Evaluation of a Diabetes Coaching Program on Clinical Outcomes in a Self-Insured Grocery Chain

Background: Diabetes is among the most prevalent and costly disease states to treat. Many self-insured employers offer employee wellness programs to decrease healthcare expenditures for chronic illnesses, such as diabetes. Existing literature demonstrates that pharmacists can positively impact treatment of patients with diabetes and assist in lowering costs of care, but no current literature examines pharmacist intervention within an employee wellness program over a prolonged period of time. Objectives: To quantify the hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) lowering achieved through participation in a pharmacist-led diabetes coaching program within a self-insured company. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted at a self-insured grocery store chain in the Kansas City area with an employee wellness program called Start Now. Patients who enrolled in the Start Now Program for Diabetes Care (SN-DM) between July 1, 2008 and July 1, 2021 with at least two documented HbA1c measurements were included in the analysis. Results: A total of 355 charts were included in the analysis. The average HbA1c reduction observed in program patients was 0.61% (P < .001). At baseline, 40% of program patients were considered to have controlled diabetes (A1c <7%) compared with 60% of patients at most recent HbA1c (P < .001). There was no correlation between HbA1c lowering and number of pharmacist coaching visits; however, greater HbA1c lowering was observed in patients with a higher baseline HbA1c. Conclusion: Patients who participated in the SN-DM program achieved a significant decrease in mean HbA1c. More patients were considered controlled at last or most recent HbA1c according to the American Diabetes Association guidelines.

Economic Impact and Health Care Utilization Outcomes of Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support Interventions for Persons With Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Recommendations for Future Research

PURPOSE

Value-driven outcomes are important because health systems determine sustainability of diabetes self-management education and support (DSMES) programming. Health care utilization and clinical outcomes are critical factors when considering the impact of DSMES programs.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to describe studies that report on the economic and health care utilization outcomes of diabetes self-management programs.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed in multiple databases. Studies reporting economic and health care utilization outcomes related to DSMES and including 1 or more of the ADCES7 Self-Care BehaviorsTM from January 2006 to May 2020 were included. Eligible articles needed to compare the intervention and comparison group and report on economic impact. The methodological quality was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist specific to each individual study design.

RESULTS

A total of 22 of 14 556 articles published between 2007 and 2020 were included. Cost benefits varied, and there were considerable methodological heterogeneity among design, economic measures, population, perspective, intervention, and biophysical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

DSMES interventions may positively impact economic outcomes and/or health care utilization, although not all studies showed consistent benefit. This review highlights an evidence gap, and future health economic evaluations are warranted.

Assessment of clinical inertia in people with diabetes within primary care

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Clinical inertia, defined as a delay in treatment intensification, is prevalent in people with diabetes. Treatment intensification rates are as low as 37.1% in people with haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) values >7%. Intensification by addition of medication therapy may take 1.6 to more than 7 years. Clinical inertia increases the risk of cardiovascular events. The primary objective was to evaluate rates of clinical inertia in people whose diabetes is managed by both pharmacists and primary care providers (PCPs). Secondary objectives included characterizing types of treatment intensification, HbA1c reduction, and time between treatment intensifications.

METHOD

Retrospective chart review of persons with diabetes managed by pharmacists at an academic, safety-net institution. Eligible subjects were referred to a pharmacist-managed cardiovascular risk reduction clinic while continuing to see their PCP between October 1, 2016 and June 30, 2018. All progress notes were evaluated for treatment intensification, HbA1c value, and type of medication intensification.

RESULTS

Three hundred sixty-three eligible patients were identified; baseline HbA1c 9.6% (7.9, 11.6) (median interquartile range [IQR]). One thousand one hundred ninety-two pharmacist and 1739 PCP visits were included in data analysis. Therapy was intensified at 60.5% (n = 721) pharmacist visits and 39.3% (n = 684) PCP visits (P < .001). The median (IQR) time between interventions was 49 (28, 92) days for pharmacists and 105 (38, 182) days for PCPs (P < .001). Pharmacists more frequently intensified treatment with glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists and sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacist involvement in diabetes management may reduce the clinical inertia patients may otherwise experience in the primary care setting.

