The effect of interactive reminders on medication adherence: A randomized trial.

Expanding on evidence that interventions to improve health are more effective when informed by behavioral science, we explore whether reminders designed to harness behavioral science principles can improve medication adherence. We conducted a randomized controlled trial with 46,581 U.S. participants with commercial or Medicare Advantage insurance from Humana. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions. Participants in the usual care condition only received standard mailings that the insurer usually sends. In addition to the standard mailings, participants in the other three conditions also received (1) mailings that reminded them to take a target medication (basic reminder condition), (2) reminders that prompted them to predict their medication adherence in the next 30days (prediction condition), or (3) reminders that prompted them to commit to a self-determined level of adherence for the next 30days (commitment condition). We sent these mailings once a month for three months from November, 2014 through January, 2015, and tracked prescription refills. We find that, during the mailing period, reminders increased adherence by 0.95 percentage points (p<0.05), and this effect was driven by the prediction and commitment conditions; during the three-month post-mailing period, reminders increased adherence by 0.98 percentage points (p<0.05), and this effect was driven by the basic reminder and commitment conditions. The reminders increased medication adherence by 0.7 pills per dollar spent over our 181day study period. Trial registry name: Effect of Reminders on Adherence. Registration identification number: NCT02411006 URL for the registry: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02411006.

Synchronized prescription refills and medication adherence: a retrospective claims analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Medication adherence is often suboptimal, especially among patients on multiple chronic medications. We examined the association between synchronized medication refill schedules-which typically reduce organizational effort and logistical demands-and adherence. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study among patients enrolled in Medicare Advantage prescription drug plans. METHODS: We used 2012 pharmacy, medical, and enrollment data linked with consumer meta-data for Medicare patients filling 2 or more maintenance prescriptions for antihypertensives, lipid-lowering agents, antidiabetic agents, antidepressants, and/or antiosteoporotic agents. Medication adherence for the year was measured using the proportion of days covered (PDC) at the drug class level. Patients were deemed adherent if drug class PDC was ≥0.80. Outcomes were compared between 1:1 propensity score-matched patients on synchronized versus nonsynchronized refill schedules for maintenance medications. RESULTS: The synchronized refill group showed better adherence than the control group, although the magnitude of effects varied by drug class and specific outcome measure. Mean PDC scores ranged from 0.02 higher for antihypertensives to 0.07 higher for antidepressants in the synchronized refill group relative to the control group (P <.01). Further, compared with the control group, a larger proportion of synchronized refill group members were deemed adherent, ranging from 6 percentage points higher for antihypertensives to 15 percentage points higher for lipid-lowering agents (P <.01). Differences between the synchronized and control groups were larger among exclusive users of retail versus mail order pharmacies for maintenance medications. CONCLUSIONS: Synchronized medication refill schedules were associated with better medication adherence, particularly for patients filling maintenance medications exclusively at retail pharmacies.

A Synchronized Prescription Refill Program Improved Medication Adherence.

Synchronizing medication refills-renewing all medications at the same time from the same pharmacy-is an increasingly popular strategy to improve adherence to medication regimens, but there has been little research regarding its effectiveness. In light of increasing policy interest, we evaluated the impact of a pilot refill synchronization program implemented by a large national insurer. A random sample of Medicare Advantage patients receiving mail-order refills for common maintenance medications (antihypertensive, lipid-lowering, or antidiabetic agents) were invited to join the program and followed for twelve months. On average, the absolute increase in the proportion of patients deemed adherent during follow-up was 3-10 percentage points for the intervention group, compared to 1-5 percentage points for the control group. Patients with poorer baseline adherence showed larger increases in the absolute proportion deemed adherent in intervention (23-26 percentage points) compared to a control group (13-15 percentage points). Synchronizing refills might be a promising intervention to improve adherence to maintenance medications, especially among Medicare patients with low baseline adherence.

