Giving formulary and drug cost information to providers and impact on medication cost and use: a longitudinal non-randomized study

"It's a mess sometimes": patient perspectives on provider responses to healthcare costs, and how informatics interventions can help support cost-sensitive care decisions

OBJECTIVE

We investigated patient experiences with medication- and test-related cost conversations with healthcare providers to identify their preferences for future informatics tools to facilitate cost-sensitive care decisions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted 18 semistructured interviews with diverse patients (ages 24-81) in a Midwestern health system in the United States. We identified themes through 2 rounds of qualitative coding.

RESULTS

Patients believed their providers could help reduce medication-related costs but did not see how providers could influence test-related costs. Patients viewed cost conversations about medications as beneficial when providers could adjust medical recommendations or provide resources. However, cost conversations did not always occur when patients felt they were needed. Consequently, patients faced a "cascade of work" to address affordability challenges. To prevent this, collaborative informatics tools could facilitate cost conversations and shared decision-making by providing information about a patient's financial constraints, enabling comparisons of medication/testing options, and addressing transportation logistics to facilitate patient follow-through.

DISCUSSION

Like providers, patients want informatics tools that address patient out-of-pocket costs. They want to discuss healthcare costs to reduce the frequency of unaffordable costs and obtain proactive assistance. Informatics interventions could minimize the cascade of patient work through shared decision-making and preventative actions. Such tools might integrate information about efficacy, costs, and side effects to support decisions, present patient decision aids, facilitate coordination among healthcare units, and eventually improve patient outcomes.

CONCLUSION

To prevent a burdensome cascade of work for patients, informatics tools could be designed to support cost conversations and decisions between patients and providers.

Health informatics interventions to minimize out-of-pocket medication costs for patients: what providers want

Objective

To explore diverse provider perspectives on: strategies for addressing patient medication cost barriers; patient medication cost information gaps; current medication cost-related informatics tools; and design features for future tool development.

Materials and Methods

We conducted 38 semistructured interviews with providers (physicians, nurses, pharmacists, social workers, and administrators) in a Midwestern health system in the United States. We used 3 rounds of qualitative coding to identify themes.

Results

Providers lacked access to information about: patients’ ability to pay for medications; true costs of full medication regimens; and cost impacts of patient insurance changes. Some providers said that while existing cost-related tools were helpful, they contained unclear insurance information and several questioned the information’s quality. Cost-related information was not available to everyone who needed it and was not always available when needed. Fragmentation of information across sources made cost-alleviation information difficult to access. Providers desired future tools to compare medication costs more directly; provide quick references on costs to facilitate clinical conversations; streamline medication resource referrals; and provide centrally accessible visual summaries of patient affordability challenges.

Discussion

These findings can inform the next generation of informatics tools for minimizing patients’ out-of-pocket costs. Future tools should support the work of a wider range of providers and situations and use cases than current tools do. Such tools would have the potential to improve prescribing decisions and better link patients to resources.

Conclusion

Results identified opportunities to fill multidisciplinary providers’ information gaps and ways in which new tools could better support medication affordability for patients.

Almost a quarter of Americans taking prescription medications have difficulty affording them. We asked 38 healthcare providers what they do to help patients get affordable medications. They try to reduce the number of medications that patients take, choose more affordable medication options, and connect them to free medications or financial help. But it is hard for providers to do these things because they don’t always know which patients have financial challenges, and they may not know how much medications cost patients. Healthcare providers use digital tools like ordering systems to pick medications for patients, but they do not always have clear price information and they do not help outside of healthcare visits with prescribers. It is also hard for healthcare providers to get information about what patients have difficulty affording medications, and about resources to help them. Healthcare providers want new and improved digital tools to help them choose medications, and to be able to compare exact medication price differences. They also want a visual sign for patients with financial challenges, and centralized information about cost reduction resources. Finally, they desire tools to help them talk to patients about mediation prices, and medication price reports for patients themselves.

A Pilot Program to Teach Pharmacy Students Practical Skills to Navigate Drug Insurance Benefits

Pharmacists must be able to navigate prescription drug coverages to help providers and patients reduce out-of-pocket costs. Traditionally, curricula on drug insurance benefits rely on lectures and lack a practicum that offers students hands-on experience with determining formulary and cost-sharing information. An activity for pharmacy students to update a free public website that summarizes formularies and copayment requirements across major insurers was piloted. Pharmacy students were trained to locate online formularies and identify a drug’s coverage tier, step therapy, prior authorization, and cost-sharing during a 6-week experiential rotation. Students checked formularies from six insurance plans for 250-plus drugs across 15 health conditions. Graduates were surveyed (74% response rate) about the activities’ impact on their learning and ability to navigate drug benefits. Respondents rated the training as helpful in learning whether a drug was covered (100%), or required step therapy or prior authorization (100%). The majority of graduates reported being able to look up formulary coverage (90%), step therapy or prior authorization (90%), and copayment requirements (65%). Our innovative skills-based pilot activity was effective in teaching pharmacy students to navigate insurance formularies, which is essential for helping patients access medications.

