Pharmacists Colocated With Primary Care Physicians: Understanding Delivery of Interprofessional Primary Care

BACKGROUND

While evidence supports interprofessional primary care models that include pharmacists, the extent to which pharmacists are working in primary care and the factors associated with colocation is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to analyze the physical colocation of pharmacists with primary care providers (PCPs) and examine predictors associated with colocation.

RESEARCH DESIGN

This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of pharmacists and PCPs with individual National Provider Identifiers in the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System's database. Pharmacist and PCP practice addresses of the health care professionals were geocoded, and distances less than 0.1 miles were considered physically colocated.

SUBJECTS

In all, 502,373 physicians and 221,534 pharmacists were included.

RESULTS

When excluding hospital-based pharmacists, 1 in 10 (11%) pharmacists were colocated with a PCP. Pharmacists in urban settings were more likely to be colocated than those in rural areas (OR=1.32, CI: 1.26-1.38). Counties with the highest proportion of licensed pharmacists per 100,000 people in the county had higher colocation (OR=1.38, CI: 1.32-1.45). Colocation was significantly higher in states with an expanded scope of practice (OR 1.37, CI: 1.32-1.42) and those that have expanded Medicaid (OR 1.07, CI: 1.03-1.11). Colocated pharmacists more commonly worked in larger physician practices.

CONCLUSION

Although including pharmacists on primary care teams improves clinical outcomes, reduces health care costs, and enhances patient and provider experience, colocation appears to be unevenly dispersed across the United States, with lower rates in rural areas. As the integration of pharmacists in primary care continues to expand, knowing the prevalence and facilitators of growth will be helpful to policymakers, researchers, and clinical administrators.

Development of a value-based care and population health internship for student pharmacists

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacists assist in achieving desired outcomes and reducing costs of care within newer value-based payment models. The purpose of this article is to describe a summer internship for first- and second-year student pharmacists to gain exposure to value-based care.

METHODS

University Health Network is a clinically integrated health network and accountable care organization in East Tennessee. Two student interns completed consecutive seven-week programs alongside clinical pharmacist specialists in the primary care settings of the network. Program requirements included direct patient care for chronic disease state management, topic discussions, formal writing assignments and presentations, and a quality improvement project. Student perception of internship activities was measured using a Likert type survey and free response questionnaire.

RESULTS

Student interns responded positively to program requirements with feelings of enhanced preparedness for advanced pharmacy practice experiences and post-graduate residency positions. Additionally, interns perceived themselves as more competitive for post-graduate positions having completed the internship.

CONCLUSIONS

As the US continues to move toward value-based payment models, student pharmacists must be well prepared to contribute to quality and population health initiatives. Student pharmacists benefit from an internship in a clinically integrated health network by gaining an improved understanding of the future of United States healthcare, an expanded clinical skillset, experience in demonstrating a pharmacist's value to the healthcare team, and the ability to overcome barriers to pharmacy services. A pharmacy internship within a clinically integrated health network may help prepare students to successfully contribute to value-based models of healthcare.

Medicare's annual wellness visit: 10 years of opportunities gained and lost

Medicare annual wellness visits (AWV) were initiated 10 years ago. Though AWVs emphasize on disease prevention and health promotion for older adults was a huge step forward, the current "one size fits all" approach does not adequately meet the wellness needs of a diverse population of older adults. Current AWVs do not sufficiently take into consideration the medical, psychological, functional, racial, cultural and socio-economic diversity of older adults. Updated AWVs should be tailored to meet the needs and priorities of older adults receiving them. Several geriatrics approaches to care, including geriatrics Glidepaths and the 4Ms of an Age-Friendly Health System, could help develop and guide a more patient-specific geriatrics focused approach to AWVs. Medicare's IPPE is an ideal time to advise new Medicare beneficiaries regarding what they should and should not do to maximize their ability to be healthy and functionally independent into their 80s, 90s, and 100s.

