Characteristics of Mail-Order Pharmacy Users: Results From the Medical Expenditures Panel Survey

Did Access to Ambulatory Care Moderate the Associations Between Visit Mode and Ancillary Services Utilization Across the COVID-19 Pandemic Period?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

In recent years, 2 circumstances changed provider-patient interactions in primary care: the substitution of virtual (eg, video) for in-person visits and the COVID-19 pandemic. We studied whether access to care might affect patient fulfillment of ancillary services orders for ambulatory diagnosis and management of incident neck or back pain (NBP) and incident urinary tract infection (UTI) for virtual versus in-person visits.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the electronic health records of 3 Kaiser Permanente Regions to identify incident NBP and UTI visits from January 2016 through June 2021. Visit modes were classified as virtual (Internet-mediated synchronous chats, telephone visits, or video visits) or in-person. Periods were classified as prepandemic [before the beginning of the national emergency (April 2020)] or recovery (after June 2020). Percentages of patient fulfillment of ancillary services orders were measured for 5 service classes each for NBP and UTI. Differences in percentages of fulfillments were compared between modes within periods and between periods within the mode to assess the possible impact of 3 moderators: distance from residence to primary care clinic, high deductible health plan (HDHP) enrollment, and prior use of a mail-order pharmacy program.

RESULTS

For diagnostic radiology, laboratory, and pharmacy services, percentages of fulfilled orders were generally >70-80%. Given an incident NBP or UTI visit, longer distance to the clinic and higher cost-sharing due to HDHP enrollment did not significantly suppress patients' fulfillment of ancillary services orders. Prior use of mail-order prescriptions significantly promoted medication order fulfillments on virtual NBP visits compared with in-person NBP visits in the prepandemic period (5.9% vs. 2.0%, P=0.01) and in the recovery period (5.2% vs. 1.6%, P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Distance to the clinic or HDHP enrollment had minimal impact on the fulfillment of diagnostic or prescribed medication services associated with incident NBP or UTI visits delivered virtually or in-person; however, prior use of mail-order pharmacy option promoted fulfillment of prescribed medication orders associated with NBP visits.

Associations between pharmacy choice and influenza vaccination: Mail order vs community pharmacy users

BACKGROUND: Despite the effectiveness of vaccines, US adult vaccination rates remain low. This is especially true for the influenza vaccine, which is recommended annually and widely available. The accessibility of community pharmacies as convenient places to receive influenza vaccines has been shown to increase uptake. However, use of mail order pharmacies may reduce in-person pharmacist encounters and reduce the likelihood that users receive annual influenza vaccines. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between the type of pharmacy a patient uses and their likelihood of receiving an influenza vaccine. METHODS: This cross-sectional cohort study used the 2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to observe noninstitutionalized US adult pharmacy users. Pharmacy type was dichotomized into community use only vs any mail order pharmacy use. Multivariable weighted logistic regression was used to identify associations between the type of pharmacy used and influenza vaccination, adjusting for sociodemographic, health status, and health care access and utilization confounders. All analyses were stratified by age (< 65 and ≥ 65 years). RESULTS: The aged younger than 65 years and aged 65 years and older samples had 8,074 and 4,037 respondents who represented 95,930,349 and 40,163,276 weighted observations, respectively. Compared with community pharmacy users, mail order users were more likely to be aged 65 and older, be White, have high income, and have a usual source of care (P < 0.0001). Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) for influenza vaccination were significantly lower among community pharmacy users than mail order users among individuals aged younger than 65 years (AOR=0.71; 95% CI = 0.580.87) but was not significant among those aged 65 years and older (AOR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.69-1.09). CONCLUSIONS: Community pharmacy users aged younger than 65 years are less likely to receive the influenza vaccine than their mail order pharmacy user counterparts. These counterintuitive results could be caused by residual confounding due to differences in factors that influence pharmacy use type and vaccination likelihood. Further exploration is needed to account for differences between these populations that independently drive vaccination choice. DISCLOSURES: Dr Burbage was a fellow in the Real World Evidence, Population Health and Quality Research Postdoctoral Fellowship Program in collaboration with University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy and Pharmacy Quality Alliance, and supported by Janssen Scientific Affairs at the time of this study. She is now employed by Janssen Scientific Affairs. Dr Parikh is an employee of Pharmacy Quality Alliance. Dr Campbell was employed by Pharmacy Quality Alliance at the time of the study. He is now employed by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. Dr Ramachandran has received an unrelated research contract with Pharmacy Quality Alliance. Dr Gatwood has received vaccine-related research grants from Merck & Co. and GlaxoSmithKline unrelated to this project and consulting fees for a vaccine-related expert panel with Merck & Co. unrelated to this manuscript and is an advisory board member with Janssen Scientific Affairs. Dr. Urick was employed by the UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy at the time of this writing and is currently employed by Prime Therapeutics. He has received community pharmacy-related consulting fees from Cardinal Health and Pharmacy Quality Solutions unrelated to this work. Dr Ozawa has a research grant from Merck & Co. unrelated to this project. This project did not receive funding from any agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Home Drug Delivery Service from the Perspective of Community Pharmacy Staff in Saudi Arabia