Formulary Management Activities and Practice Implications Among Public Sector Hospital Pharmaceutical and Therapeutics Committees in a South African Province

Introduction

The World Health Organization identified Pharmaceutical and Therapeutics Committees (PTCs) at district and hospital levels as one of the pivotal models to promote rational use of medicines (RUM). This is endorsed by the Government in South Africa. Formulary development and management is one of the main functions of PTCs. This study aimed to describe the formulary management activities among PTCs in public hospitals in Gauteng Province, South Africa, following initiatives to promote RUM in South Africa.

Methods

Qualitative, nonparticipatory, observational study, observing 26 PTC meetings. Data were coded and categorized using NVivo9^® qualitative data analysis software. Themes and sub-themes were developed. The themes and sub-themes on formulary management are the principal focus of this paper.

Results

More than half of the observed PTCs reviewed their formulary lists. There was variation in the review process among institutions providing different levels of care. Various aspects were considered for formulary management especially requests for medicines to be added. These included cost considerations (mainly focusing on acquisition costs), evidence-based evaluation of clinical trials, patient safety, clinical experience and changes in the National Essential Medicines List (NEML). The tertiary PTCs mostly dealt with applications for new non-EML medicines, while PTCs in the other hospitals mainly requested removal or addition of EML medicines to the list.

Conclusion

This is the first study from Gauteng Province, South Africa, reporting on how decisions are actually taken to include or exclude medicines onto formularies within public sector hospitals providing different levels of care. Various approaches are adopted at different levels of care when adding to- or removing medicines from the formulary lists. Future programs should strengthen PTCs in specialized aspects of formulary management. A more structured approach to formulary review at the local PTC level should be encouraged in line with the national approach when reviewing possible additions to the NEML.

Knowledge and Attitude of Physicians Towards the Cost of Commonly Prescribed Medicines: A Case Study in Three Nigerian Healthcare Facilities

OBJECTIVE

One of the core principles of rational prescribing is consideration of the cost of the medicines prescribed, especially in countries with high patient copayments and low incomes such as Nigeria. Little is known about Nigerian physicians' knowledge about the cost of commonly prescribed medicines. The principal objective of the study was to assess the knowledge of Nigerian physicians about the cost of commonly prescribed medicines.

METHODS

Descriptive cross-sectional survey conducted among physicians in 3 tertiary institutions in Nigeria. Apart from socio-demographic and other information, questions about the estimated costs of branded and generic versions of 11 commonly prescribed medications were included in the questionnaire.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventy-nine (179; 95.7%) respondents agreed that costs of medicines were important when writing prescriptions, although only 7 (3.7%) of them had any formal training in the economics of healthcare. The median percentages of respondents with accurate estimated costs for generic and originator brands were 6.2% and 12%, respectively. Respondents were more knowledgeable about the cost of medicines used for the treatment of infectious diseases (malaria, bacterial infections) than noncommunicable diseases (diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and dyslipidemia).

CONCLUSIONS

The knowledge of Nigerian physicians in the 3 participating hospitals about the costs of commonly prescribed medicines was poor. This is despite their awareness about the importance of costs of medicines when prescribing.

Clinicians' Values and Preferences for Medication Adherence and Cost Clinical Decision Support in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Medication nonadherence and unaffordability are prevalent, burdensome issues in primary care. In response, technology companies are capitalizing on clinical decision support (CDS) to deliver patient-specific information regarding medication adherence and costs to clinicians using electronic health records (EHRs). To maximize adoption and usability, these CDS tools should be designed with consideration of end users' values and preferences.

OBJECTIVE

This article evaluates primary care clinicians' values and preferences for a medication adherence and cost CDS.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with primary care clinicians with prescribing privileges and EHR access to identify clinicians' perceptions of and approaches to assessing medication adherence and costs, and to determine perceived values and preferences for medication adherence and cost CDS. Interviews were conducted until saturation of responses was reached. ATLAS.ti was used for thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Among 26 clinicians interviewed, themes identified included a high value, but moderate need for a medication adherence CDS and high value and need for cost CDS. Clinicians expressed the cost CDS would provide actionable solutions and greatly impact patient care. Another theme identified was a desire for medication adherence and cost CDS to be separate tools yet integrated into workflow. The majority of clinicians preferred a medication adherence CDS that integrated claims data and actively displayed data using color-coded adherence categories within patients' medication lists in the EHR. For the cost CDS, clinicians preferred medication out-of-pocket costs and a list of cheaper or payor-preferred alternatives to display within the order queue of the EHR.

