Implementation of a pharmacy-managed program for the transition of chemotherapy to the outpatient setting

Oncology pharmacy practice in the United States: Results of a comprehensive, nationwide survey

Introduction: This study was designed to describe the landscape of oncology pharmacy practice at patient facing institutional healthcare organizations throughout the United States. Methods: The Hematology/Oncology Pharmacy Association (HOPA) Practice Outcomes and Professional Benchmarking Committee conducted a multi-organization, voluntary survey of HOPA members between March 2021 and January 2022. Four overarching domains were targeted: institutional description, job function, staffing, and training/certification. Data were evaluated using descriptive statistics. Results: A total of 68 responses were analyzed including 59% and 41% who self-identified their organization as academic and community centers, respectively. The median number of infusion chairs and annual infusion visits were 49 (interquartile range (IQR): 32-92) and 23,500 (IQR: 8300-300,000), respectively. Pharmacy departments reported to a business leader, physician leader, and nursing leader 57%, 24%, and 10% of the time, respectively. The median oncology pharmacy full-time equivalents was 16 (IQR: 5-60). At academic centers, 50% (IQR: 26-60) of inpatient and 30% (IQR: 21-38) of ambulatory pharmacist FTEs were dedicated to clinical activities. At community centers, 45% (IQR: 26-65) of inpatient and 50% (IQR: 42-58) of ambulatory pharmacist FTEs were dedicated to clinical activities. As many as 18% and 65% of organizations required or encouraged certification for oncology pharmacists, respectively. The median number of Board-Certified Oncology Pharmacists was 4 (IQR: 2-15). Conclusion: As the number of patients with cancer rises, the oncology workforce must grow to support this expanding population. These results describe the practice landscape of oncology pharmacy at US healthcare institutions to serve as a foundation for future research evaluating metrics and benchmarks.

Outcomes on an inpatient oncology service after the introduction of hospitalist comanagement

BACKGROUND

Smilow Cancer Hospital (SCH) introduced hospitalist comanagement to the inpatient oncology service to address long lengths of stay and oncologist burnout.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of hospitalists on inpatient quality outcomes and oncologist experience.

INTERVENTIONS

Hospitalists were introduced to one of two inpatient oncology services at SCH. Patients were assigned to teams equally based on capacity. Outcomes on the oncologist-led, traditional service (TS) were compared with outcomes on the hospitalist service (HS) 6 months after program implementation.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Outcomes included patient volume, length of stay (LOS), early discharge, discharge time, and 30-day readmission rate. Mixed linear or Poisson models that accounted for multiple admissions during the study duration were used. Oncologist experience was measured by survey.

RESULTS

During the study period, there were 713 discharges, 400 from the HS and 313 from the TS (p = .0003). There was no difference in demographics or severity of illness (SOI) between services. Following adjustment for age, sex, race/ethnicity, cancer type, and discharge disposition, the average LOS was 4.71 on the HS and 5.47 on the TS (p = .01). Adjusted early discharge rate was 6.22% on the HS and 2.06% on the TS (p = .01). Adjusted mean discharge time was 3:45 p.m. on HS and 4:16 p.m. on TS (p = .009). There was no difference in readmission rates. Oncologists reported less stress (p = .001) and a better ability to manage competing responsibilities (p < .0001) while working on the HS.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalist comanagement significantly improved LOS, early discharge, time of discharge, and oncologist experience without an increase in 30-day readmissions.

Unbalanced Treatment Costs of Breast Cancer in China: Implications From the Direct Costs of Inpatient and Outpatient Care in Liaoning Province

BACKGROUND

The increasing incidence of breast cancer and its financial burden highlights the need for controlling treatment costs. This study aimed to assess the direct costs of inpatient and outpatient care for breast cancer patients in Liaoning Province to provide a policy reference for cost containment.

METHODS

Based on the System of Health Accounts 2011 (SHA 2011), systematic data collection was conducted via multistage stratified cluster random sampling. A total of 1160 health institutions, including 83 hospitals, 16 public health institutions, 120 primary health institutions, and 941 outpatient institutions were enrolled in 2017. A database was established containing 20 035 patient-level medical records from the information system of these institutions. Curative care expenditure (CCE)was calculated, and generalized linear modeling was performed to determine cost-related factors.