Background: In response to COVID-19, many big pharmacy chains in Saudi Arabia have started to provide home drug delivery services. This study aims to understand home drug delivery service from the perspective of community pharmacists in Saudi Arabia. Also, the study investigates the obstacles that may limit the use of home drug delivery service. Methods: A cross-sectional self-reported survey was distributed from February 2021 to May 2021. Descriptive analysis of sociodemographic characteristics was conducted and presented. Frequencies and percentages were calculated for all variables. Results: A total of 965 community pharmacists were surveyed. Most of the pharmacists, (73.5%) were young, aged 23 to 34 years old. The vast majority of the participants, (93.6%), said that the service will improve drug adherence. The lack of required knowledge and skills among pharmacists could be the main obstacle to implement home drug delivery service (34%). A shortage in the number of community pharmacists was the second main obstacle (24%). Conclusion: Home delivery services in the future may largely replace the tradition of going in person to the pharmacy. There are obstacles that may limit the full use of the service like shortage in number of pharmacists and the lack of required training.

Effects of Real-time Prescription Benefit Recommendations on Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Rising drug costs contribute to medication nonadherence and adverse health outcomes. Real-time prescription benefit (RTPB) systems present prescribers with patient-specific out-of-pocket cost estimates and recommend lower-cost, clinically appropriate alternatives at the point of prescribing.

Objective

To investigate whether RTPB recommendations lead to reduced patient out-of-pocket costs for medications.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cluster randomized trial, medical practices in a large, urban academic health system were randomly assigned to RTPB recommendations from January 13 to July 31, 2021. Participants were adult patients receiving outpatient prescriptions during the study period. The analysis was limited to prescriptions for which RTPB could recommend an available alternative. Electronic health record data were used to analyze the intervention's effects on prescribing. Data analyses were performed from August 20, 2021, to June 8, 2022.

Interventions

When a prescription was initiated in the electronic health record, the RTPB system recommended available lower-cost, clinically appropriate alternatives for a different medication, length of prescription, and/or choice of pharmacy. The prescriber could select either the initiated order or one of the recommended options.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Patient out-of-pocket cost for a prescription. Secondary outcomes were whether a mail-order prescription and a 90-day supply were ordered.

Results

Of 867 757 outpatient prescriptions at randomized practices, 36 419 (4.2%) met the inclusion criteria of having an available alternative. Out-of-pocket costs were $39.90 for a 30-day supply in the intervention group and $67.80 for a 30-day supply in the control group. The intervention led to an adjusted 11.2%; (95% CI, -15.7% to -6.4%) reduction in out-of-pocket costs. Mail-order pharmacy use was 9.6% and 7.6% in the intervention and control groups, respectively (adjusted 1.9 percentage point increase; 95% CI, 0.9 to 3.0). Rates of 90-day supply were not different. In high-cost drug classes, the intervention reduced out-of-pocket costs by 38.9%; 95% CI, -47.6% to -28.7%.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cluster randomized clinical trial showed that RTPB recommendations led to lower patient out-of-pocket costs, with the largest savings occurring for high-cost medications. However, RTPB recommendations were made for only a small percentage of prescriptions.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04940988; American Economic Association Registry: AEARCTR-0006909.

