Extending COVID-19 Pharmacy Technician Duties: Impact on Safety and Pharmacist Jobs

Background: The 2019 coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) led to an expanded scope of practice for pharmacy technicians. As the pandemic wanes, state governments are faced with the decision of whether or not to make permanent the authority of pharmacy technicians to perform extended duties. Objective: Determine the impacts on patient safety and job market demands preadoption and postadoption of Idaho's expanded technician duties in 2017 as a natural experiment for expanded technician duties. Methods: Data from the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) is used to explore patient safety outcomes in Idaho preadoption and postadoption and as compared with its border states. Data from Pharmacy Demand Reports is used to compare job postings in Idaho and its border state, and National Association of Boards of Pharmacy census data are used to compare growth in the number of pharmacists and technicians in Idaho and its border states over time. Results: For Idaho pharmacists, the average number of disciplinary actions reported against both pharmacists and technicians dropped after implementation of expanded technician duties. Idaho also had a lower rate of discipline for pharmacists and technicians than its border states. Idaho had the third highest job postings for pharmacists and the second highest for technicians among its border states. Idaho also had the largest growth in the number of licensed pharmacists and technicians of the observed states in the study period. Conclusion: Available statewide data from Idaho as compared with its border states suggests that expanded technician duties did not adversely impact patient safety outcomes or the pharmacist job market. Additional states may wish to expand pharmacy technician duties in the years ahead.

Federal pharmacist Paxlovid prescribing authority: A model policy or impediment to optimal care?

The U.S federal government leveraged emergency authority to allow pharmacists to prescribe Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir and ritonavir) during the COVID-19 pandemic. While heralded by pharmacy associations, the FDA framework included restrictions that ran counter to clinical guidelines and evidence-based research and recommendations. These restrictions will limit the utility of pharmacist prescriptive authority for Paxlovid in practice. The experience of Paxlovid prescribing and a similar recent federal action illustrate the challenges inherent in federal oversight of pharmacist prescriptive authority. While initially more difficult to navigate for stakeholders, working with state legislatures and state boards of pharmacy has much stronger long-term potential to enable broad pharmacist prescriptive authority and benefit patient care. This commentary uses Idaho's pharmacist prescribing regulations as a comparison to the federal actions.

Federal pharmacist Paxlovid prescribing authority: A model policy or impediment to optimal care?

The U.S federal government leveraged emergency authority to allow pharmacists to prescribe Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir and ritonavir) during the COVID-19 pandemic. While heralded by pharmacy associations, the FDA framework included restrictions that arguably ran counter to clinical guidelines and evidence-based research and recommendations. These restrictions will limit the utility of pharmacist prescriptive authority for Paxlovid in practice. The experience of Paxlovid prescribing and a similar recent federal action illustrate the challenges inherent in federal oversight of pharmacist prescriptive authority. While initially more difficult to navigate for stakeholders, working with state legislatures and state boards of pharmacy has much stronger long-term potential to enable broad pharmacist prescriptive authority and benefit patient care. This commentary uses Idaho's pharmacist prescribing regulations as a comparison to the federal actions.

Pharmacy-Based Point-of-Care Testing: How a "Standard of Care" Approach Can Facilitate Sustainability.

COVID-19 spurred rapid expansion of pharmacy-based point-of-care testing (POCT). This growth was aided, in part, by federal guidance that removed state-level regulatory uncertainty surrounding the ability of pharmacists to administer, interpret, and act on the results of tests. Surveys suggest there is considerable confusion about the legality of these services by state regulators. To ensure the sustainability of POCT services over time, states should consider adopting a standard of care approach to regulation, allowing a flexible framework for practice innovation and expansion over time.

Pharmacy technician-administered immunizations: A five-year review.

In October 2020, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued guidance authorizing trained pharmacy technicians in all states to administer immunizations. Given that this action is temporary, it will be necessary for states to adopt their own legislation or regulations to sustain these efforts beyond the coronavirus pandemic. At least 11 different immunization administration training programs have emerged for pharmacy technicians. An increasing number of publications have emerged on pharmacy technician immunization administration, demonstrating the ability to train technicians and have them safely administer immunizations in practice. Supervising pharmacists reported initial hesitancy but strong acceptance of delegating this task after experience in practice. States should look to expand and make permanent the authority of pharmacy technicians to ensure these benefits can continue to be realized after the HHS guidance expires.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on addressing common barriers to pharmacy-based point-of-care testing.

Introduction: Pharmacy-based point-of-care testing has long had the potential to improve patient access to timely care, but adoption has been slowed by financial and regulatory barriers. The COVID-19 pandemic reduced or temporarily eliminated many of the barriers to pharmacy-based testing. This review examines how the changes brought on by may impact pharmacy-based testing after the pandemic.Areas covered: This review searched peer-reviewed, lay, and regulatory literature to explore the implementation of pharmacy-based COVID-19 testing. This includes a review of regulatory and financial changes that removed barriers to testing. Additionally, it reviews the literature related to the growth of pharmacy-based testing.Expert opinion: It is clear that the COVID-19 pandemic created an awareness and opportunity for pharmacy-based point-of-care testing. The changes made in response to the pandemic have the potential to increase the role of pharmacy-based testing, but additional regulatory changes and wider pharmacy adoption are still needed to maximize the value of such services.

Impact of COVID-19 on prevalence of community pharmacies as CLIA-Waived facilities.

BACKGROUND: The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA) enabled greater access to low-risk tests by allowing their use in facilities with a Certificate of Waiver in the U.S. Recently, the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has shined a spotlight on CLIA-waived diagnostic testing. To meet this increased patient demand for diagnostic testing, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) authorized licensed pharmacists to order and administer FDA authorized COVID-19 tests. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to update the previous national benching report and examine both the number of pharmacies in the United States with CLIA Certificates of Waiver before and after the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the state-by-state differences in the percentage of pharmacies with CLIA Certificates of Waiver. METHODS: Data were collected from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CLIA Laboratory Search website May 3rd, 2015, August 4th, 2019 and November 26th, 2020. The website allows for exportation of demographic data on all CLIA-waived facilities by state. RESULTS: Pharmacies exhibited the largest growth both in number (4865 new locations) and by percent (45%) of CLIA-waived facilities between 2015 and 2020. The total number of pharmacies with a CLIA-waiver grew from 10,626 (17.94%) locations in 2015 to 12,157 (21.43%) locations in 2019, to 15,671 (27.63%) locations in 2020. States demonstrated considerable variability in the percentage of pharmacies with a CLIA-waiver, with a range of 2.92%-56.52%. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacies have become an increasingly important location for patients to access CLIA-waived tests in the United States, now serving as the second largest provider of CLIA-waived tests by the total number of locations. Most of this growth occurred between 2019 and 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and concentrated efforts will be necessary to sustain this momentum.