure the performance of maternity departments.

•

Using routine data, post-inspection performance was not associated with inspection scores.

•

Inspection and rating do not stimulate improvement on the performance measures studied.

Objectives

To determine whether the prior performance of maternity services, as measured by Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists performance indicators, is associated with ratings by the Care Quality Commission at subsequent inspection, and whether performance changes occur after inspection.

Methods

We used hospital activity data from 176 maternity sites inspected between October 2013 and March 2016 to generate a set of performance indicators developed by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. We linked these data to Care Quality Commission data on inspection dates and rating scores and used regression models, controlling for site level effects, to estimate the relationships between inspection ratings and performance indicators before and after inspections.

Results

Coefficients measuring the relationship between indicator performance and subsequent inspection rating score had wide confidence intervals which crossed zero suggesting no statistically significant relationship prior to inspection. The same absence of statistical significance was observed for changes in indicator performance after inspection.

Conclusions

The use of routine data for performance monitoring is becoming increasingly important as regular inspection is costly and regulators require accurate and timely intelligence. However, we found no statistically significant relationships between inspection ratings and performance indicators before or after inspections in maternity services. This calls into question the validity and reliability of the performance indicators, the inspection process and ratings, or both, as measures of performance.

Insights on the effectiveness of reward schemes from 10-year longitudinal case studies in 2 Italian regions

BACKGROUND

Pay for performance (P4P) programs have been widely analysed in literature, and the results regarding their impact on performance are mixed. Moreover, in the real-life setting, reward schemes are designed combining multiple elements altogether, yet, it is not clear what happens when they are applied using different combinations.

OBJECTIVES

To provide insights on how P4P programs are influenced by 5 key elements: whom, what, how, how many targets, and how much to reward.

METHODS

A qualitative longitudinal analysis of 10 years of P4P reward schemes adopted by the regional administrations of Tuscany and Lombardy (Italy) was conducted. The effects of the P4P features on performance are discussed considering both overall and specific indicators.

RESULTS

Both regions applied financial reward schemes for General Managers by linking the variable pay to performance. While Tuscany maintained a relatively stable financial incentive design and governance tools, Lombardy changed some elements of the design and introduced, in 2012, a P4P program aimed to reward the providers. The main differences between the 2 cases regard the number of targets (how many), the type (what), and the method applied to set targets (how).

CONCLUSION

Considering the overall performance obtained by the 2 regions, it seems that whom, how, and how much to reward are not relevant in the success of P4P programs; instead, the number (how many) and the type (what) of targets set may influence the performance improvement processes driven by financial reward schemes.

Characterization and effectiveness of pay-for-performance in ophthalmology: a systematic review

Background

To identify, characterize and compare existing pay-for-performance approaches and their impact on the quality of care and efficiency in ophthalmology.

Methods

A systematic evidence-based review was conducted. English, French and German written literature published between 2000 and 2015 were searched in the following databases: Medline (via PubMed), NCBI web site, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, Econlit and the Cochrane Library. Empirical as well as descriptive articles were included. Controlled clinical trials, meta-analyses, randomized controlled studies as well as observational studies were included as empirical articles. Systematic characterization of identified pay-for-performance approaches (P4P approaches) was conducted according to the “Model for Implementing and Monitoring Incentives for Quality” (MIMIQ). Methodological quality of empirical articles was assessed according to the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists.

Results

Overall, 13 relevant articles were included. Eleven articles were descriptive and two articles included empirical analyses. Based on these articles, four different pay-for-performance approaches implemented in the United States were identified. With regard to quality and incentive elements, systematic comparison showed numerous differences between P4P approaches. Empirical studies showed isolated cost or quality effects, while a simultaneous examination of these effects was missing.

Conclusion

Research results show that experiences with pay-for-performance approaches in ophthalmology are limited. Identified approaches differ with regard to quality and incentive elements restricting comparability. Two empirical studies are insufficient to draw strong conclusions about the effectiveness and efficiency of these approaches.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2333-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

An overview of reviews evaluating the effectiveness of financial incentives in changing healthcare professional behaviours and patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