Desires and Attitudes towards Telepharmacy Medicine Delivery

The COVID-19 pandemic has limited healthcare services for patients with non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Hospital pharmacy departments in Thailand apply a new normal pharmacy service known as "telepharmacy" to serve remote pharmacy practice and deliver medication to patients. Current knowledge clearly shows the benefit of each medicine delivery method, but the study of patient's desires and attitudes towards all drug delivery methods is still limited. To fill the gap, this study aims to investigate desires and attitudes about drug delivery methods among Thai patients living with NCDs who need regular and continuous care. The sample was included by accidentally randomized technique at NCD clinics of the southern Thailand tertiary care hospital. Data were collected between January and March 2021 by a questionnaire that contained three sections: the currently received medicine delivery method, the desires and attitudes about the medicine delivery system, and patients' demographic information. The majority of patients were women aged 60 years who earned less than 10,000 THB (263.85 USD), were enrolled in the Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme (CSMBS), lived 0-15 km from the hospital, living with hypertension, had 1-4 prescribed medications, visited the doctor every 3 months, and received the conventional drug delivery method. The result showed that only the subdistrict health promotion hospital (SHPH) medicine delivery method was at a high level of desire, while the rest including conventional, drug store, postal pharmacy, and drive-thru medicine delivery methods were at medium. Attitudes toward the quality of medicine delivery methods consisted of five dimensions: confidence, timeliness, reliability, empathy, and facilities. Thai NCD patients had positive attitudes toward SHPH and drug store medicine delivery methods that could be seen from the high level of attitude score across all dimensions, while postal pharmacy and drive-thru delivery methods received medium-level attitude scores across all five dimensions.

Structural Racism, Place, and COVID-19: A Narrative Review Describing How We Prepare for an Endemic COVID-19 Future

Background:

Place is a social determinant of health, as recently evidenced by COVID-19. Previous literature surrounding health disparities in the United States often fails to acknowledge the role of structural racism on place-based health disparities for historically marginalized communities (i.e., Black and African American communities, Hispanic/Latinx communities, Indigenous communities [i.e., First Nations, Native American, Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian], and Pacific Islanders). This narrative review summarizes the intersection between structural racism and place as contributors to COVID-19 health disparities.

Methods:

This narrative review accounts for the unique place-based health care experiences influenced by structural racism, including health systems and services and physical environment. We searched online databases for peer-reviewed and governmental sources, published in English between 2000 and 2021, related to place-based U.S. health inequities in historically marginalized communities. We then narrate the link between the historical trajectory of structural racism and current COVID-19 health outcomes for historically marginalized communities.

Results:

Structural racism has infrequently been named as a contributor to place as a social determinant of health. This narrative review details how place is intricately intertwined with the results of structural racism, focusing on one's access to health systems and services and physical environment, including the outdoor air and drinking water. The role of place, health disparities, and structural racism has been starkly displayed during the COVID-19 pandemic, where historically marginalized communities have been subject to greater rates of COVID-19 incidence and mortality.

Conclusion:

As COVID-19 becomes endemic, it is crucial to understand how place-based inequities and structural racism contributed to the COVID-19 racial disparities in incidence and mortality. Addressing structurally racist place-based health inequities through anti-racist policy strategies is one way to move the United States toward achieving health equity.