RESULTS

In 2017, the CCE for breast cancer was approximately CNY 830.19 million (US$122.96 million) in Liaoning province (0.7% of the total health expenditure and 9.9% of cancer-related healthcare costs). Inpatient care costs were estimated to be CNY 617.27 million (US$91.42 million), accounting for 74.4% of the CCE for breast cancer, almost three times as large as outpatient costs (25.6%). The average inpatient and outpatient costs for breast cancer were estimated to be CNY 12 108 (US$1793) and CNY 829 (US$123) per visit. Medication cost was the main cost driver, which comprised 84.0% of the average outpatient cost and 37.2% of the mean inpatient cost.

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer imposes a large economic burden on patients and the social health insurance system. Results show an irrational cost pattern of inpatient and outpatient services, with patients relying excessively on inpatient services for treatment. Promoting outpatient care whenever relevant is conducive to cost containment and rational utilization of resources.

Transitioning ifosfamide chemotherapy regimens to the ambulatory setting: reviewing cost savings and safety profile

PURPOSE

To characterize and compare both the outcome and cost of treatment of outpatient (OP) and inpatient (IP) ifosfamide therapy.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective chart review of patients 18 years and older receiving ifosfamide therapy. The primary endpoint compares and evaluates the side effect profiles of ifosfamide-treated patients in the OP/IP settings. The adverse event grading system was characterized using the CTCAE Version 5.0. The highest grade was documented per cycle. The secondary endpoint of this study compares the costs of OP/IP therapy. It was assumed that the cost of medication was equivalent for IP/OP treatments. The cost saved with OP administration was determined by the average cost of hospital stay for IP admission.

RESULTS

Ifosfamide therapy of 86 patients (57 OP, 29 IP) was reviewed. The predominant OP regimens were doxorobucin-ifosfamide-mesna (AIM) with 43.9% and ifosfamide-etoposide (IE) with 29.8%. Grade 4 anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia were most frequent in IP vs OP therapies (22.9% IP vs 4.3% OP, 21.6% IP vs 9.2% OP, and 22.8% IP vs 19.6% OP respectively). Neutropenic fever (NF) occurred in 20 OP patients which were predominantly treated with AIM or IE and led to average hospital stay of 6 days. Neurotoxicity, treated with methylene blue (MB) occurred in 4 OP patients. OP therapy saved a total of 783 hospital days, leading to a cost savings of $2,103,921.

CONCLUSIONS

Transitioning ifosfamide to the OP setting is feasible for academic and community infusion centers with the OP administration being safe, well-tolerated, and associated with decreased total cost of care. The current processes allow for safe transition of chemotherapy of chemotherapy under times of COVID.

Successful implementation of outpatient R ± DHAX (rituximab, dexamethasone, oxaliplatin, cytarabine) for select patients with lymphoma: a single-center experience

R ± DHAX has been traditionally administered to inpatient due to the timing of chemotherapy administration and the perceived need for close monitoring of adverse effects. To administer R ± DHAX outpatient, a multidisciplinary task force created clinical and educational guidelines which were implemented through two phases: pilot and expansion. The pilot program determined the feasibility of transitioning R ± DHAX outpatient at a single infusion site. The expansion phase led to a service-wide implementation across all outpatient sites. A total of 40 patients were included, of which 23 patients completed all cycles, outpatient, 12 transitioned inpatient to outpatient administration, and 5 transitioned outpatient to inpatient administration. The success rate of outpatient R ± DHAX administration was 90% (36 patients successfully completed outpatient administration/40 total patients). No cytarabine-related cerebellar or ophthalmic toxicity was reported. Outpatient R ± DHAX saved 192 hospital days. R ± DHAX could be successfully administered outpatient with minimal safety concerns and reduced hospital bed utilization.

Effects of Pharmacist-Led Clinical Pathway/Order Sets on Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review

Background: Pharmacist-led clinical pathways/order sets (PLCOs) were first applied for designated diseases and surgical operations, such as cancer. They were not used in pharmacotherapy until recently. After screening a large number of publications, we found that PLCOs were rarely accessible.

