ASHP Survey of Health-System Specialty Pharmacy Practice: Practice Models, Operations, and Workforce - 2022

PURPOSE

The results of the 2022 American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) Survey of Health-System Specialty Pharmacy (HSSP) Practice: Practice Models, Operations, and Workforce are presented.

METHODS

A total of 273 leaders in HSSPs were contacted by email to complete a survey hosted using Qualtrics. The survey sample was compiled from ASHP member lists, the presence of a specialty pharmacy indicated in previous ASHP surveys, and outreach to ASHP member organizational leaders.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 35.9%. Most HSSPs dispense 30,000 or fewer specialty prescriptions annually. Most respondents have an annual revenue of $100 million or less, are part of a 340B-covered entity, operate one location, have 1 to 2 specialty pharmacy accreditations, dispense both nonspecialty and specialty medications, and employ an average of 15.5 pharmacists and 17.6 technicians. The majority (66.7%) dispense 50% or less of prescriptions written by internal providers due to payor and manufacturer network restrictions. Over one-third employ nonpharmacist and nontechnician professionals. Specialty pharmacists are involved in treatment decisions and therapy selection before prescription generation (69.8%), and 47.7% of respondents report pharmacists operating under collaborative practice agreements. Most (82.6%) offer experiential or formal education in specialty pharmacy. The top point of pride remains patient satisfaction and level of service. Top challenges include access to payor networks, the ability to hire and retain qualified staff, and shrinking reimbursement from payors.

CONCLUSION

The HSSP is a continually maturing integrated advanced practice model focused on providing patient-centric care to all patients and employees of the health system regardless of network status. HSSPs are raising the standards for quality in specialty pharmacy care.

2022 ASHP Survey of Health-System Specialty Pharmacy Practice: Clinical Services

PURPOSE

Results of the first ASHP national survey of clinical services provided by health-system specialty pharmacies (HSSPs) are presented.

METHODS

A survey questionnaire was developed by 26 HSSP contacts after reviewing available literature on the role and services of HSSPs. After pilot and cognitive testing resulting in a final questionnaire of 119 questions, a convenience sample of 441 leaders in HSSPs was contacted using email and invited to participate in the survey.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 29%. Almost half of respondents (48%) had offered pharmacy services for 7 years or more, and most (60%) dispensed more than 15,000 prescriptions annually. Respondents most commonly (42%) reported a specialist model wherein staff are dedicated to specific specialty disease states. Over half of respondents reported providing several medication access, pretreatment assessment, and initial counseling services to patients referred to them, regardless of whether the HSSP was used for medication fulfillment. All HSSP activities were noted to be documented in the electronic health record and visible to providers frequently or always. Almost all respondents noted that HSSP pharmacists have a role in specialty medication selection. Disease-specific outcomes were tracked in 95% of responding HSSPs, with 67% reporting that outcomes were used to drive patient monitoring. HSSPs were often involved in continuity of care services such as transitions of care (reported by 89% of respondents), referral to other health-system services (53%), and addressing social determinants of health (60%). Most respondents (80%) reported providing clinical education to specialty clinic staff, including medicine learners (62%). Though only 12% of respondents had dedicated outcomes research staff, many reported annually publishing (47%) or presenting (61%) outcomes research.

CONCLUSION

HSSPs are a clinical and educational resource for specialty clinics and have developed robust patient care services that encompass the patient journey from before specialty medication selection through treatment monitoring and optimization.

Implementation of an integrated ambulatory care pharmacist collaborative care workflow model in specialty clinics in a large academic health system

PURPOSE

Ambulatory care and specialty pharmacy practices are rapidly growing in tandem with the accelerated development of advanced therapies for complex disease states. A coordinated and standardized interprofessional team-based approach is critical to providing high-quality care to specialty patients on complex, expensive, and high-risk therapies. Yale New Haven Health System dedicated resources to the creation of a medication management clinic under a unique care model that integrates ambulatory care pharmacists within specialty clinics who coordinate with centralized specialty pharmacists. The new care model workflow encompasses ambulatory care pharmacists, specialty pharmacists, ambulatory care pharmacy technicians, specialty pharmacy liaisons, clinicians, and clinic support staff. The strategies employed to design, implement, and optimize this workflow to meet the increasing demand for pharmacy support in specialty care is discussed.