CONCLUSION

We identified valuable insights regarding clinician values and preferences for medication adherence and cost CDS. Overall, primary care clinicians feel CDS for medication adherence and cost are valuable and prefer them to be separate. These insights should be used to inform the design, implementation, and EHR integration of future medication and cost CDS tools.

Policy Recommendations for Pharmacy Benefit Managers to Stem the Escalating Costs of Prescription Drugs: A Position Paper From the American College of Physicians

Recent discussions about the increasing prices of prescription drugs have focused on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), third-party intermediaries for various types of employers and government purchasers who negotiate drug prices in health plans and thus play a crucial role in determining the amount millions of Americans pay for medications. In this position paper, the American College of Physicians expands on its position paper from 2016 by offering additional recommendations to improve transparency in the PBM industry and highlighting the need for reliable, timely, and relevant information on prescription drug pricing for physicians and patients.

Assessing and Improving Zoster Vaccine Uptake in a Homeless Population

The herpes zoster (shingles) vaccine is recommended for all adults aged ≥ 60 years without contraindications to prevent shingles and post-herpetic neuralgia. There are no published studies on zoster vaccination rates, barriers, or workflows in adults who have experienced homelessness. Due to barriers specific to this vaccine, including difficulty determining insurance coverage, high upfront costs, need for storage in a freezer, and under-prescription by physicians, uptake is lower compared to other recommended vaccines for older adults. To address these barriers, we developed a new approach of partnering our on-site primary care clinic in a transitional homeless shelter with a local pharmacy and offering vaccination on Shingles Immunization Days with a goal of matching or exceeding the national zoster immunization rate of 30.6%. Over a 3-year period, the live attenuated zoster vaccine was offered to 86% of eligible patients resulting in an immunization rate of 38.1%. This is higher than the estimated national rate but significantly lower than rates of tetanus (80.6%), pneumococcal (76.3%), and influenza (69.6%) vaccination in the same population, highlighting the unique obstacles to zoster immunization. Major reasons that patients were not immunized included lack of insurance coverage and patient refusal of all vaccines. Our findings demonstrate that homeless adults are interested in zoster vaccination and a model of on-site primary care in a shelter partnering with a pharmacy can successfully improve vaccine uptake in this population. Coverage of the new inactivated zoster vaccine under Medicare Part B could increase the national zoster immunization rate.

What is in your wallet? A cluster randomized trial of the effects of showing comparative patient out-of-pocket costs on primary care prescribing for uncomplicated hypertension

BACKGROUND

Drug expenditures are responsible for an increasing proportion of health costs, accounting for $1.1 trillion in annual expenditure worldwide. As hundreds of billions of dollars are being spent each year on overtreatment with prescribed medications that are either unnecessary or are in excess of lowest cost-effective therapy, programs are needed that optimize fiscally appropriate use. We evaluated whether providing physicians with information on the patient out-of-pocket payment consequences of prescribing decisions that were in excess of lowest cost-effective therapy would alter prescribing decisions using the treatment of uncomplicated hypertension as an exemplar.

METHODS

A single-blind cluster randomized trial was conducted over a 60-month follow-up period in 76 primary care physicians in Quebec, Canada, and their patients with uncomplicated hypertension who were using the MOXXI integrated electronic health record for drug and health problem management. Physicians were randomized to an out-of-pocket expenditure module that provided alerts for comparative out-of-payment costs, thiazide diuretics as recommended first-line therapy, and tools to monitor blood pressure targets and medication compliance, or alternatively the basic MOXXI system. System software and prescription claims were used to analyze the impact of the intervention on treatment choice, adherence, and overall and out-of-pocket payment costs using generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

Three thousand five-hundred ninety-two eligible patients with uncomplicated hypertension were enrolled, of whom 1261 (35.1%) were newly started (incident patient) on treatment during follow-up. There was a statistically significant increase in the prescription of diuretics in the newly treated intervention (26.6%) compared to control patients (19.8%) (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.33). For patients already treated (prevalent patient), there was a statistically significant interaction between the intervention and patient age, with older patients being less likely to be switched to a diuretic. Among the incident patients, physicians with less than 15 years of experience were much more likely to prescribe a diuretic (OR 10.69; 95% CI 1.49 to 76.64) than physicians with 15 to 25 years (OR 0.67; 95%CI 0.25 to 1.78), or more than 25 years of experience (OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.23 to 2.65). There was no statistically significant effect of the intervention on adherence or out-of-pocket payment cost.

CONCLUSIONS

The provision of comparative information on patient out-of-pocket payments for treatment of uncomplicated hypertension had a statistically significant impact on increasing the initiation of diuretics in incident patients and switching to diuretics in younger prevalent patients. The impact of interventions to improve the cost-effectiveness of prescribing may be enhanced by also targeting patients with tools to participate in treatment decision-making and by providing physicians with comparative out-of-pocket information on all evidence-based alternatives that would enhance clinical decision-making.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN96253624.