Objective: To evaluate the effects and the changes of relevant medical outcomes of PLCOs.

Methods: Articles from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang database, and China Biology Medicine disc (CBM) were systematically retrieved. Clinical research comparing cancer patients’ clinical effects with or without clinical pathway/order sets was performed. Two reviewers performed quality assessment, and the data were abstracted independently. A narrative synthesis of the extracted data was performed due to heterogeneity.

Results: Nine studies were identified, including six uncontrolled before–after studies and three case-series studies. The scopes of PLCOs of included research can be divided into two types, one focusing on chemotherapy agents and the other on the managements of chemotherapy-induced complications. The PLCOs shortened hospital length of stay, decreased initial antibiotic time intervals in patients with febrile neutropenia, reduced medication error incidence, and increased physicians’ adherence rate to clinical pathway/order sets. Moreover, three articles included economic effects showing positive savings on medication costs through PLCOs.

Conclusion: PLCOs can have beneficial effects on medication effectiveness, safety, and economic outcomes. Nevertheless, clinical pathway/order sets need to be further optimized and expanded to other clinical areas.

Bidirectional information sharing between Nagoya Memorial Hospital and health insurance pharmacies using a communication sheet for pharmaceutical cooperation

Background

We collaborated with the regional pharmaceutical associations near Nagoya Memorial Hospital and created a communication sheet for pharmaceutical cooperation between the hospital and health insurance pharmacies.

Methods

The communication sheet for pharmaceutical cooperation was issued in October 2014. We conducted a questionnaire survey of both cancer patients and community pharmacists 1 year after the implementation of the use of this sheet. Based on the results of the survey, we modified our communication sheet and added a unified reply form in October 2016. We examined the number of replies from community pharmacists from October 2014 to April 2019. We then analyzed how community pharmacists instructed and communicated with cancer patients using the results of both the questionnaire survey and the reply form, which were compared before and after introducing the modified version of the communication sheet.

Results

During the 5 years of observation, 743 communication sheets were sent from Nagoya Memorial Hospital to community pharmacists. As a result of pharmaceutical cooperation in using the communication sheet, 96.4% of prescribed medication were immediately prepared in health insurance pharmacies on that day. The communication sheet also enhanced the conversations between cancer patients and pharmacists. The introduction of the unified reply form increased the response rate of community pharmacists from 1.7 to 69.5% (p < 0.001). The communication between community pharmacists and cancer patients was significantly hindered by prescriptions without an oral cancer drug and patient age < 65 years old (p < 0.05). However, this hindrance was reduced by the use of the modified form.

Conclusions

The communication sheet for pharmaceutical cooperation is useful for bidirectional information sharing between hospitals and health insurance pharmacies, which may enable pharmacists to provide cancer patients with medication instructions in coordination with hospitals and increase the quality of outpatient pharmacy services.

Similar Quality of Life and Safety in Patients Receiving Inpatient or Outpatient Chemotherapy: A Focus on Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Quality of life (QoL) is a particularly important issue for cancer patients. This study was designed to investigate the differences in QoL in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients who underwent inpatient chemotherapy (IPCT) or outpatient chemotherapy (OPCT). A total of 107 ESCC patients were enrolled, including 53 patients in the IPCT group and 54 patients in the OPCT group. The widely used and well-validated instruments European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 Items (EORTC QLQ-C30) and Oesophageal Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-OES18) were used to examine the QoL of the two groups. In addition, the differences in adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. The results of QLQ C-30 analysis showed that mean global quality of life scores were similar between IPCT and OPCT groups, as were functional and symptom scales. There were no significant differences in the functional and symptom scales in the analysis of QLQ OES18 either. Most AEs of chemotherapy were grades 1–2, and the majority of patients tolerated the side effects; no statistically significant difference in AEs between these two groups was mentioned. Our study suggests that the health-related QoL and adverse events in ESCC patients who received IPCT or OPCT are similar. OPCT is reasonable and safe in clinical practice.