Impact of an Advanced Practice Pharmacist Type 2 Diabetes Management Program: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to describe the impact of an Advanced Practice Pharmacist (APh) on lowering hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in patients with type 2 diabetes within a patient centered medical home (PCMH) and to classify the types of therapeutic decisions made by the APh.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study using data from electronic health records. The study evaluated a partnership between Chapman University School of Pharmacy and Providence St. Joseph Heritage Healthcare that provided diabetes management by an Advanced Practice Pharmacist in a PCMH under a collaborative practice agreement. Change in the HbA1c was the primary endpoint assessed in this study. The type of therapeutic decisions made by the APh were also evaluated. Descriptive analysis and Wilcoxon signed ranktest were used to analyze data.

RESULTS

The study included 35 patients with diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus managed by an APh from May 2017 to December 2017. Most of the patients were 60-79 years old (68.5%), 45.7% were female, and 45.7% were of Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. The average HbA1cwas 8.8%±1.4% (range=6.0%-12.4%) and 7.5%±1.4% (range=5.5%-12.4%) at the initial and final APh visit, respectively (p<0.0001). Therapeutic decisions made by the APh included drug dose increase (35.5% of visits), drug added (16.4%), drug dose decrease (6.4%), drug switch (5.5%), and drug discontinuation (1.8%).

CONCLUSION

The Advanced Practice Pharmacist's interventions had a significant positive impact on lowering HbA1c in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in a PCMH. The most common therapeutic decisions made by the APh included drug dose increase and adding a new drug.

Barriers to a full scope of pharmacy practice in primary care: A systematic review of pharmacists' access to laboratory testing

Objectives

To describe primary care pharmacists' current scope of practice in relation to laboratory testing.

Method

A 2-tiered search of key databases (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE) and grey literature with the following MeSH headings: prescribing, pharmacist/pharmacy, laboratory test, collaborative practice, protocols/guidelines. We focused on Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia for this review.

Results

There is limited literature exploring primary care pharmacists' scope of practice in relation to laboratory testing. The majority of literature is from the United States and Canada, with some from the United Kingdom and New Zealand and none from Australia. Overall, there is a difference in regulations between and within these countries, with the key difference being whether pharmacists access and/or order laboratory testing dependently or independently. Canadian pharmacists can access and/or order laboratory tests independently or dependently, depending on the province they practise in. US pharmacists can access and/or order laboratory tests dependently within collaborative practice agreements. In the United Kingdom, laboratory testing can be performed by independent prescribing pharmacists or dependently by supplementary prescribing pharmacists. New Zealand prescribing pharmacists can order laboratory testing independently. Most publications do not report on the types of laboratory tests used by pharmacists, but those that do predominantly resulted in positive patient outcomes.

Discussion/Conclusion

Primary care pharmacists' scope of practice in laboratory testing is presently limited to certain jurisdictions and is often performed in a dependent fashion. As such, a full scope of pharmacy services is almost entirely unavailable to patients in the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia. Just as in the case for pharmacists prescribing, evidence indicates better patient outcomes when pharmacists can access/order laboratory tests, but more research needs to be done alongside the implementation of local guidelines and practice standards for pharmacists who practise in that realm. Patients around the world deserve to receive a full scope of pharmacists' practice, and lack of access to laboratory testing is one of the major obstacles to this. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2019;152:xx-xx.

Ambulatory Care Pharmacists' Perception of Prediabetes

INTRODUCTION

Eighty-four million patients in the United States have prediabetes yet evidence-based interventions to prevent diabetes are infrequently used. The concept of prediabetes is contentious, although preventive interventions are guideline supported. Team-based care models incorporating pharmacists for prediabetes have been proposed; however, pharmacist perception regarding prediabetes has not been assessed. This study's objective was to assess ambulatory care pharmacists' perception of recommendations for prediabetes.

