Correlation between medication adherence using proportion of days covered and achieving viral suppression in patients living with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Medication adherence plays an important role for patients living with HIV and achieving the treatment goal of viral suppression. A goal adherence rate of at least 90% has been previously cited and endorsed; however, studies have demonstrated that lower rates of adherence may still lead to high rates of viral suppression. Adherence rates are increasingly being used by payers to assess pharmacy performance. OBJECTIVE: To determine if there is a difference in the odds of achieving viral suppression with a proportion of days covered (PDC) at least 90% compared with patients with lower PDC levels. Additionally, to determine if demographic factors, including age, ethnicity, sex, primary antiretroviral regimen type, payer type, primary pharmacy location, and refill assistance program enrollment, impact the odds of achieving viral suppression. METHODS: This retrospective observational study included patients who were aged 18 years or older; were diagnosed with HIV; had at least 2 occurrences of dispensed antiretrovirals between July 1, 2020, and June 30, 2021, within the health system; and had at least 1 HIV-RNA viral load recorded between these dates. PDC was calculated at the generic product identifier (GPI) level. For patients receiving multiple GPIs in this period, a weighted average PDC was calculated. A logistic regression analysis was performed, and odds ratios were calculated with 95% confidence for each demographic factor to determine correlation with viral suppression. RESULTS: 1,629 patients were included. Overall, 1,516 (93.1%) patients were virally suppressed. 106 (6.5%) patients had a PDC lower than 50% and 639 (39.2%) had a PDC of at least 90%. Of the patients with a PDC lower than 50%, 80 (75.5%) achieved viral suppression as did 617 (96.6%) patients with a PDC of at least 90%. Age and insurance type significantly impacted viral suppression. No statistically significant difference was found between the odds of achieving viral suppression until PDC was below 75%. Patients with a PDC of less than 50% or a PDC of 50% to less than 75% were less likely to achieve viral suppression than patients with a PDC of at least 90% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with adherence rates above 75% achieve similar results compared with patients with adherence rates above 90%. High population viral suppression may be achieved with as few as 39.2% of patients achieving a PDC greater than 90%. Using these results, the Pharmacy Quality Alliance and other guidance setting entities should consider lowering the at least 90% threshold as well as providing further guidance on how payers should use results and network benchmarking when creating pharmacy quality performance measures.

Anti-Xa activity by weight in critically ill patients receiving unfractionated heparin for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis.

PURPOSE: This study compared anti-Xa activity in critically ill patients receiving UFH for VTE prophylaxis between two weight groups (<100 kg vs ≥100 kg). METHODS: This prospective, observational study included critically ill patients on UFH 5000 or 7500 units every 8 h. A peak and trough anti-Xa activity assay was ordered for each patient at steady state. Goal peak anti-Xa activity was 0.1-0.3 units/mL. RESULTS: From March 2017 to June 2018, 75 patients were enrolled with 44 in the <100 kg group and 31 in the ≥100 kg group. There was no significant difference in the percentage of patients with peak anti-Xa activity within goal range between patients <100 kg and ≥ 100 kg (55.3% vs 35.7%, p = 0.12). The odds ratio for achieving peak anti-Xa activity within goal range as weight-based dose increased was 1.03 (95% CI 0.99-1.07). No differences were found in trough anti-Xa activity, VTE, bleeding, length of stay, or death. CONCLUSIONS: Though only one-third of patients ≥100 kg had peak anti-Xa activity within goal range, no significant difference was found between the weight groups. Additional prospective studies with adequate sample sizes are warranted to further investigate appropriate weight-based dosing of UFH in critically ill patients.

Evaluation of the Brief Alcohol Withdrawal Scale Protocol at an Academic Medical Center.

OBJECTIVES: The standard of care for treatment of alcohol withdrawal is symptom-triggered dosing of benzodiazepines using a withdrawal scale. Abbreviated scales are desired for clinician efficiency. The objective of this study was to evaluate the use of the 5-item Brief Alcohol Withdrawal Scale (BAWS) protocol. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective, observational, cohort study assessed patients ordered the BAWS protocol between August 1, 2016 and July 31, 2017. Data were collected on benzodiazepine exposure, duration of treatment, withdrawal severity, agitation, over-sedation, and delirium while being treated for alcohol withdrawal. Comparisons were made to analyze predetermined patient subgroups. RESULTS: Seven hundred ninety-nine patients were initiated on the BAWS protocol. Patients received a median (IQR) of 0 (0-4) lorazepam equivalents (LEs) and were on the BAWS protocol for a median (IQR) of 44.9 (22.4-77.2) hours. Of the patients that received benzodiazepines while on the BAWS protocol, a median (IQR) of 4 (2-11) LEs were given. Seventeen (2.1%) patients had severe withdrawal. Days of agitation, over-sedation, and delirium were minimal, with the median (IQR) of 0 (0-0). Few patients received adjunctive medications for symptom management. Intensive care unit (ICU) patients had more severe withdrawal than non-ICU patients, but received the same cumulative benzodiazepine dose. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients on the BAWS protocol received little-to-no benzodiazepines; severe withdrawal, agitation, delirium, or over-sedation were uncommon. This is the first evaluation of the BAWS protocol on a diverse population of hospitalized patients.