Online Pharmacies Selling Prescription Drugs: Systematic Review

Introduction: The patronage of online pharmacies is rapidly growing, driven by the convenience and cheaper costs of purchasing prescription drugs electronically, especially under the lockdown situation. However, there are issues regarding the quality of the prescription drugs sold online and the legitimacy of online pharmacies. The use of prescription drugs without the supervision of a licensed health care practitioner may potentially harm consumers. Objectives: This systematic review was conducted to improve the body of knowledge on three main aspects of online pharmacies: (1) type and characteristics of the online pharmacies selling drugs; (2) the quality of pharmaceutical drugs purchased online; and (3) the characteristics of consumers of online pharmacies. Methods: Based on a pre-defined search strategy, PubMed and Scopus were utilised to search articles written in the English language published between January 2009 and February 2020. Studies focusing on the sale of prescription drugs were included. The terms used for the literature search were “online pharmacy”, “internet pharmacy”, “e-pharmacy”, “prescription”, “quality”, “medication safety”, and “counterfeit medicine”. These terms were used alone and in combination with Boolean operators. The institutional webpages including the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) were also examined for any additional studies. No methodological limitations in terms of study design were applied. A standardised data collection form was used to compile the data. Results: Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 46 articles were eligible and included in the final analysis. There were 27 articles on types and characteristic of online pharmacies, 13 articles on the quality of prescription drugs sold from online pharmacies, and 11 articles on consumers purchasing prescription drugs from online pharmacies. Readers should note that five articles discussed both the types and characteristics of online pharmacies, and the quality of the drugs sold from the outlets. The response rate (products received out of the number of orders) ranged from 20% to 100%, whereas the proportion of consumers buying prescription drugs online ranged from 2.3% to 13%. Reasons for online purchase of prescription drugs include the difficulty of obtaining a prescription for certain medications such as opioid analgesics, cheaper cost, since the costs associated with seeing a physician to obtain a prescription are reduced, and the need to obtain drugs such as opioid analgesics and benzodiazepine for misuse. Conclusions: Almost half of the online pharmacies are not properly regulated and fraudulent issues were uncovered. To address this issue, stricter regulation by World Health Organization and implementation should be carried out together with frequent monitoring of the licensure system and pharmacy verification on every online pharmacy, this would reduce the number of illegal or illegitimate online pharmacy.

The role of integrated medical and prescription drug plans in addressing racial and ethnic disparities in medication adherence

Medication nonadherence in the United States contributes to 125,000 deaths and 10% of hospitalizations annually. The pain of preventable deaths and the personal costs of nonadherence are borne disproportionately by Black, Latino, and other minority groups because nonadherence is higher in these groups due to a variety of factors. These factors include socioeconomic challenges, issues with prescription affordability and convenience of filling and refilling them, lack of access to pharmacies and primary care services, difficulty taking advantage of patient engagement opportunities, health literacy limitations, and lack of trust due to historical and structural discrimination outside of and within the medical system. Solutions to address the drivers of lower medication adherence, specifically in minority populations, are needed to improve population outcomes and reduce inequities. While various solutions have shown some traction, these solutions have tended to be challenging to scale for wider impact. We propose that integrated medical and pharmacy plans are well positioned to address racial and ethnic health disparities related to medication adherence. DISCLOSURES: This study was not supported by any funding sources other than employment of all authors by Humana Inc. Humana products and programs are referred to in this article.

Public Perceptions About Home Delivery of Medication Service and Factors Associated with the Utilization of This Service

INTRODUCTION

Home medication delivery service is a major service for the public. It reduces overcrowding and unnecessary visits to health centers. This study aims to investigate the public perception of home delivery of medication service in Jordan and evaluate factors affecting the use of this service.

METHODS

The study was conducted in March 2022 using an online survey. Participants were asked to fill out a validated questionnaire to evaluate their perception of home delivery of medication service.