There is considerable interest in the effectiveness of financial incentives in the delivery of health care. Incentives may be used in an attempt to increase the use of evidence-based treatments among healthcare professionals or to stimulate health professionals to change their clinical behaviour with respect to preventive, diagnostic and treatment decisions, or both. Financial incentives are an extrinsic source of motivation and exist when an individual can expect a monetary transfer which is made conditional on acting in a particular way. Since there are numerous reviews performed within the healthcare area describing the effects of various types of financial incentives, it is important to summarise the effectiveness of these in an overview to discern which are most effective in changing health professionals' behaviour and patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct an overview of systematic reviews that evaluates the impact of financial incentives on healthcare professional behaviour and patient outcomes.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) (The Cochrane Library); Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE); TRIP; MEDLINE; EMBASE; Science Citation Index; Social Science Citation Index; NHS EED; HEED; EconLit; and Program in Policy Decision-Making (PPd) (from their inception dates up to January 2010). We searched the reference lists of all included reviews and carried out a citation search of those papers which cited studies included in the review. We included both Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), interrupted time series (ITSs) and controlled before and after studies (CBAs) that evaluated the effects of financial incentives on professional practice and patient outcomes, and that reported numerical results of the included individual studies. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of each review according to the AMSTAR criteria. We included systematic reviews of studies evaluating the effectiveness of any type of financial incentive. We grouped financial incentives into five groups: payment for working for a specified time period; payment for each service, episode or visit; payment for providing care for a patient or specific population; payment for providing a pre-specified level or providing a change in activity or quality of care; and mixed or other systems. We summarised data using vote counting.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four reviews reporting on 32 studies. Two reviews scored 7 on the AMSTAR criteria (moderate, score 5 to 7, quality) and two scored 9 (high, score 8 to 11, quality). The reported quality of the included studies was, by a variety of methods, low to moderate. Payment for working for a specified time period was generally ineffective, improving 3/11 outcomes from one study reported in one review. Payment for each service, episode or visit was generally effective, improving 7/10 outcomes from five studies reported in three reviews; payment for providing care for a patient or specific population was generally effective, improving 48/69 outcomes from 13 studies reported in two reviews; payment for providing a pre-specified level or providing a change in activity or quality of care was generally effective, improving 17/20 reported outcomes from 10 studies reported in two reviews; and mixed and other systems were of mixed effectiveness, improving 20/31 reported outcomes from seven studies reported in three reviews. When looking at the effect of financial incentives overall across categories of outcomes, they were of mixed effectiveness on consultation or visit rates (improving 10/17 outcomes from three studies in two reviews); generally effective in improving processes of care (improving 41/57 outcomes from 19 studies in three reviews); generally effective in improving referrals and admissions (improving 11/16 outcomes from 11 studies in four reviews); generally ineffective in improving compliance with guidelines outcomes (improving 5/17 outcomes from five studies in two reviews); and generally effective in improving prescribing costs outcomes (improving 28/34 outcomes from 10 studies in one review).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Financial incentives may be effective in changing healthcare professional practice. The evidence has serious methodological limitations and is also very limited in its completeness and generalisability. We found no evidence from reviews that examined the effect of financial incentives on patient outcomes.

Managing obesity in pharmacy: the Australian experience

OBJECTIVE

To explore pharmacists' opinions about the provision of weight management services in community pharmacy and their attitudes towards the establishment of an accredited training course in weight management in pharmacy.

SETTING

Interviews were conducted with practising pharmacists on site in various community pharmacies in metropolitan Sydney, Australia.

METHOD

In-depth, semi-structured interviews with twenty practising pharmacists were conducted. Of the twenty interviewed pharmacists, sixteen were involved in the provision of one or more pharmacy based weight management programs in their pharmacies. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using the grounded theory approach.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The data were thematically analysed to identify facilitators and perceived barriers to the provision of high quality services, and pharmacists' willingness to undertake training and accreditation.

RESULTS

Participants clearly perceived a role for pharmacy in weight management. Key facilitators to provision of service were accessibility and the perception of pharmacists as trustworthy healthcare professionals. The pharmacists proposed collaboration with other healthcare professionals in order to provide a service incorporating diet, exercise and behavioural therapy. A program that was not-product-centred, and supported by ethical marketing was favoured. Appropriate training and accreditation were considered essential to assuring the quality of such services. Barriers to the provision of high quality services identified were: remuneration, pharmacy infrastructure, client demand and the current marketing of product-centred programs.

CONCLUSION

Australian pharmacists believe there is a role for pharmacy in weight management, provided training in accredited programs is made available. A holistic, evidence-based, multi-disciplinary service model has been identified as ideal.

