Community Pharmacy Medicare Part D Consultations: Plan-Switching Decisions and Chronic Medication Adherence.

OBJECTIVES: (1)To compare Part D plan switching for users and nonusers of a pharmacy-led Medicare Part D consultation service and (2) to evaluate the effect of service use on chronic medication adherence. METHODS: This was a longitudinal study, occurring in one independently owned community pharmacy in Iowa. Medicare Part D beneficiaries who used the service were compared to nonusers. Dispensing data were used to compare planswitching and the effect of service use on chronic medication adherence between service users and nonusers. Proportion of days covered (PDC) was used to evaluate medication adherence. RESULTS: In the 2017 and 2018 plan year, 79 and 138 Medicare beneficiaries used the service, respectively. These individuals were compared to 849 Medicare beneficiaries and a random sample of 101 beneficiaries in respective years. The respective switching rates for service users in 2018 and 2019 plan year were 43% and 15.9%, compared to 4% switching rates in both years for nonusers. Using the Medicare Part D consultation yielded a statistically significant positive effect on switching in both plan years (P values < .05) and a statistically significant positive effect on PDC between years (P value <.05). CONCLUSION: The use of a pharmacist-led Medicare Part D consultation resulted in increased plan switching and improved chronic medication adherence.

The relationship between contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and breast reconstruction, complications, breast-related procedures, and costs: A population-based study of health insurance data.

BACKGROUND: Increasingly, women are undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for the treatment of unilateral breast cancer. The relationship between contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and breast reconstruction, postsurgical complications, additional breast-related procedures, and cost has not received the attention it deserves. METHODS: Data from the New York comprehensive, all-age, all-payer, Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System were queried to identify patients undergoing unilateral mastectomy or contralateral prophylactic mastectomy from 2008 to 2010. We identified the complications and breast-related procedures within a 2-y follow-up period. Costs of the index operation and subsequent follow-up were estimated. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Of 12,959 women identified, 10.7% underwent contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. On univariate analysis, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy was positively associated with breast reconstruction, complications, and additional breast-related procedures. Rates of complications were greater for women who had contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (29.5% vs 20.8% for unilateral mastectomy group; P < .001), but not after stratifying by breast reconstruction. Additional breast-related procedures were more common in the contralateral prophylactic mastectomy group than in the unilateral mastectomy group, but only for those who underwent breast reconstruction (82.8% vs 72.1%; P < .001). Unadjusted costs were greater for women with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy than with unilateral mastectomy but did not differ between the groups after adjusting for breast reconstruction and additional breast-related procedures. CONCLUSION: Women who elected contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in this population-based study were more likely to have both breast reconstruction and additional breast-related procedures than women with unilateral mastectomy. The greater rates of complications and costs associated with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy were explained by breast reconstruction and additional breast-related procedures. Surgeons should counsel patients regarding the increased cost and likelihood of undergoing additional, non-complication-related procedures after contralateral prophylactic mastectomy with breast reconstruction.

The Initial Use of the Home Medication Experience Questionnaire (HOME-Q) in Community-Based Pharmacy.

The Home Medication Experience Questionnaire (HOME-Q) was developed to systematically gather information on the medication experience of patients. The objectives of this study were to (1) assess the frequencies of medication experience issues for a sample of patients and (2) report pharmacist recommendations to address issues and patient implementation of recommendations. This study used a single-group design with 3-month follow-up. A convenience sample of patients aged 55 years and older and taking 4 or more chronic medications self-administered the HOME-Q and discussed responses with a pharmacist from 2 community pharmacies. A researcher called or visited participants at 3 months to readminister the HOME-Q and inquire about recommendations. Thirty-three patients completed questionnaires, and 30 participated in the follow-up. At 3 months, the HOME-Q median did not decrease (4 at both administrations). There were 51 pharmacist interventions/recommendations, and 47% were reported adopted. The HOME-Q prompted pharmacists to respond to medication experience issues that may not have been identified otherwise. More work is needed to test the impact of the HOME-Q and better understand medication experience discussions between patients and pharmacists.

Provider beliefs on the Barriers and Facilitators to Prescription Monitoring Programs and Mandated Use.