Evaluation of quality measure attainment with pharmacist-delivered Medicare annual wellness visits

BACKGROUND

Medicare is required to fully cover annual wellness visits (AWVs) to increase access to preventive care. As health care converts to pay for performance models, clinical quality measures have increasing importance. Few studies have investigated the effect of pharmacist-delivered AWVs on clinical quality measure attainment in a rural family medicine (FM) clinic setting.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study was to evaluate attainment of clinical quality measures for pharmacist-delivered AWVs compared with physician-delivered AWVs (usual care). Secondary objectives included assessment of the number and type of drug therapy problems (DTPs) identified by pharmacists during AWVs.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted within an FM clinic located in southwest Georgia. Two cohorts were created according to the provider of AWVs during 2017: pharmacist or physician-usual care. Data on quality measure eligibility, attainment, and DTPs (for the pharmacist group only) were collected through electronic chart review. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize variables, and chi-square (or Fisher exact where appropriate) tests to compare the proportion of clinical quality measures attained between groups.

RESULTS

Among 334 delivered AWVs, pharmacists performed 68.6%. Approximately 62% of pharmacist and usual care visits were female with mean ages of 72 (SD +/- 9.1) and 62 (SD +/- 13.9) years, respectively. Pharmacist-delivered AWVs had statistically significant greater quality measure attainment in the following categories: advance care planning, osteoporosis cardiovascular screenings, and Tdap vaccinations compared with usual care (P < 0.05). Usual care had statistically significant greater quality measure attainment for diabetes screening. Seventy-five DTPs were identified in the pharmacist group, with the majority being related to adherence (39%).

CONCLUSION

Pharmacist-delivered AWVs had greater quality measure attainment in several areas than usual care. Furthermore, increased quality measure attainment may assist in meeting benchmarks set by payers to ensure ongoing reimbursement of these services.

Financial performance and reimbursement of pharmacist-led chronic care management

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the financial performance and reimbursement of chronic care management (CCM) provided by clinical pharmacists in a primary care setting using Current Procedural Terminology codes that were added to the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule in 2017.

METHODS

A retrospective study assessing financial performance of pharmacist-led CCM was conducted for the 12-month period from May 1, 2018, through April 30, 2019, at an academic multiclinic medical practice. Pharmacist-led CCM encounters included a combination of telephone and in-clinic visits. Return on investment, a ratio of net income to financial investment, was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included the number of CCM encounters, time spent by pharmacists delivering CCM (ie, "time-on-task"), and third-party claim reimbursement.

RESULT

Sixty-five patients were enrolled in CCM during the 12-month study period. Pharmacists provided 236 CCM encounters, including 31 enrollment visits and 102 hours of clinical time-on-task. Gross revenue for CCM during the 12-month period was $7,433.91, and expenses totaled $6,430.36, resulting in a 15.6% return on investment. Out of 158 CCM claims, 131 (83%) were paid and 27 (17%) were unpaid or remained in adjudication at study completion.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacist-led CCM resulted in a modest positive return on investment compared to other reimbursable pharmacy services. Practitioners should evaluate opportunities to synergize CCM with other fee-for-service and quality-based reimbursement programs.

Return-On-Investment for Billable Pharmacist-Provided Services in the Primary Care Setting

BACKGROUND

Pharmacists are increasingly fulfilling roles on primary care teams, yet business models for pharmacist services in these settings have not been optimized. This study describes how an ambulatory care pharmacy department implemented various billing methods to generate revenue for pharmacist services.

OBJECTIVES

(1) Describe pharmacist-delivered billable and non-billable services; and (2) Assess the impact of various billing methods on the return-on-investment (ROI) for billable services.

METHODS

This study was conducted from September 2016 to August 2017 in Virginia. Pharmacist time spent performing billable encounters using current procedural technology (CPT) codes (e.g., incident-to a physician, annual wellness visits) was calculated. Encounters eligible for the hospital-based facility (G0463) and chronic care management (CCM) codes were considered to be potentially billable services. The ROI was calculated for billable and potentially billable services.

RESULTS

A total of 948.3 hours (0.46 full-time equivalents (FTE)), 17% of all clinical services, were billed using CPT codes. This resulted in a total revenue of $173,638.66. Missed revenue from not billing for the G0463 and CCM codes was $68,268.37. The cost of pharmacist services for 0.46 FTE was $78,613.08, resulting in a ROI for billed pharmacist services of 1.2:1. The ROI increased to 1.6:1 when considering potentially billable services.

CONCLUSION

It is feasible to have a positive ROI for billable pharmacist services. To achieve a sustainable business model, there must be a high volume of billable services. G0463 and CCM codes are often underutilized, yet represent significant opportunities in revenue for pharmacist services and should be pursued.