Integration of an Academic Medical Center and a Large Health System: Implications for Pharmacy.

Objective: To provide lessons learned for colleges of pharmacy and large health systems that are contemplating or in the process of undergoing integration. Method: This report describes the merger of an academic medical center and large health system with a focus on the implications of the merger for pharmacy from the perspectives of both a college of pharmacy and a health system's pharmacy services. Results: Overarching pharmacy issues to consider include having an administrator from the college of pharmacy directly involved in the merger negotiation discussions, having at least one high-level administrator from the college of pharmacy and one high-level pharmacy administrator from the health system involved in ongoing discussions about implications of the merger and changes that are likely to affect teaching, research, and clinical service activities, having focused discussions between college and health system pharmacy administrators on the implications of the merger on experiential and research-related activities, and anticipating concerns by clinical faculty members affected by the merger. Conclusion: The integration of a college of pharmacy and a large health system during the acquisition of an academic medical center can be challenging for both organizations, but appropriate pre- and post-merger discussions between college and health system pharmacy administrators that include a strategic planning component can assuage concerns and problems that are likely to arise, increasing the likelihood of a mutually beneficial collaboration.

Implementation of a pharmacy-managed program for the transition of chemotherapy to the outpatient setting.

PURPOSE: Implementation of a pharmacy-managed program for the transition of chemotherapy to the outpatient setting is described. SUMMARY: The University of Arizona Cancer Center and Banner-University Medical Center Tucson are affiliated not-for-profit academic medical centers in Tucson, Arizona, whose facilities include a hospital and ambulatory care clinics that maintain 3 outpatient infusion centers. The cancer center pharmacy currently employs 25 pharmacists, with 4 clinical pharmacists serving both the inpatient and outpatient treatment sites. A multidisciplinary team of staff members was assembled to address the transition of chemotherapy from inpatient to outpatient that included physicians, ambulatory clinical oncology pharmacists, finance, social workers, pharmacy staff, nursing staff, and information technology. The program was initiated in May 2014, with a 2-year postimplementation evaluation of our transition of chemotherapy to the outpatient setting. Chemotherapy order sets were developed in our electronic medical record for transitioning rituximab to the outpatient setting for inpatient chemotherapy orders as well as transitioning leukemia, lymphoma, and solid tumor chemotherapy regimens to be administered in the outpatient setting. Eighteen rituximab-containing regimens and 14 chemotherapy protocols were switched to the outpatient setting, with numerous variants of these regimens also created for outpatient only administration. The realized savings for high-cost chemotherapy transitioned to the outpatient setting with rituximab and clofarabine was $1,902,890. Over 747 inpatient bed days were saved, with an approximated cost savings to the health system of $1,402,866, with a cumulative cost savings to our health system of $3,305,756. CONCLUSION: This model for transitioning chemotherapy from the hospital to the outpatient setting enhanced access to care, decreased bed utilization in the hospital, and improved clinical and financial metrics.

Impact of a transition-of-care pharmacist during hospital discharge.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of a transition-of-care pharmacist during hospital discharge. SETTING: An academic medical center in southern Arizona. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: One pharmacist coordinated patient discharges in two inpatient units from August 2012 through July 2013. The pharmacist attended interdisciplinary discharge coordination meetings, ensured appropriate discharge orders, facilitated the filling of medications, and educated patients on discharge medications. PRACTICE INNOVATION: The implementation of a transition-of-care pharmacist to provide discharge medication reconciliation and education. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Readmission rates and medication interventions made by the pharmacist at discharge. RESULTS: The pharmacist was involved in the education of 1,011 patients and performed 452 interventions. There were more readmissions per month in the control year versus the year of pharmacist involvement (median 27.5 vs. 25, P = 0.0369). Interventions made by the pharmacist to improve discharge management included starting an omitted medication (23.5%), preventing multiple discharge problems (16.4%), avoiding duplication of therapy (15.7%), correcting insurance issues related to medication coverage (12.2%), changing an improper medication dose or quantity (11.3%), changing an inappropriate prescription for a medication (5.1%), preventing a drug interaction (3.3%), and resolving other problems (12.6%). The most common medication classes involved were antimicrobial agents (9.1%), anticoagulants (8%), antihyperglycemic agents (3.8%), other drug classes (24%), and multiple drug classes (35%). CONCLUSION: A transition-of-care pharmacist is in a unique position to educate patients on hospital discharge, to intercept a substantial number of medication errors, and to resolve insurance issues that may lead to adherence problems. These improvements in care may result in reduced hospital readmission rates.

Cost savings with interventions to reduce aerosolized bronchodilator use in mechanically ventilated patients.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this evaluation is to describe the cost savings associated with multimodal interventions aimed at reducing aerosolized bronchodilator use in mechanically ventilated patients without adversely affecting costs associated with length of stay (LOS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects were included in the analysis if they were aged more than 18 years, on mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit, and received aerosolized bronchodilators. Patients were excluded if they had reversible airway disease, an indication needing bronchodilator therapy. Patient data were obtained using the University Health System Consortium Clinical Data Base/Resource Manager (Chicago, IL) to compare outcomes during two 6-month periods separated by a 4-month intervention phase aimed to reduce bronchodilator use. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, sex, and LOS (observed and expected) between the preintervention and postintervention phases. Based on whole acquisition costs, the total cost of bronchodilators dispensed to the adult intensive care units over the 6-month postintervention phase was reduced by $56960 compared with the 6-month preintervention phase ($120562 vs $63602, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Multimodal efforts to restrict aerosolized bronchodilator therapy in mechanically ventilated patients were successful and led to sustained reductions in use that was associated with substantial reductions in cost, without affecting LOS.