Expansion of inpatient clinical pharmacy services through reallocation of pharmacists.

PURPOSE: The redesign of an inpatient pharmacy practice model through reallocation of pharmacy resources in order to expand clinical services is described. METHODS: A pharmacy practice model change was implemented at a nonprofit academic medical center to meet the increasing demand for direct patient care services. In order to accomplish this change, the following steps were completed: reevaluation of daily tasks and responsibilities, reallocation of remaining tasks to the most appropriate pharmacy staff member, determination of the ideal number of positions needed to complete each task, and reorganization of the model into a collection of teams. Data were collected in both the preimplementation and postimplementation periods to assess the impact of the model change on operational workflow and clinical service expansion. RESULTS: The mean ± S.D. times to order verification were 17 ± 52 minutes during the preimplementation period and 21 ± 70 minutes in the postimplementation period (p < 0.001). During the 3 months before and after implementation of the model change, the mean number of medication reconciliations performed increased from 114 to 144. After implementation of the model change, total interventions increased 194%. Notably, there was a 736% increase in the number of interventions focused on facilitating safe discharge. CONCLUSION: A pharmacy practice model change was successfully implemented by reallocating existing pharmacist and technician roles and increasing incorporation of pharmacy residents and students. This change led to an expansion of direct patient care coordination services without negatively affecting the operational responsibilities of the pharmacy or the need to hire additional staff.

Implementation of transitions-of-care services through acute care and outpatient pharmacy collaboration.

PURPOSE: The implementation of a practice model designed to reduce hospital readmissions through optimal deployment of pharmacy staff on multidisciplinary care collaboration teams is described. SUMMARY: In response to Affordable Care Act provisions aimed at reducing preventable hospital readmissions, the pharmacy department at The Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH) led the implementation of a new pharmacy services model spanning both inpatient and outpatient settings. Key components of the model include (1) increased pharmacist participation in multidisciplinary rounds, (2) targeted medication reconciliation and patient education, (3) postdischarge phone monitoring of selected patients, and (4) bedside discharge medication delivery performed by a "transitions pharmacist extender." Incorporation of care coordination activities into the daily workflow has increased the rate of patient education on high-risk medications and allowed for affordable and effective medication regimens to be designed and prescriptions to be filled prior to patient discharge. The ultimate goal is enhanced multidisciplinary collaboration to decrease hospital readmissions by increasing medication adherence and patients' understanding of medications. CONCLUSION: The inpatient and outpatient pharmacy teams at JHH collaborated to improve their understanding of patients' medication use prior to admission through targeted medication reconciliation, education of patients on high-risk medications initiated during admission, and development of affordable and practical medication regimens that patients would receive in hand on discharge. A pharmacy team model was developed to ensure that these services are adequately provided and enhance patient understanding of the importance of medications for acute and chronic disease state management.

Development and implementation of a postdischarge home-based medication management service.

PURPOSE: The development and implementation of a postdischarge home-based, pharmacist-provided medication management service are described. SUMMARY: A work group composed of pharmacy administrators, clinical specialists, physicians, and nursing leadership developed the structure and training requirements to implement the service. Eligible patients were identified during their hospital admission by acute care pharmacists and consented for study participation. Pharmacists and pharmacy residents visited the patient at home after discharge and conducted medication reconciliation, provided patient education, and completed a comprehensive medication review. Recommendations for medication optimization were communicated to the patient's primary care provider, and a reconciled medication list was faxed to the patient's community pharmacy. Demographic and medication-related data were collected to characterize patients receiving the home-based service. A total of 50 patients were seen by pharmacists in the home. Patient education provided by the home-based pharmacists included monitoring instructions, adherence reinforcement, therapeutic lifestyle changes, administration instructions, and medication disposal instructions. Pharmacists provided the following recommendations to providers to optimize medication regimens: adjust dosage, suggest laboratory tests, add medication, discontinue medication, need prescription for refills, and change product formulation. Pharmacists identified a median of two medication discrepancies per patient and made a median of two recommendations for medication optimization to patients' primary care providers. CONCLUSION: The implementation of a post-discharge, pharmacist-provided home-based medication management service enhanced the continuity of patient care during the transition from hospital to home. Pharmacists identified and resolved medication discrepancies, educated patients about their medications, and provided primary care providers and community pharmacies with a complete and reconciled medication list.