RESULTS

Among the 1032 adult participated in this study, the majority reported that they had heard of home delivery of medication service (n = 832, 80.6%). However, only 30.9% of them have used this service before. Results showed that 71.4% of the participants (n = 737) believe that home delivery of medication service is more convenient and accessible than in-store drug refill. In addition, 65.6% of the participants (n = 677) believed that home delivery of medication service is suitable only for refill-prescription drugs (65.0%). The main pros of the service as perceived by the study participants were to serve sick patients, elderly, and disabled people (n = 822, 79.7%). In contrast, the inability of patients to build a professional relationship with pharmacists using home delivery of medications service was the most perceived con of this service (n = 627, 60.8%). Finally, regression analysis revealed that older participants, those with chronic diseases, and those who visit community pharmacies two times or more per month revealed higher use of the service (P = <0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study has shown that most participants showed positive perceptions toward the home delivery of medication services. However, participants believed that this service may decrease pharmacist's patient contact time, thus affecting the quality of medication counseling. More comprehensive future studies are necessary to examine the financial aspects of such a service and its associated drawbacks.

Impacts of a Mail-Order Service for Refilling Prescriptions on Patient Satisfaction and Operational Load at a Comprehensive Cancer Center in Jordan

Background

Mail-order services for refilling prescriptions for medications have been established in many countries and have increased patient satisfaction. We developed a mail-order service for the outpatient pharmacy of a comprehensive cancer center in Jordan.

Objective

To describe the implementation of a mail-order service and to report the impact of the service on patient satisfaction and the pharmacy workload.

Methods

A multidisciplinary team was formed to plan a mail-order service for refilling prescriptions for medications, and a survey was designed to evaluate patient satisfaction with the service. Patients were instructed to call the refill call center and order their medications at least 48 hours before their refill is due. The pharmacy workflow for refilling prescriptions was evaluated, and the time required with and without the mail-order service was documented, with a calculation of the time saved.

Results

At 1 year after the mail-order service had been established, 14 200 prescriptions had been refilled through the service, with the majority (97.5%) dispensed within 48 hours of the order time. As per the survey conducted with 219 patients, on the overall satisfaction, 69.4% reported being highly satisfied with the service and 27.9% reported being satisfied. The problems reported with the service were delay in arrival (n = 23, 10.5%), medication-related errors (n = 9, 4.1%), cash-related error (n = 1, 0.45%), improper storage condition (n = 1, 0.45%), and delivery to the wrong address (n = 4, 1.8%). The service was also associated with reduced overall time for processing in the outpatient pharmacy service; for patients receiving their medications from the pharmacy, resulting in reduced patients' overall waiting time (from 11.4 to 8.2 minutes). The service resulted in saving of 0.4 full-time employee at 1 year of implementation.

Conclusions

A mail-order service for refilling prescriptions within a hospital setting had positive outcomes on both patient satisfaction and the pharmacy workflow. The major issues were related to transportation and logistics.

Trends in Mail-Order Pharmacy Use in the U.S. From 1996 to 2018: An Analysis of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey

INTRODUCTION

The use of mail-order pharmacies is generally associated with lower healthcare costs and improved medication adherence. To promote the use of mail-order pharmacies, it is important to understand the time trends in their use and whether these trends vary by population subgroups.

METHODS

This study used the 1996-2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to determine the annual prevalence of mail-order pharmacy use (defined as purchasing ≥1 prescription from a mail-order or online pharmacy) among U.S. adult prescription users and its variation by population characteristics. Logistic regression was used to determine the correlates of mail-order pharmacy use. Results were presented for medications and therapeutic classes most commonly purchased by mail-order pharmacy exclusive users. Analyses were conducted in December 2020.

RESULTS

The annual prevalence of mail-order pharmacy use among U.S. adult prescription users increased from 10.2% (95% CI=9.3, 11.1) in 1996 to 17.0% (95% CI=15.9, 18.1) in 2005 and then declined to 15.7% (95% CI=14.9, 16.6) by 2018. Absolute differences in the prevalence of use by race/ethnicity, education, and health insurance coverage widened over time, whereas they remained stable when stratifying by sex, age, marital status, region, limitations in daily activities, pain interference, health status, number of chronic conditions, and access to medical care. Among mail-order pharmacy exclusive users, the 3 most commonly purchased medications were atorvastatin (16.7%), levothyroxine (13.6%), and lisinopril (13.1%); the 3 most commonly purchased therapeutic classes were cardiovascular agents (57.9%), metabolic agents (52.1%), and central nervous system agents (29.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of mail-order pharmacy use has declined in recent years and has shown significant variation across population subgroups. Future research should examine whether the declining trends and variation in use may influence the management of chronic conditions and the disparities in health and healthcare costs.

