Pursuing Pharmacoequity: Determinants, Drivers, and Pathways to Progress.

The United States pays more for medical care than any other nation in the world, including for prescription drugs. These costs are inequitably distributed, as individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups in the United States experience the highest costs of care and unequal access to high-quality, evidence-based medication therapy. Pharmacoequity refers to equity in access to pharmacotherapies or ensuring that all patients, regardless of race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or availability of resources, have access to the highest quality of pharmacotherapy required to manage their health conditions. Herein the authors describe the urgent need to prioritize pharmacoequity. This goal will require a bold and innovative examination of social policy, research infrastructure, patient and prescriber characteristics, as well as health policy determinants of inequitable medication access. In this article, the authors describe these determinants, identify drivers of ongoing inequities in prescription drug access, and provide a framework for the path toward achieving pharmacoequity.

Patient and medication-related factors associated with opioid use disorder after inpatient opioid administration.

BACKGROUND: Examine baseline factors associated with a new diagnosis of opioid use disorder (OUD) within 12 months postdischarge among opioid-naïve patients who received an opioid prescription in the inpatient setting. DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort (surgery and nonsurgery) study of opioid-naive patients who had at least one prescription for an opioid during an inpatient hospitalist between 2014 and 2017. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three thousand and thirty-three patients were included. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to determine baseline factors associated with a new OUD diagnosis within 12 months of discharge. Baseline covariates included demographic information, clinical characteristics, medication use, characteristics related to index hospital encounter, and discharge location. FINDINGS: 2.1% of the sample had a new diagnosis of OUD within a year after receiving an opioid during hospital admission. Patients between ages 25 and 34 had higher odds of a new OUD diagnosis compared to those 65 years of age and older (odds ratio [OR]: 6.98, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.02-12.1 [nonsurgery] and 4.69, 95% CI: 2.63-8.37 [surgery]). Patients from a high opioid geo-rank region had higher odds of OUD diagnosis (OR: 2.08, 95% CI: 1.31-3.31 [nonsurgery] and 1.80, 95% CI: 1.03-3.15 [surgery]). History of nonopioid-related drug disorder, tobacco use disorder, mental health conditions, and gabapentin use 12 months prior to index date and white race were associated with higher odds of new OUD diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to identify and evaluate factors associated with developing a new diagnosis of OUD following hospitalization. This can inform pain management strategies within the hospital and at discharge, and prompt clinicians to screen for risk of OUD.

Primary care provider payment models and adherence to anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is recommended for the prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation (AF). However, only 50%-60% of AF patients in the United States are treated with OAC, and 60% of them adhere to OAC therapy over time. OBJECTIVES: To (1) compare adherent use of OAC between AF patients who received primary care from practices involved in shared-savings models and patients who received care from practices not involved in shared savings and (2) examine the trend of adherence to OAC over time. Because OAC can save downstream medical costs associated with averted stroke events, we hypothesized that OAC adherence would be higher among patients receiving care from practices involved in shared savings. METHODS: Using 2014-2019 claims data from a health insurer in western Pennsylvania, we identified 20,637 AF patients from 2015-2018. Patients were followed from the first AF diagnosis (index date) for 12 months or until disenrollment. We categorized patients according to the payment model of the practice from which they received primary care: shared savings (n = 8,844) and no shared savings (n = 11,793). The primary outcome was adherent use of OAC therapy, which was defined as having at least 80% of the followup period covered with OAC. Secondary outcomes included adherent use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and adherent use of warfarin. We constructed logistic regression models to assess the association between involvement in shared savings and adherent use of OAC, while controlling for demographics, clinical characteristics, and index year. RESULTS: 34% of patients in the shared-savings group adhered to OAC, compared with 32.7% in the no shared-savings group (P = 0.04). After adjustment, adherence was higher for the shared-savings group for OAC (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.07, 95% CI = 1.01-1.14) and warfarin (aOR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.02-1.20) compared with the no shared-savings group. However, the odds of adherent use of DOACs did not statistically differ between shared savings and no shared savings (aOR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.91-1.08). The odds of adherent OAC use increased over time: the aOR of adherent use of OAC was 1.21 (95% CI = 1.09-1.34) for index year 2016; 1.50 (95% CI = 1.36-1.67) for 2017; and 1.78 (95% CI 1.60-1.98) for 2018, all compared with 2015. CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of primary care from a practice involved in shared savings was associated with a higher adherent use of OAC and warfarin for patients with atrial fibrillation. Furthermore, adherent use of OAC improved over time for both treatment groups. Our research demonstrates that the alignment of financial incentives between providers and insurers may improve the use of therapies with downstream cost-saving potential. DISCLOSURES: This project was funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (grant number K01HL142847). Hernandez has received consulting fees from Pfizer and BMS, outside of the submitted work. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