METHODS

An anonymous survey was electronically distributed through the American College of Clinical Pharmacy Ambulatory Care Practice and Research Network. The primary outcome was the proportion of respondents who reported supporting 3 main recommendations related to prediabetes (ie, screening, evidence-based lifestyle-intervention, metformin). The study was approved by the University of South Florida Institutional Review Board. Data collection and analysis occurred in 2017.

RESULTS

The survey was distributed to approximately 2209 potential participants. One hundred thirty-three surveys were completed. The American Diabetes Association guideline was the most common primarily supported guideline related to prediabetes (89%). Of the respondents, 87% supported all 3 main recommendations regarding prediabetes. Qualitative feedback demonstrated the full range of opinions; programs for prediabetes, limited intervention for prediabetes, and against prediabetes as a concept.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of ambulatory care pharmacists responding supported all main recommendations related to prediabetes and therefore may be practicable for disseminating diabetes prevention interventions. However, barriers to implementation should be expected.

Multidisciplinary collaborative care in the management of patients with uncontrolled diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is a chronic and complex disease that requires a multidisciplinary collaborative care approach.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients with uncontrolled diabetes within a multidisciplinary collaborative care model. The secondary objective was to evaluate the humanistic and economic outcomes of this model of care.

METHODS

A search using PubMed, SCOPUS, and CINAHL from 2007 to 2017 was conducted. Articles selected included randomised controlled studies on multidisciplinary collaborative care (defined as care provision by ≥ two different care providers) vs usual care (defined as standard care provided solely by physicians) for patients with uncontrolled diabetes. In addition, the eligible article had to report at least two of the three outcomes such as clinical (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c], systolic blood pressure [SBP], low-density lipoprotein [LDL], and triglyceride [TG]), humanistic (patient-reported measures), and economic (healthcare costs and utilisations) outcomes. Parameters examined included study characteristics, care interventions, patient characteristics, and study outcomes. Primary outcomes using mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were analysed either by fixed- or random-effects models.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies were included in the review. Multidisciplinary collaborative care significantly improved HbA1c (MD = -0.55%, 95% CI = -0.65% to -0.45%, P < 0.001, I²  = 35%) and SBP (MD = -4.89 mm Hg, 95% CI = -6.64 to -3.13 mm Hg, P < 0.001, I²  = 46%) over 3-12 months. The humanistic outcomes in the multidisciplinary collaborative care model were either improved or maintained over time. In comparison to usual care, the healthcare costs and utilisations in the multidisciplinary collaborative care model were comparable without incurring excessive costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary collaborative care appeared to positively impact on the clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes of patients with uncontrolled diabetes.

Impact of pharmacy services on initial clinical outcomes and medication adherence among veterans with uncontrolled diabetes

Background

Diabetes remains a growing public health threat but evidence supports the role that pharmacists can play in improving diabetes medication use and outcomes. To improve the quality of care, the Veterans Health Administration has widely adopted care models that integrate clinical pharmacists, but more data are needed to interpret the impact of these services. Our objective was to assess clinical pharmacy services’ impact on outcomes and oral antidiabetic medication (OAD) use among veterans with uncontrolled diabetes in the first year of therapy.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort analysis using the Veterans Affairs (VA) Corporate Data Warehouse to identify the first diagnosis of and initiation of OAD therapy for uncomplicated, uncontrolled diabetes (A1C > 7.0%) during 2002–2014. Receipt of clinical pharmacy services was identified using codes within VA electronic health records, and clinical values were obtained at or near the initial fill date and 365 days later. Use of OADs was assessed by proportion of days covered (PDC) for one year following the first filled prescription. Veterans having received clinical pharmacy services were matched 1:1 to those having not seen a clinical pharmacist in the first year of therapy, and generalized linear models assessed changes and differences in outcomes.