Health Needs and Functional Disability Among Mail-Order Pharmacy Users in the US

This cross-sectional study examines the health characteristics of individuals who use mail-order pharmacies.

Access to chronic medicines: patients' preferences for a last kilometre medicine delivery service in Cape Town, South Africa

Background

Chronic patients are required to access their chronic medicines on a regular basis, often only to refill their repeat prescriptions. Adherence to chronic medicines is challenging and has stimulated health care providers to devise differentiated service delivery models of care to decentralise chronic medicine distribution to decrease the frequency of medicine collection at health care facilities. One such option includes a last kilometre medicine delivery service. This study investigated chronic patients’ preferences for a last kilometre medicine delivery service model.

Methods

An exploratory non-randomised quantitative study was conducted over 4 weeks at four public sector primary health care facilities in Cape Town, South Africa. Data was collected on a structured questionnaire from chronic patients queuing to receive medication at each facility’s pharmacy waiting area. Patient demographics were noted to align with preferences for chronic medicine service delivery characteristics including; mobile ordering, fee for service and location for delivery. Chi-square test and frequencies were employed to analyse data using SPSS version 23.

Results

A total of 116 patients participated in this study. Most were interested in a medicine delivery service (80.2%) and were willing to use a mobile application to order their medicines (84.5%). Almost all patients (96.8%) preferred that their medicines be delivered to their home. More than three quarters of participants were willing to pay for the service (77.6%). Chi-square test showed that gender, age group, employment status, distance to the health facility and /or average waiting time at the clinic significantly influenced the preference for certain characteristics of the medicine delivery service (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Most participants were interested in a last kilometre medicine delivery service, especially those older than 45 years, waiting for more than 6 h at the facility, and staying within one kilometre radius of the clinic. More studies are needed to establish the influence of patients’ employment status and the distance to health facility on interest in the medicine delivery service.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01392-1.

Trends in Mail-Order Prescription Use among U.S. Adults from 1996 to 2018: A Nationally Representative Repeated Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Mail-order prescriptions are popular in the U.S., but the recent mail delays due to operational changes at the United States Postal Services (USPS) may postpone the delivery of vital medications. Despite growing recognition of the health and economic effects of a postal crisis on mail-order pharmacy consumers, little is known about the extent of mail-order prescription use, and most importantly, the population groups and types of medications that will likely be most affected by these postal delays.

METHODS

The prevalence of mail-order prescription use was assessed using a nationally representative repeated cross-sectional survey (the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey) carried out among adults aged 18 and older in each year from 1996 to 2018. We stratified use of mail-order prescription by socio-demographic and health characteristics. Additionally, we calculated which prescription medications were most prevalent among all mailed medications, and for which medications users were most likely to opt for mail-order prescription.