Emerging treatments for lupus nephritis: health equity considerations in clinical research and coverage.

DISCLOSURES: No funding was received for the writing of this commentary. The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Impact of community pharmacist-led interventions in chronic disease management on clinical, utilization, and economic outcomes: An umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: Chronic disease represents a significant burden to the United States (US) health care system, with approximately 50% of all adults in the US having one or more chronic disease conditions. Pharmacist-led chronic disease management interventions are of special interest since 80% of medical treatments involve the use of prescription drugs. Moreover, community pharmacists are among the most accessible health care professionals to provide care for populations with chronic diseases. The impact of care provided by community pharmacists isn't well defined, with interventions taking on diverse forms with varied effects on outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review is to summarize evidence from secondary literature on community pharmacist-led chronic disease management interventions and the impact on clinical, utilization, and economic outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and narrative reviews using MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE.com and Cochrane Library databases published between January 1, 2007 and October 17, 2017. The following data were extracted: citation details, review type, number of primary studies included, disease state, description of the intervention, outcomes assessed, and results. RESULTS: Our search strategy retrieved 2296 titles and abstracts of which 15 references met our inclusion criteria. Selected articles covered 7 main diseases -diabetes, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), hypertension, heart failure, hyperlipidemia, and human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS). Community pharmacist-led interventions mostly consisted of patient consultations and education. In diabetes, interventions achieved significant reductions in hemoglobin A1c, total cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL). Reviews also reported favorable reductions in blood pressure, improved medication adherence and reduced readmission rates in patients with heart failure, improved lung function in patients with respiratory conditions, and increased medication adherence in those with HIV/AIDs. Literature reporting economic and utilization outcomes were limited and mostly focused on pharmacy interventions in diabetes. In some cases, community pharmacy services demonstrated a decrease in medical and health care costs in patients with diabetes. CONCLUSION: We found that community pharmacists can improve clinical outcomes in a wide array of chronic diseases, including diabetes, hyperlipidemia, HIV/AIDS, cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. More robust studies are needed to further assess the impact of specific interventions on economic and utilization outcomes.

Effectiveness and Safety of Restarting Oral Anticoagulation in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation after an Intracranial Hemorrhage: Analysis of Medicare Part D Claims Data from 2010-2016.

BACKGROUND: In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who survive an anticoagulant-related intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), the benefits of restarting oral anticoagulation (OAC) remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we sought to determine the effectiveness and safety associated with resumption of OAC in atrial fibrillation patients who survive an ICH. METHODS: Using 2010-2016 Medicare claims data, we identified patients with non-valvular AF who experienced an OAC-related ICH and survived at least 6 weeks after the ICH (n = 1502). The primary outcomes included the composite of ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA), thromboembolism (TE), a composite of ischemic stroke/TIA and TE, recurrent ICH, and all-cause mortality. We constructed Cox proportional hazard models to evaluate the association between post-ICH OAC resumption, which was measured in a time-dependent manner, and the risk of primary outcomes, while controlling for a comprehensive list of covariates. RESULTS: Among patients who survived an ICH, 69% reinitiated OAC within 6 weeks of the event, and among those who resumed OAC, 83% restarted warfarin. There was no significant difference in the risk of ischemic stroke/TIA (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-1.21), TE (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.55-1.32), and ischemic stroke/TIA/TE (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.61-1.07) between post-ICH OAC use and non-use. Post-ICH OAC use was associated with a lower risk of recurrent ICH (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.41-0.95) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.37-0.62) compared with non-OAC use. CONCLUSIONS: In AF patients who survived an ICH, restarting OAC was not associated with a greater risk of recurrent ICH. Evidence from randomized controlled studies is needed to further clarify the clinical benefit of restarting OAC in this high-risk population. Further evaluation of which individuals benefit from restarting OAC is also needed to provide more clinical guidance.

