Pharmacoeconomic, Medication Access, and Patient-Satisfaction Analysis of a Pharmacist-Managed VTE Clinic Compared to Primary Care Physician Outpatient Therapy.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common medical condition often treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Current literature supports outpatient treatment of select, low-risk VTE patients by a pharmacist with DOACs; however, no studies exist to demonstrate if a pharmacist-managed VTE clinic provides financial benefit compared to physician-managed outpatient care. To compare the financial implications and patient satisfaction of pharmacist-managed VTE care versus outpatient VTE care by a primary care physician. A single-center retrospective chart review was conducted on all patients seen at a pharmacist-managed VTE clinic for safety and reimbursement outcomes between August 1, 2018 and July 31, 2019. These data points were used to assess the primary endpoint of net gain per patient visit and secondary outcomes, including patient satisfaction score. The primary outcome median (IQR) for net gain per visit was $16.57 (16.57, 16.57) for the pharmacist-managed group and $64.37 (47.04, 64.37) in the physician-managed group with a 95% CI of 39.13-47.80. The median cost to the organization per visit was $4.96 (4.96, 4.96) for the pharmacist-managed group and $39.41 (23.65, 39.41) for the physician managed group with a 95% CI of 26.57-34.45. Statistical difference was also found for a secondary outcome of percentage of days covered for the pharmacist-managed group compared to the physician managed group, median (IQR) 100% (76,100) vs 92.2% (67.2, 98.9) respectfully, with a p-value of 0.043. The pharmacist-managed VTE clinic, although financially sustainable, provides significantly less net revenue per patient than physician managed clinics, demonstrating the need for increased payer recognition for pharmacists.

Deprescribing opportunities for elderly inpatients in an academic, safety-net health system.

BACKGROUND: Deprescribing is one way to reduce inappropriate polypharmacy in older adult patients. Although algorithms have been published to guide practitioners in deprescribing, it is still unknown how applicable these algorithms are to the general older adult population. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to assess the applicability of published deprescribing protocols in hospitalized older adult patients. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients aged 65 years or greater who were discharged from an internal medicine team between January 1, 2017 and June 30, 2017. Along with age and admission to internal medicine wards, other eligibility criteria were extracted from published deprescribing protocols. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients eligible for deprescribing based on published algorithms. Secondary endpoints included the proportion of patients receiving medications which were included in an algorithm, proportion of patients using medications included in the algorithms who were eligible for deprescribing, and proportion of patients with medications deprescribed during the hospital stay. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-seven patients were included and 124 (46.4%) used a medication with a published deprescribing algorithm. Thirty-four percent of all patients and 74% (92/124) of patients prescribed medications included in algorithms were eligible for deprescribing. Seven percent (6/92) of patients eligible for deprescribing had medications deprescribed during the hospital stay. CONCLUSION: The application of deprescribing algorithms in hospitalized older adults identified a significant opportunity to initiate deprescribing practices.

Implementation and Preliminary Clinical Outcomes of a Pharmacist-managed Venous Thromboembolism Clinic for Patients Treated With Rivaroxaban Post Emergency Department Discharge.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to describe the implementation, work flow, and differences in outcomes between a pharmacist-managed clinic for the outpatient treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) using a non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant versus care by a primary care provider (PCP). METHODS: Patients in the studied health system that are diagnosed with low-risk VTE in the emergency department are often discharged without hospital admission. These patients are treated with a non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant and follow-up either in a pharmacist-managed VTE clinic or with their PCP. Pharmacists in the VTE clinic work independently under a collaborative practice agreement (CPA). An evaluation of 34 patients, 17 in each treatment arm, was conducted to compare the differences in treatment-related outcomes of rivaroxaban when managed by a pharmacist versus a PCP. RESULTS: The primary endpoint was a 6-month composite of anticoagulation treatment-related complications that included a diagnosis of major bleeding, recurrent thromboembolism, or fatality due to either major bleeding or recurrent thromboembolism. Secondary endpoints included number of hospitalizations, adverse events, and medication adherence. There was no difference in the primary endpoint between groups with one occurrence of the composite endpoint in each treatment arm (p = 1.000), both of which were recurrent thromboembolic events. Medication adherence assessment was formally performed in eight patients in the pharmacist group versus no patients in the control group. No differences were seen among other secondary endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacist-managed clinic is a novel expansion of clinical pharmacy services that treats patients with low-risk VTEs with rivaroxaban in the outpatient setting. The evaluation of outcomes provides support that pharmacist-managed care utilizing standardized protocols under a CPA may be as safe as care by a PCP.