Results

The analysis included 5749 patients in each cohort. On average, patients saw a clinical pharmacist 2.5 times throughout the first year of OAD therapy. Adherence to OAD medications was higher in veterans having seen a pharmacist (84.3% vs. 82.4%, p < 0.0001) and more such patients achieved a PDC of at least 80% (72.2% vs. 68.2%, p < 0.0001). After one year of OAD therapy, mean change in hemoglobin A1C was greater among those receiving pharmacy services (− 1.5% vs. -1.4%, p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Pharmacist participation in diabetes patients’ primary care positively affects the multifaceted needs of patients with this condition and comorbid chronic disease.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3665-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Estimated Cost-Effectiveness, Cost Benefit, and Risk Reduction Associated with an Endocrinologist-Pharmacist Diabetes Intense Medical Management “Tune-Up” Clinic

BACKGROUND

In 2012 U.S. diabetes costs were estimated to be $245 billion, with $176 billion related to direct diabetes treatment and associated complications. Although a few studies have reported positive glycemic and economic benefits for diabetes patients treated under primary care physician (PCP)-pharmacist collaborative practice models, no studies have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of an endocrinologist-pharmacist collaborative practice model treating complex diabetes patients versus usual PCP care for similar patients.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness and cost benefit of a collaborative endocrinologist-pharmacist Diabetes Intense Medical Management (DIMM) "Tune-Up" clinic for complex diabetes patients versus usual PCP care from 3 perspectives (clinic, health system, payer) and time frames.

METHODS

Data from a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (A1c) ≥ 8% who were referred to the DIMM clinic at the Veterans Affairs San Diego Health System were used for cost analyses against a comparator group of PCP patients meeting the same criteria. The DIMM clinic took more time with patients, compared with usual PCP visits. It provided personalized care in three 60-minute visits over 6 months, combining medication therapy management with patient-specific diabetes education, to achieve A1c treatment goals before discharge back to the PCP. Data for DIMM versus PCP patients were used to evaluate cost-effectiveness and cost benefit. Analyses included incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) at 6 months, 3-year estimated total medical costs avoided and return on investment (ROI), absolute risk reduction of complications, resultant medical costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over 10 years.

RESULTS

Base case ICER results indicated that from the clinic perspective, the DIMM clinic costs $21 per additional percentage point of A1c improvement and $115-$164 per additional patient at target A1c goal level compared with the PCP group. From the health system perspective, medical cost avoidance due to improved A1c was $8,793 per DIMM patient versus $3,506 per PCP patient (P = 0.009), resulting in an ROI of $9.01 per dollar spent. From the payer perspective, DIMM patients had estimated lower total medical costs, a greater number of QALYs gained, and appreciable risk reductions for diabetes-related complications over 2-, 5- and 10-year time frames, indicating that the DIMM clinic was dominant. Sensitivity analyses indicated results were robust, and overall conclusions did not change appreciably when key parameters (including DIMM clinic effectiveness and cost) were varied within plausible ranges.

CONCLUSIONS

The DIMM clinic endocrinologist-pharmacist collaborative practice model, in which the pharmacist spent more time providing personalized care, improved glycemic control at a minimal cost per additional A1c benefit gained and produced greater cost avoidance, appreciable ROI, reduction in long-term complication risk, and lower cost for a greater gain in QALYs. Overall, the DIMM clinic represents an advanced pharmacy practice model with proven clinical and economic benefits from multiple perspectives for patients with T2DM and high medication and comorbidity complexity.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding supported this study. The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Preliminary versions of the study data were presented in abstract form at the American Pharmacists Association Annual Meeting & Exposition; March 27, 2015; San Diego, California, and the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy Annual Meeting; April 21, 2016; San Francisco, California. Study concept and design were contributed by Hirsch, Bounthavong, and Edelman, along with Morello and Morreale. Arjmand, Ourth, Ha, Cadiz, and Zimmerman collected the data. Data interpretation was performed by Ha, Morreale, and Morello, along with Cadiz, Ourth, and Hirsch. The manuscript was written primarily by Hirsch and Zimmerman, along with Arjamand, Ourth, and Morello, and was revised by Hirsch and Cadiz, along with Bounthavong, Ha, Morreale, and Morello.

Economic evaluations of pharmacist-managed services in people with diabetes mellitus: a systematic review

AIM

To review and evaluate the most recent literature on the economic outcomes of pharmacist-managed services in people with diabetes.