Optimizing the Role of Community Pharmacists in Managing the Health of Populations: Barriers, Facilitators, and Policy Recommendations.

The shift to a value-based health care system has incentivized providers to implement strategies that improve population health outcomes while minimizing downstream costs. Given their accessibility and expanded clinical care models, community pharmacists are well positioned to join interdisciplinary care teams to advance efforts in effectively managing the health of populations. In this Viewpoints article, we discuss the expanded role of community pharmacists and potential barriers limiting the uptake of these services. We then explore strategies to integrate, leverage, and sustain these services in a value-based economy. Although community pharmacists have great potential to improve population health outcomes because of their accessibility and clinical interventions that have demonstrated improved outcomes, pharmacists are not recognized as merit-based incentive eligible providers and, as a result, may be underutilized in this role. Additional barriers include lack of formal billing codes, which limits patient access to services such as hormonal contraception; fragmentation of Medicare, which prevents alignment of medical and pharmaceutical costs; and continued fee-for-service payment models, which do not incentivize quality. Despite these barriers, there are several opportunities for continued pharmacist involvement in new care models such as patient-centered medical homes (PCMH), accountable care organizations, and other value-based payment models. Community pharmacists integrated within PCMHs have demonstrated improved hemoglobin A1c, blood pressure control, and immunization rates. Likewise, other integrated, value-based models that used community pharmacists to provide medication therapy management services have reported a positive return on investment in overall health care costs. To uphold these efforts and effectively leverage community pharmacist services, we recommend the following: (a) recognition of pharmacists as providers to facilitate full participation in performance-based models, (b) increased integration of pharmacists in emerging delivery and payment models with rapid cycle testing to further clarify the role and value of pharmacists, and (c) enhanced collaborative relationships between pharmacists and other providers to improve interdisciplinary care. DISCLOSURES: This article was funded by the National Association of Chain Drug Stores. The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to report.

Impact of community pharmacist-provided preventive services on clinical, utilization, and economic outcomes: An umbrella review.

Preventable diseases and late diagnosis of disease impose great clinical and economic burden for health care systems, especially in the current juncture of rising medical expenditures. Under these circumstances, community pharmacies have been identified as accessible venues to receive preventive services. This umbrella review aims to examine existing evidence on the impact of community pharmacist-provided preventive services on clinical, utilization, and economic outcomes in the United States (US). We included systematic reviews, narrative reviews and meta-analyses published in English between January 2007 and October 2017. Of 2742 references identified by our search strategy, a total of 13 research syntheses met our inclusion criteria. Included reviews showed that community pharmacists are effective at increasing immunization rates, supporting smoking cessation, managing hormonal contraception therapies, and identifying patients at high risk for certain diseases. Moreover, evidence suggests that community pharmacies are especially well-positioned for the provision of preventive services due to their convenient location and extended hours of operation. There is general agreement on the positive impact of community pharmacists in increasing access to preventive health, particularly among patients who otherwise would not be reached by other healthcare providers. The provision of preventive services at US community pharmacies is feasible and effective, and has potential for improving patient outcomes and health system efficiency. However, high-quality evidence is still lacking. As the healthcare landscape shifts towards a value-based framework, it will be important to conduct robust studies that further evaluate the impact of community pharmacist-provided preventive services on utilization and economic outcomes.