Selecting effective incentive structures in health care: A decision framework to support health care purchasers in finding the right incentives to drive performance

BACKGROUND

The Ontario health care system is devolving planning and funding authority to community based organizations and moving from steering through rules and regulations to steering on performance. As part of this transformation, the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) are interested in using incentives as a strategy to ensure alignment - that is, health service providers' goals are in accord with the goals of the health system. The objective of the study was to develop a decision framework to assist policymakers in choosing and designing effective incentive systems.

METHODS

The first part of the study was an extensive review of the literature to identify incentives models that are used in the various health care systems and their effectiveness. The second part was the development of policy principles to ensure that the used incentive models are congruent with the values of the Ontario health care system. The principles were developed by reviewing the Ontario policy documents and through discussions with policymakers. The validation of the principles and the suggested incentive models for use in Ontario took place at two meetings. The first meeting was with experts from the research and policy community, the second with senior policymakers from the MOHLTC. Based on the outcome of those two meetings, the researchers built a decision framework for incentives. The framework was send to the participants of both meetings and four additional experts for validation.

RESULTS

We identified several models that have proven, with a varying degree of evidence, to be effective in changing or enabling a health provider's performance. Overall, the literature suggests that there is no single best approach to create incentives yet and the ability of financial and non-financial incentives to achieve results depends on a number of contextual elements. After assessing the initial set of incentive models on their congruence with the four policy principles we defined nine incentive models to be appropriate for use in Ontario and potentially other health care systems that want to introduce incentives to improve performance. Subsequently, the models were incorporated in the resulting decision framework.

CONCLUSION

The design of an incentive must reflect the values and goals of the health care system, be well matched to the performance objectives and reflect a range of contextual factors that can influence the effectiveness of even well-designed incentives. As a consequence, a single policy recommendation around incentives is inappropriate. The decision framework provides health care policymakers and purchasers with a tool to support the selection of an incentive model that is the most appropriate to improve the targeted performance.

Increasing performance of health care services within economic constraints: working towards improved incentive structures

There is increasing evidence that health care systems can create better value for money by improving performance and setting the right incentives. Worldwide this has led to an emergence of financial and non-financial incentive structures as a strategy to improve performance. The role of incentives is not only to motivate high performance through the alignment of results and rewards (financial/non-financial as well as direct/indirect) but also to enable health care providers to perform better by mitigating financial barriers that typically result from funding schemes. Various incentive structures in health care, identified in the scientific literature, are described in this article and available evidence on effectiveness and side effects is summarized. Literature shows that there is no single best approach to create an incentive yet and that the ability of financial and non-financial incentives to achieve desired results depends on a number of circumstantial elements. Several incentive schemes that can be used by health care insurers or local health authorities are discussed and concrete examples are provided. Decision-making on incentive schemes requires a careful design with the involvement of those targeted by incentives.

Evaluation of a pilot medication therapy management project within the North Carolina State Health Plan

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility of a pharmacist-based medication therapy management (MTM) service for North Carolina State Health Plan enrollees.

DESIGN

Before/after design with two control groups.

SETTING

Community pharmacies and an ambulatory care clinic in North Carolina serving patients from October 2004 to March 2005.

PARTICIPANTS

67 patients who used a large number of prescription drugs, 10 community/ambulatory care pharmacists, and more than 600 participants from two control groups.

INTERVENTIONS

Pharmacist-conducted MTM reviews for volunteering patients.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Process measures (type and frequency of drug therapy problems detected and services performed), economic measures (number and cost of medications dispensed), and humanistic measures (patient satisfaction with services).

RESULTS

Pharmacists identified an average of 3.6 potential drug therapy problems (PDTPs) per patient at the first visit. The most common PDTP categories were "potential underuse" and "more cost-effective drug available." Pharmacist actions were divided nearly equally between activities that would result in increased and decreased drug use. Pharmacists recommended a drug therapy change in about 50% of patients and contacted the prescriber more than 85% of the time. About 50% of patients with PDTPs had a change in drug therapy. Prescription use during the postintervention period decreased in both the study and control groups but was statistically significant only among the control groups. No significant differences were observed in patient co-payment or insurer prescription costs. Pharmacists provided the following educational services: medication use (90%), disease management (88%), adherence, and self-care (60%). Survey results indicated that patients highly valued the service.

CONCLUSION

A voluntary MTM program targeted at ambulatory patients using a large number of medications reduced the number of PDTPs but did not necessarily result in reductions in prescription drug use or cost. Nearly all patients received some form of medication adherence or disease education associated with problem detection and resolution. Patient satisfaction levels with the service were very high.

Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005

OBJECTIVE

To review Public Law (PL) 109-41-the Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005 (PSQIA)-and summarize key medication error research that contributed to congressional recognition of the need for this legislation.

DATA SOURCES

Relevant publications related to medication error research, patient safety programs, and the legislative history of and commentary on PL 109-41, published in English, were identified by MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, Thomas (Library of Congress), and Internet search engine-assisted searches using the terms healthcare quality, medication error, patient safety, PL 109-41, and quality improvement. Additional citations were identified from references cited in related publications.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All relevant publications were reviewed. Summarization of the PSQIA was carried out by legal textual analysis.

DATA SYNTHESIS

PL 109-41 provides privilege and confidentiality for patient safety work product (PSWP) developed for reporting to patient safety organizations (PSOs). It does not establish federal mandatory reporting of significant errors; rather, it relies on existing state reporting systems. The Act does not preempt stronger state protections for PSWP. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality is directed to certify PSOs and promote the establishment of a national network of patient safety databases. Whistleblower protection and penalties for unauthorized disclosure of PSWP are among its enforcement mechanisms.

CONCLUSIONS

The Act protects clinicians who report minor errors to PSOs and protects the information from disclosure, but providers must increasingly embrace a culture of interdisciplinary concern for patient safety if this protection is to have real impact on patient care.

A pharmacy management intervention for optimizing drug therapy for nursing home patients

BACKGROUND

A drug therapy management service was designed to reduce polypharmacy among Medicaid recipients. This service selectively focused on patients who were high users of prescription drugs and had potential drug therapy problems (PDTPs).

OBJECTIVES

This article reports the results of the first phase of the North Carolina Polypharmacy Initiative. The goals of this study were to determine: (1) the frequency with which recommendations were made by pharmacists in response to targeted profile alerts aimed at high-risk patients, (2) the frequency and type of drug therapy changes, and (3) the impact on drug-related quality and costs.

METHODS

A before-after design was used. Nursing home patient profiles with PDTP alerts for specific drugs and drug categories were provided to consultant pharmacists. Targeted patients had received 218 prescription fills within 90 days. Pharmacists were compensated for performing and documenting targeted drug regimen reviews. Interventions of pharmacists and results after physician consultation are described, and cost impacts of changes in drug therapy are reported. Monetary results are shown in year-2002 U.S. dollars.

RESULTS

Prescription profiles were generated from Medicaid claims data and sent to consultant pharmacists for 9208 patients in 253 nursing homes. Pharmacists returned 7548 (82%) of all profiles sent to them. After excluding 1204 patients (13%) who were discharged or deceased, 6344 patients (69%) remained for analysis. At baseline, patients used a mean (SD) of 9.52 prescriptions per month, costing the North Carolina Medicaid program a mean (SD) of 502.96 dollars (309.70). A mean of 1.58 recommendations were offered to prescribers. After physician consultation, > or =1 recommendation was implemented for 72% of patients with a change recommendation, 68% of whom experienced a switch to a lower-cost drug. Drug cost savings were a mean of 30.33 dollars/patient per month. Cost savings from 1 month alone covered the compensation paid to pharmacists for consultation efforts.

CONCLUSIONS

This supplemental program of medication reviews for targeted nursing home patients resulted in a reduction of polypharmacy and was beneficial based solely on drug cost savings.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmaceutical care in a medicare drug benefit program

OBJECTIVES

Although there has recently been substantial interest in a Medicare drug benefit program, little attention has focused on ensuring improved access to medication monitoring for Medicare beneficiaries. Using a societal perspective, we evaluated the impact pharmacists could have on inappropriate prescribing, patient compliance, and medication-related morbidity and mortality within a Medicare drug benefits program.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective was performed. A comprehensive MEDLINE search for relevant literature identified data sources and model parameters.

RESULTS

In the base case, a pharmaceutical care benefit in the elderly population would cost US dollars 2100 (year 2000 prices) per life-year saved, which is highly cost-effective. Reasonable changes in model parameters did not raise the cost-effectiveness ratio above US dollars 13000 per life-year saved.

CONCLUSION

Despite limitations in both the quantity and the specificity of data available, pharmaceutical care appears to be a highly cost-effective augmentation to a Medicare drug benefit program. This result is robust to model parameter changes. This model is conservative in that it does not include ongoing benefits from medication monitoring or increased elderly drug utilization and polypharmacy as the Medicare drug program is phased in.