BACKGROUND

The global prevalence of diabetes is increasing. Although pharmacist-managed services have been shown to improve people's health outcomes, the economic impact of these programmes remains unclear.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted of six databases. Study inclusion criteria were: (1) original research; (2) evaluation of pharmacist-managed services in people with diabetes; (3) an economic evaluation; (4) English-language publication; and (5) full-text, published between January 2006 and December 2014. The quality of the full economic evaluations reviewed was evaluated using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist.

RESULTS

A total of 2204 articles were screened and 25 studies were selected. These studies were conducted in a community pharmacy (n = 10), a clinic- /hospital-based outpatient facility (n = 8), or others. Pharmacist-managed services included targeted education (n = 24), general pharmacotherapeutic monitoring (n = 21), health screening or laboratory testing services (n = 9), immunization services (n = 2) and pharmacokinetic monitoring (n = 1). Compared with usual care, pharmacist-managed services resulted in cost savings that varied from $7 to $65,000 ($8 to $85,000 in 2014 US dollars) per person per year, and generated higher quality-adjusted life years with lower costs. Benefit-to-cost ratios ranged from 1:1 to 8.5:1. Among the 25 studies reviewed, 11 were full economic evaluations of moderate quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacist-managed services had a positive return in terms of economic viability. With the expanding role of pharmacists in the healthcare sector, alongside increasing health expenditure, future economic studies of high quality are needed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of these services.

Evaluating the Effects of an Interdisciplinary Practice Model with Pharmacist Collaboration on HIV Patient Co-Morbidities

Treatment of HIV now occurs largely within the primary care setting, and the principal focus of most visits has become the management of chronic disease states. The clinical pharmacist's potential role in improving chronic disease outcomes for HIV patients is unknown. A retrospective cohort study was performed for HIV-positive patients also diagnosed with diabetes, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia. Characteristics and outcomes in 96 patients treated by an interdisciplinary team that included a clinical pharmacist (i.e., the intervention group) were compared to those in 50 patients treated by an individual healthcare provider (i.e., the control group). Primary outcomes were changes from baseline over 18 months of HbA1c, low density lipoprotein (LDL), and blood pressure, respectively. Secondary outcomes included number of drug-drug interactions, HIV viral load, CD4 count, percent change in smoking status, and percent of patients treated to cardiovascular guideline recommendations. The interdisciplinary team had a significant improvement in lipid management over the control group (LDL: -8.8 vs. +8.4 mg/dL; p=0.014), and the smoking cessation rate over the study period was doubled in the interdisciplinary group (20.4% vs. 11.8%). Among those with an indication for aspirin, a significantly higher percentage of patients were prescribed the medication in the interdisciplinary group compared to the control group (85.5% vs. 64.9%; p=0.014). An informal cost analysis estimated savings of more than $3000 per patient treated by the interdisciplinary team. Based on these results, pharmacist involvement in an HIV primary care clinic appears to lead to more appropriate management of chronic co-morbidities in a cost-effective manner.

[The pharmacist-physician collaboration for IPW: from physician's perspective]

Interprofessional work (IPW) is increasingly important in various settings including primary care, in which the role of pharmacists is particularly important. Many studies have shown that in cases of hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and metabolic syndrome, physician-pharmacist collaboration can improve medication adherence and help to identify drug-related problems. Some surveys and qualitative studies revealed barriers and key factors for effective physician-pharmacist collaboration, including trustworthiness and role clarification. In Japan, some cases of good collaborative work between pharmacists and physicians in hospitals and primary care settings have been reported. Still, community pharmacists in particular have difficulties collaborating with primary care doctors because they have insufficient medical information about patients, they feel hesitant about contacting physicians, and they usually communicate by phone or fax rather than face to face. Essential competencies for good interprofessional collaboration have been proposed by the Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative (CIHC): interprofessional communication; patient/client/family/community-centered care; role clarification; team functioning; collaborative leadership; and interprofessional conflict resolution. Our interprofessional education (IPE) team regularly offers educational programs to help health professionals learn interprofessional collaboration skills. We expect many pharmacists to learn those skills and actively to facilitate interprofessional collaboration.