Evaluation of a Pharmacist-Led Intervention to Improve Statin Use in Persons with Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The Statin Use in Persons with Diabetes (SUPD) measure, developed and endorsed by the Pharmacy Quality Alliance and National Quality Forum, has been adopted by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services as part of the star rating measure set. It was added as a display measure in 2015 and, as of 2019, has become a star measure. Clinical pharmacy specialists (CPS) embedded in the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) are well positioned to review and recommend statin therapy for patients with diabetes in order to improve patient care and health plan performance. OBJECTIVE: To improve rates of statin prescribing and performance on the SUPD measure in the Denver Health Medical Plan (DHMP) population with diabetes by creating a CPS-led intervention to initiate statin prescriptions in eligible patients. METHODS: Between February 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018, DHMP patients who met SUPD measure criteria (aged ≥ 40 and ≤ 75 years, dispensing events for at least 2 diabetes mellitus medication fills, and no statin prescribed) were identified by the health plan chart review and contacted by CPS as appropriate. For patients eligible and agreeable to statin therapy, the CPS initiated the statin prescription. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize outreach and statin prescribing data. Prescription drug event data were also collected from the health plan to verify SUPD measure performance. RESULTS: At the start of 2018, DHMP's performance on the SUPD measure was 65.7% (Medicare Advantage Part D national average was 68.5%). Of the 326 patients whose charts were reviewed and who were contacted, 275 (84.4%) were eligible for statin initiation, and of these, 115 (41.8%) were prescribed statin therapy. The increase in statin prescribing and dispensing increased DHMP's performance on the SUPD measure to 87.1% at the end of 2018, which correlates with a 5-star rating based on the 2019 cut points. CONCLUSIONS: CPS embedded in the PCMH setting are well positioned to participate in and positively affect population health initiatives such as the SUPD measure. Appropriate prescribing of statin therapy by CPS for patients included in the SUPD measure ensures that they are on key medication therapy for mitigating atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and may improve a health plan's Medicare star rating. DISCLOSURES: This was an unfunded, investigator-initiated project. Anderson owns stock in Merck & Co. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

A month in an acute palliative care unit: clinical interventions and financial outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Few cancer centers have developed acute palliative care units (APCUs). The purpose of this study is to highlight clinical interventions and financial outcomes during a typical 1-month period on an APCU. METHODS: We evaluated consecutive patients admitted to our APCU from February 1 to 28, 2009, regarding demographic information, sources of and reasons for admissions, resuscitation status, clinical interventions, disposition, and reimbursement data. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were admitted during a 1-month period. Of these, 30 (71%) were referred from the inpatient palliative care consultation team. In all, 10 (24%) patients had a full code status on admission, and 8 had their status changed to do not resuscitate (DNR) prior to discharge. A total of 11 (26%) patients were discharged home with hospice care, 12 (29%) died on the APCU, and 10 (24%) were discharged home with outpatient follow-up visits. All patients received intravenous medications and the majority received intravenous antibiotics. All patients met acute care criteria for hospitalization, and financial reimbursement was satisfactory and comparable to that of other oncology patients. CONCLUSION: The APCU model is designed for the care of very complex advanced cancer patients. Palliative interventions are given simultaneously with other medical interventions. The APCU is labor intensive and well reimbursed.

Summary of the causative and treatment factors of diarrhea and the use of a diarrhea assessment and treatment tool to improve patient outcomes.

This article is a review of the causative factors and pharmacologic treatments of diarrhea. This information was incorporated into a Diarrhea Assessment and Treatment Tool (DATT) to guide clinicians on comprehensive diarrhea assessment and current treatment recommendations. The tool was utilized at a university-affiliated oncology institution by a clinical nurse specialist on 26 patients as a performance improvement project. Ease of use and efficacy of DATT were tested. Eighty-one percent of patients were assessed using DATT in 30 minutes or less. Seventy-nine percent of the 57 identified diarrhea classifications were not being treated upon initial assessment. Diarrhea control was achieved in 73% of the patients within 7 days or fewer when DATT was utilized. The premise of diarrhea management is that if all the causative factors are not treated, diarrhea will persist. The conclusions are that this tool will aid the clinician in a comprehensive assessment of diarrhea and provide a systematic approach to diarrhea treatment. The need for research on best practice for management of the various causative factors of diarrhea is needed.

Subcutaneous olanzapine for hyperactive or mixed delirium in patients with advanced cancer: a preliminary study.

CONTEXT: Oral olanzapine is effective in controlling agitation in patients with delirium, but often, parenteral administration is necessary. Intramuscular (IM) olanzapine is approved for managing agitation in schizophrenia, but this route is inappropriate for terminally ill patients. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this pilot study was to determine the safety and tolerability of subcutaneous (SC) olanzapine in the management of hyperactive or mixed delirium in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: We conducted a prospective open-label study in patients with advanced cancer who had agitated delirium (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale [RASS] score ≥+1) that had not responded to a 10mg or higher dose of parenteral haloperidol over 24 hours. Patients received olanzapine 5mg SC every eight hours for three days and continued haloperidol for breakthrough agitation. For patients requiring more than 8mg of rescue haloperidol daily, the olanzapine dose was increased to 10mg SC every eight hours. Injection site, systemic toxicity, and efficacy (RASS score <+1 and total haloperidol dose <8mg per 24 hours on the last study day) were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients received at least one olanzapine injection, and 15 (63%) completed the study. Median age of evaluable patients was 58 years (range 49-79), and 67% were males. No injection site toxicity was observed after 167 injections. Probable systemic toxic effects were observed in four patients (severe hypotension [blood pressure <90/50mmHg], paradoxical agitation, diabetes insipidus, and seizure). Efficacy was achieved in nine (37.5%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: IM olanzapine is well tolerated subcutaneously. Further research is needed to evaluate its efficacy in controlling agitated delirium.