SUMMARY

The workflow incorporated key activities from highly diverse existing specialty pharmacy, ambulatory care pharmacy, and specialty clinic practices. Standard processes were developed for patient identification, referral placement, visit scheduling, encounter documentation, medication fulfillment, and clinical follow-up. Resources were created or optimized to support successful implementation, including an electronic pharmacy referral, specialty collaborative practice agreements to facilitate pharmacist-led comprehensive medication management, and a standardized note template. Communication strategies were developed to facilitate feedback and process updates. Enhancements focused on eliminating documentation redundancies and delegating nonclinical tasks to a dedicated ambulatory care pharmacy technician. The workflow was implemented in 5 ambulatory rheumatology, digestive health, and infectious diseases clinics. Pharmacists utilized this workflow to complete 1,237 patient visits, serving 550 individual patients over 11 months.

CONCLUSION

This initiative created a standard workflow to support an interdisciplinary standard of specialty patient care that is robust to accommodate planned expansion. This workflow implementation approach can serve as a road map for other healthcare systems with integrated specialty and ambulatory pharmacy departments undertaking similar models for specialty patient management.

Health-system specialty pharmacy role and outcomes: A review of current literature

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

Specialty medications can have life-altering outcomes for patients with complex diseases. However, their benefit relies on appropriate treatment selection, patients' ability to afford and initiate treatment, and ongoing treatment optimization based on patient response to therapy. Mounting research demonstrates the benefits of the health-system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) in improving specialty medication access, affordability, and outcomes. The purpose of this rapid review is to describe the currently reported role and function of HSSP pharmacists and outcomes reported with use of the HSSP model, and to identify gaps in the literature where more information is needed to better understand the HSSP model and outcomes.

SUMMARY

Current literature describes the role of HSSP pharmacists in facilitating patient access, affordability, and initiation and maintenance of specialty medications. Though it is clear HSSP pharmacists are involved in treatment monitoring, often through utilizing the electronic health record, more information is needed to elucidate the frequency, method, and extent of monitoring. Despite several valuable continuity of care services reported to be provided by HSSPs, the breadth and degree of standardization of these services remains unclear. There is minimal literature describing HSSP education and research involvement. HSSPs have reported significant benefits of this patient care model, as demonstrated by higher adherence and persistence; better clinical outcomes; financial benefits to patients, payers and the health system; better quality of care; higher patient and provider satisfaction with services, and highly efficient specialty pharmacy services. More literature comparing clinical and diagnosis-related outcomes in HSSP versus non-HSSP patients is needed.

CONCLUSION

HSSPs provide comprehensive, patient-centered specialty medication management that result in improved care across the continuum of the specialty patient journey and act as a valuable resource for specialty clinics and patients beyond medication management. Future research should build on the current description of HSSP services, how services affect patient outcomes, and the impact HSSP network restrictions.

Implementation of an integrated pharmacist collaborative care model in specialty disease state clinics

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

To expand health-system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) clinical continuity by implementing a specialty integrated model for clinical services in target sites.

SUMMARY

After evaluation of baseline clinical continuity and institutional goals, select clinics were identified as target sites to which to expand this integrated approach of a medication management clinic (MMC). In this MMC model, the key steps included engaging stakeholders, workflow training, optimization of the electronic health record, service evaluation, compliance with regulatory standards, and development of marketing strategies. The initial focus was development of innovative collaborative practice agreements (CPAs) to expand the scope of ambulatory care pharmacists' practice. Analysis of existing specialty and ambulatory workflows and technology was completed before development of the integrated workflow. Existing credentialing policies were updated to support expanded practices, and marketing collaterals were developed to support growth of pharmacy referrals. Meetings with stakeholders took place to ensure smooth transitions into integrated areas. Primary endpoints included clinical continuity, as determined by prescription orders placed within the health system sent to the HSSP, and number of signed referrals to MMC. Secondary endpoints included disease state-specific clinical outcomes as well as overall outcomes such as medication adherence, laboratory test adherence, immunization rates, and patient and clinician satisfaction. An MMC model was successfully implemented in 5 target specialty practices. Specialty clinic CPAs were developed for rheumatology and digestive health (including viral hepatitis). Since implementation, clinical continuity increased 23% and referrals exceeded the target at 165%. Data on secondary endpoints are currently being collected to evaluate quality of pharmacy services. Pharmacy services have enhanced patient care and received positive feedback from clinicians.