FINDINGS

500,217 adults participated in the survey. Between 1996 and 2018, the prevalence of using at least one mail-order prescription in a year among U.S. adults was 9.8% (95% CI, 9.5%-10.0%). Each user purchased a mean of 19.4 (95% CI, 19.0-19.8) mail-order prescriptions annually. The prevalence of use increased from 6.9% (95% CI, 6.4%-7.5%) in 1996 to 10.3% (95% CI, 9.7%-10.9%) in 2018, and the mean annual number of mail-order prescriptions per user increased from 10.7 (95% CI, 9.8-11.7) to 20.5 (95% CI, 19.3-21.7) over the same period. Use of mail-order prescription in 2018 was common among adults aged 65 and older (23.9% [95% CI, 22.3%-25.4%]), non-Hispanic whites (13.6% [95% CI, 12.8%-14.5%]), married adults (12.7% [95% CI, 11.8%-13.6%]), college graduates (12.2% [95% CI, 11.3%-13.1%]), high-income adults (12.6%, [95% CI, 11.6%-13.6%]), disabled adults (19.3% [95% CI, 17.9%-20.7%]), adults with poor health status (15.6% [95% CI, 11.6%-19.6%]), adults with three or more chronic conditions (24.2% [95% CI, 22.2%-26.2%]), Medicare beneficiaries (22.8% [95% CI, 21.4%-24.3%]), and military-insured adults (13.9% [95% CI, 10.8%-17.1%]). Mail-order prescriptions were commonly filled for analgesics, levothyroxine, cardiovascular agents, antibiotics, and diabetes medications.

INTERPRETATION

The use of mail-order prescription, including for critical medications such as insulin, is increasingly common among U.S. adults and displays substantial variation between population groups. A national slowdown of mail delivery could have important health consequences for a considerable proportion of the U.S. population, particularly during the current Coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic.

Virtual Visits for Care of Patients with Heart Failure in the Era of COVID-19: A Statement from the Heart Failure Society of America

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, US federal and state governments have implemented wide-ranging stay-at-home recommendations as a means to reduce spread of infection. As a consequence, many US healthcare systems and practices have curtailed ambulatory clinic visits—pillars of care for patients with heart failure (HF). In this context, synchronous audio/video interactions, also known as virtual visits (VVs), have emerged as an innovative and necessary alternative. This scientific statement outlines the benefits and challenges of VVs, enumerates changes in policy and reimbursement that have increased the feasibility of VVs during the COVID-19 era, describes platforms and models of care for VVs, and provides a vision for the future of VVs.

Opportunities to encourage mail order pharmacy delivery service use for diabetes prescriptions: a qualitative study

Background

Medication non-adherence is a major contributor to poor outcomes in diabetes. Previous research has shown an association between use of mail order pharmacy delivery and better medication adherence, but little is known about the barriers and facilitators to mail order pharmacy use in diabetes patients. This qualitative study examined factors related to mail order pharmacy use versus traditional “brick and mortar” pharmacies to refill prescriptions.

Methods

We conducted four 90-min focus groups in 2016 among 28 diabetes patients in the Hawaii and Northern California regions of Kaiser Permanente, a large integrated health care delivery system. We queried participants on their preferred mode for refilling prescriptions and perceived barriers and facilitators of mail order pharmacy use. One researcher independently coded each focus group transcript, with two of these transcripts double-coded by a second researcher to promote reliability. We employed thematic analysis guided by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior (COM-B) framework using NVivo 11 software.

Results

A total of 28 diabetes patients participated. Participants’ average age was 64.1 years; 57% were female; and racial/ethnic backgrounds included Asian/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (36%), Black/African-American (21%) Hispanic/Latino (7%), and non-Hispanic White (36%). Analysis uncovered 26 themes related to the decision to use mail order pharmacy, with each theme representing a barrier or facilitator mapped to the COM-B framework. Most themes (20/26) fell into the COM-B category of ‘Opportunity.’ Opportunity barriers to mail order pharmacy use included unpredictability of medication delivery date, concerns about mail security, and difficulty coordinating refill orders for multiple prescriptions. In contrast, facilitators included greater access and convenience (e.g., no need to wait in line or arrange transportation) compared to traditional pharmacies. Motivational facilitators to mail order pharmacy use included receiving a pharmacy benefit plan incentive of a free one-month supply of prescriptions.

Conclusions

This study found that while patients with diabetes may benefit from mail order pharmacy use, they perceive numerous barriers to using the service. These findings will inform the design of interventions and quality improvement initiatives to increase mail order pharmacy use, which in turn may improve medication adherence and outcomes in diabetes patients, across health care systems.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4250-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.