Two Randomized Controlled Pilot Trials of Social Forces to Improve Statin Adherence among Patients with Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Medication nonadherence is an important obstacle to cardiovascular disease management. OBJECTIVE: To improve adherence through real-time feedback based on theories of how social forces influence behavior. DESIGN: Two randomized controlled pilot trials called PROMOTE and SUPPORT. Participants stored statin medication in wireless-enabled pill bottles that transmitted adherence data to researchers. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with diabetes and a history of low statin adherence based on pharmacy refills (i.e., Medication Possession Ratio [MPR] <80% in the pre-randomization screening period). INTERVENTION: In PROMOTE, each participant was randomized to 1) weekly messages in which that participant's statin adherence was compared to that of other participants (comparison), 2) weekly summaries of that participant's statin adherence (summary), or 3) control. In SUPPORT, each participant identified another person (the Medication Adherence Partner [MAP]) to receive reports about that participant's adherence, and was randomized to 1) daily reports to MAP, 2) weekly reports to MAP, 3) reports to MAP only if dose was missed, or 4) control. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURE: Adherence measured by pill bottle. KEY RESULTS: Among 45,000 health plan members contacted by mail, <1% joined the trial. Participants had low baseline MPRs (median = 60%, IQR 41-72%) but high pill-bottle adherence (90% in PROMOTE, 92% in SUPPORT) during the trial. In PROMOTE (n = 201) and SUPPORT (n = 200), no intervention demonstrated significantly better adherence vs. CONTROL: In a subgroup of PROMOTE participants with the lowest pre-study MPR, pill-bottle-measured adherence in the comparison arm (89%) was higher than the control (86%) and summary (76%) arms, but differences were non-significant (p = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Interventions based on social forces did not improve medication adherence vs. control over a 3-month period. Given the low percentage of invited individuals who enrolled, the studies may have attracted participants who required little encouragement to improve adherence other than study participation.

"Hidden" value: how indirect benefits of health information exchange further promote sustainability.

BACKGROUND: Health information exchanges (HIEs) have already demonstrated direct value in controlling the costs associated with utilization of emergency department services and with inpatient admissions from the emergency department. HIEs may also affect inpatient admissions originating from outside of the emergency department. OBJECTIVE: To assess if a potential association exists between a community-based HIE being used in hospital emergency departments and inpatient admissions emanating from outside of the emergency department. METHODS: The study design was observational, with an eligible population of fully insured plan members who sought emergency department care on at least 2 occasions over the study period between December 2008 and March 2010. Utilization data, obtained from medical and pharmacy claims, were matched to a list of emergency department utilizers where HIE querying could have occurred. Of the eligible members, 1482 underwent propensity score matching to create two 325-member groups-(1) a test group in which the HIE database was queried for all members in all of their emergency department visits, and (2) a control group in which the HIE database was not queried for any of the members in any emergency department visit. RESULTS: A post-propensity matching analysis showed that although the test group had more admissions per 1000 members overall (199 more admissions per 1000 members) than the control group, these admissions might have been more appropriate for inpatient treatment in general. The relative risk of an admission by the time of a first emergency department visit was 28% higher in the control group than the test group, although by the time of a second emergency department visit, it was only 8% lower in the control group. Moreover, test group admissions resulted in less time spent as inpatients, which was denoted by bed days per 1000 members (771 fewer bed days per 1000 members) and by average length of stay (4.27 days per admission for all admissions and 0.95 days per admission when catastrophic cases were removed). CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, HIE availability in the care of patients presenting to the emergency department is associated with fewer inpatient hospital days and a shorter length of stay, even when catastrophic cases are removed from the analysis. Although many factors can play a role in this finding, it is possible that HIE promotion of more appropriate hospital admissions from outside of the emergency department is one cause. Such "indirect" value shows that the return on investment found by HIEs may even be greater than previously calculated. Additional study is warranted to further the business case for HIE investment for the various stakeholders who are interested in supporting HIE sustainability.

The business case for payer support of a community-based health information exchange: a humana pilot evaluating its effectiveness in cost control for plan members seeking emergency department care.

BACKGROUND: As emergency department utilization continues to increase, health plans must limit their cost exposure, which may be driven by duplicate testing and a lack of medical history at the point of care. Based on previous studies, health information exchanges (HIEs) can potentially provide health plans with the ability to address this need. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of a community-based HIE in controlling plan costs arising from emergency department care for a health plan's members. Albert Tzeel. METHODS: The study design was observational, with an eligible population (N = 1482) of fully insured plan members who sought emergency department care on at least 2 occasions during the study period, from December 2008 through March 2010. Cost and utilization data, obtained from member claims, were matched to a list of persons utilizing the emergency department where HIE querying could have occurred. Eligible members underwent propensity score matching to create a test group (N = 326) in which the HIE database was queried in all emergency department visits, and a control group (N = 325) in which the HIE database was not queried in any emergency department visit. RESULTS: Post-propensity matching analysis showed that the test group achieved an average savings of $29 per emergency department visit compared with the control group. Decreased utilization of imaging procedures and diagnostic tests drove this cost-savings. CONCLUSIONS: When clinicians utilize HIE in the care of patients who present to the emergency department, the costs borne by a health plan providing coverage for these patients decrease. Although many factors can play a role in this finding, it is likely that HIEs obviate unnecessary service utilization through provision of historical medical information regarding specific patients at the point of care.