CONCLUSION

Expansion of integrated decentralized pharmacists into target practices has increased clinical continuity and the number of pharmacist referrals. Clinicians have regarded pharmacists as vital members of the team. Creation of additional specialty CPAs will be needed to support further growth in other clinics.

Financial Impact of Medically Integrated Pharmacy Interventions on Oral Oncolytic Prescriptions

PURPOSE:

As the utilization of oral cancer medications rises, it is vital that cancer centers track costs associated with these expensive medications. This research seeks to report the cost interventions associated with medically integrated pharmacies (MIPs) and mail-order pharmacies.

METHODS:

Data collection occurred from October 2016 through May 2021. Volunteers input data from their oncology practice into NCODA's Cost Avoidance and Waste Tracker tool, an innovative easy-to use tool that allows practices to document any cost saving interventions or waste occurrences.

RESULTS:

The Cost Avoidance and Waste Tracker tool was used by nearly 50 MIPs across the country. Specifically, 26 practices submitted cost avoidance data, and 37 practices tracked waste associated with oral oncolytic therapy. Among the 26 practices, 677 cost avoidance events led to a total cost avoidance of $7,057,053.73 US dollars (USD). The net cost avoidance for the MIP's was $6,510,971.28 USD compared with $546,082.45 USD for the external mail-order pharmacies. Among the 37 practices that reported waste, 768 events were reported, leading to a total drug waste of $11,275,642.16 USD. Of that, $8,935,612.15 USD was attributed waste from external mail-order pharmacies, whereas $2,429,592.01 USD worth of drug waste was reported from MIPs.

CONCLUSION:

Medically integrated dispensing of oral oncolytic therapies allows for increased pharmacy oversight, leading to increased cost avoidance and reduced waste for patients and third-party payers. Although these data are difficult to compare because of the complexity of workflows at different dispensing sites, the real-world financial differences between medically integrated dispensing and mail-order pharmacies appear to be significant.

NCODA's CAWT tool was used by nearly 50 medically integrated practices across the country; specifically, 26 practices submitted cost avoidance data, and 37 practices used the tool to track waste associated with oral oncolytic therapy. 677 cost avoidance events across the 26 practices led to a total cost avoidance of $7,057,053.73 USD, and 768 reported waste events across the 37 practices led to a total drug waste calculation totaling $11,275,642.16 USD.

Association between health system specialty pharmacy use and health care costs among national sample of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries

BACKGROUND: Health care expenditures are growing rapidly. There is a growing body of literature showing that health system specialty pharmacy is associated with improvement in clinical outcomes; however, there is a lack of data on its effect on health care costs and utilization. OBJECTIVE: To perform exploratory research assessing the association between health system specialty pharmacy use and health care costs and utilization. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted examining medical and pharmacy claims from 2018 and 2019 of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. Optum Advisory Service's proprietary deidentified Normative Health Information database was used, which includes claims, membership, and provider data for 12.6 million Medicare Advantage members. Members who filled a prescription at a health system specialty pharmacy and had a specialty provider participating in the health system specialty pharmacy care model in clinic were assigned to the intervention group. Members who did not use a health system specialty pharmacy but had the same provider (provider benchmark group) or different provider (network benchmark group) were considered as comparisons. The network benchmark group was further refined to match variation in health care cost due to geography. The primary outcome measure was total health care costs (across the medical and pharmacy benefit) on a per-patient per-month basis. Secondary outcomes were selected utilization drivers and cost subcomponents. Cost and utilization metrics were calculated on a risk-adjusted basis using Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Hierarchical Condition Categories (CMS-HCC) risk score methodology. Differences were assessed for categorical variables with chi-square tests, and 2-tailed t-tests were used for continuous variables. RESULTS: Of the analytic sample of 9,780 members used in this study, 208 (2.1%) used health system specialty pharmacy services. During the 2018 baseline period, total health care costs and utilization were similar after CMS-HCC risk score adjustment ($9,520 among health system specialty pharmacy users; $8,691 among the provider benchmark group; $9,510 among the network benchmark group) but lower in 2019 ($7,060, $7,683, and $8,152, respectively). The differences in 2019 were primarily driven by savings in pharmacy and free-standing physician-related costs. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a health system specialty pharmacy is associated with a lower health care cost. Further study is required to analyze how drug and disease-specific interactions influence total health care costs and utilization for health system specialty pharmacy populations. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Shields Health Solutions and completed with Optum Advisory Services, which provided all analysis and was the sole source of data. University of Massachusetts Medical School investigators were independent context experts, who volunteered their time for this study. Hellems is employed by Optum Advisory Services; Fasching and Smith are employed by Shields Health Solutions; and Soni and McManus are employed by the University of Massachusetts Medical School. Soni received support from the National Institute of General Medical Science (T32GM107000), National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (TL1-TR001454), and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (1F30HD091975-03). McManus's time was supported by R01HL126911, R01HL137734, R01HL137794, R01HL135219, R01HL136660, U54HL143541 from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. McManus has received research support from Bristol Myers Squibb, Care Evolution, Samsung, Apple Computer, Pfizer, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, Philips Research Institute, Flexcon, Fitbit; has consulted for Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Philips, Samsung Electronics, Rose Consulting, Boston Biomedical Associates, and FlexCon; and is also a member of the Operations Committee and Steering Committee for the GUARD-AF Study (NCT04126486), sponsored by Bristol Meyers Squibb and Pfizer. The other authors have nothing additional to disclose. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. The funders played no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Pharmacy benefit manager reform within Medicaid Managed Care: The pursuit of a model that preserves the intent of the 340B program

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

ASHP National Survey of Health-System Specialty Pharmacy Practice-2020

PURPOSE

Results of the first ASHP National Survey of Health-System Specialty Pharmacy Practice are presented.

METHODS

A sample of 230 leaders in health-system specialty pharmacies were contacted by email and invited to participate in a survey hosted using an online survey application. The survey sample was compiled from ASHP member lists, through review of data from other ASHP surveys indicating the presence of specialty pharmacies, and by outreach to ASHP member organizational leaders.

RESULTS

The response rate was 53.0%. Most health-system specialty pharmacies dispense 30,000 or fewer specialty prescriptions per year, have an annual revenue of $100 million or less, are part of an entity eligible to participate in the 340B Drug Pricing Program, operate 1 specialty pharmacy location, have at least 1 specialty pharmacy accreditation, dispense nonspecialty medications in addition to specialty medications, and employ an average of 13 pharmacists and 15 technicians. More than two-thirds of health-system specialty pharmacies (68.8%) dispense no more than half of the prescriptions written by their providers due to payer network restrictions or limited distribution drugs. The health-system specialty pharmacy practice model includes access to the electronic health record (100% of respondents), pharmacists and technicians dedicated to specific clinics (64.9% and 57.7%, respectively), specialty pharmacist involvement in treatment decisions and drug therapy selection prior to the prescription being written (64.9%), and documenting recommendations and progress notes in patients' electronic health record (93.4%). Most health-system specialty pharmacies (83.3%) offer experiential or formal education in specialty pharmacy. Top challenges that survey respondents expected to face in the next year included restricted access to payer networks and limited distribution drugs, 340B Drug Pricing Program changes, and shrinking reimbursement from payers.

CONCLUSION

The health-system specialty pharmacy represents an integrated advanced practice model that incorporates specialty medication-use management across the continuum of care.