Background: Underutilization of Prescription monitoring programs (PMP), especially in states where participation is voluntary could limit their impact against opioid epidemic. Objectives: To (1) examine PMP use among Iowa healthcare providers (HCPs); (2) identify factors prompting and impeding PMP use, and (3) assess beliefs toward mandating PMP use. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of Iowa HCPs was conducted using a 12-item questionnaire. Survey domains include demographics, current PMP utilization, conditions and barriers associated with PMP use, and perspectives on use mandates. Analyses were based on descriptive statistics, proportional odds and poisson regression models. Results: There were 704 usable responses. Almost all respondents were registered with the PMP with dentists having the lowest rate (p < .001). Nurse practitioners consulted the PMP for the largest proportion of prescriptions, while pharmacists and dentists used significantly less (p < .001). Lack of time was the most common reported barrier impeding PMP use. Red flag behaviors and unfamiliarity with patient were the most common conditions prompting PMP review. HCPs estimated their use of the PMP would significantly increase if integrated into their electronic health records (p < .001). Almost half of HCPs held the opinion that PMP use should never be mandated, although inter-provider variation was present with nurse practitioners most amenable to mandates. Discussion: HCPs displayed variation in PMP use. EMR integration appears to be a strategy for increasing PMP use. There was resistance to mandating PMP use for all controlled substances prescribed and dispensed, with some interest in mandates for new patients only or new controlled substance prescriptions only.

Factors Influencing Judgments to Consult Prescription Monitoring Programs: A Factorial Survey Experiment.

BACKGROUND: Prescription monitoring programs (PMPs) can provide health care professionals with valuable information. However, few studies have explored providers' decision making for accessing PMPs. AIMS: This study aimed to identify provider characteristics and situational factors most influencing perceived importance of consulting the PMP for patients in a simulated context. DESIGN: The study used a cross-sectional factorial survey. SETTINGS: The survey was administered electronically. PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS: Community pharmacists, advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), and physicians in Iowa. METHODS: Participants were recruited by mail which included a link to the online survey. The survey consisted of demographic questions, eight randomly generated vignettes, and one ranked item. The vignettes described a hypothetical prescription using eight experimental variables whose levels were randomly varied. Respondents evaluated each vignette for importance to access the PMP. Analyses used linear mixed-effects models in R (Version 3.5.0). RESULTS: A total of 138 responses were available for multilevel analysis. Women, physicians, and APRNs rated it more important to consult the PMP for a given prescription compared with men and pharmacists. Accessing a PMP was perceived as more important with cash payments, quantity dispensed, suspicion for misuse, hydromorphone and oxycodone prescriptions, and headache. Advancing age, postoperative pain, and anxiety or sleep indications were associated with less importance. CONCLUSIONS: Age, indication for prescribing, misuse, and payment mode each independently had greater importance to providers in accessing the PMP. This was the first study to isolate the influence of different controlled substances on how important it was to consult the PMP.

Pilot and Feasibility of Combining a Medication Adherence Intervention and Group Diabetes Education for Patients with Type-2 Diabetes.

Introduction: Controlling diabetes typically requires self-management and medications. Community pharmacists are positioned to support patients with both. Methods: This study assessed the feasibility and potential benefit of combining pharmacist-provided group diabetes education (up to eight sessions) and medication synchronization using a three-group design. Data were collected using pre-post paper surveys and electronic health record data. One group received both education and synchronization services, another group received medication synchronization only, and a third served as control. Results: Of 300 contacted patients, eighteen patients participated in group diabetes education, 14 had medication synchronization only, and 12 comprised a control group. There was little change in HbA1c over the study period. Medication adherence appeared to be positively aided by medication synchronization, although all groups started with high adherence. Some medication beliefs and self-care activities may have been positively impacted by group diabetes education. Both groups receiving medication synchronization were satisfied. Conclusions: Participants strongly agreed they would recommend group diabetes education from the study pharmacy to a friend and were satisfied with medication synchronization; however, it was difficult to tell if there was a synergistic effect by combining the two services. Reimbursement for diabetes education was not obtained despite multiple attempts, hindering sustainability.