Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
College of Pharmacy, Oregon State University, Portland.
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 May 1;3(5):e205252. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.5252.
Since 2016, 11 states have expanded the scope of pharmacists to include direct prescription of hormonal contraception. Dispensing greater than 1 month's supply is associated with improved contraceptive continuation rates and fewer breaks in coverage. Scant data exist on the practice of pharmacist prescription of contraception and its outcomes compared with traditional, clinic-based prescriptions.
To compare the amount of hormonal contraceptive supply dispensed between pharmacists and clinic-based prescriptions. Prescribing patterns were assessed by describing prescribing practices for women with contraindications to combined hormonal contraception. Characteristics of women seeking hormonal contraception directly from pharmacists were also described.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study surveyed women aged 18 to 50 years who presented to pharmacies in California, Colorado, Hawaii, and Oregon for hormonal contraception prescribed by a clinician or a pharmacist between January 30 and November 1, 2019.
Pharmacist or clinic-based prescription of contraception.
Months of contraceptive supply dispensed.
Four hundred ten women (mean [SD] age, 27.1 [7.7] years) were recruited who obtained contraception directly from a pharmacist (n = 144) or by traditional clinician prescription (n = 266). Women obtaining contraception from a pharmacist were significantly younger (82 [56.9%] vs 115 [43.2%] participants aged 18-24 years; P = .03), had less education (38 [26.4%] vs 100 [37.6%] with a bachelor degree; P = .002), and were more likely to be uninsured (16 [11.1%] vs 8 [3.0%] participants; P = .001) compared with women with a prescription from a clinician. Pharmacists were significantly more likely to prescribe a 6-month or greater supply of contraceptives than clinicians (6.9% vs 1.5%, P < .001) and significantly less likely to only prescribe a 1-month supply (42 [29.2%] vs 118 [44.4%] prescriptions; P < .001). Controlling for all covariates, women seen by pharmacists had higher odds of receipt of a 6-month or greater supply of contraceptives compared with those seen by clinicians (odds ratio = 3.55; 95% CI, 1.88-6.70). Pharmacists were as likely as clinicians to prescribe a progestin-only method to women with a potential contraindication to estrogen (n = 60 women; 8 [20.0%] vs 6 [30.0%], P = .52).
These findings suggest that pharmacist prescription of contraception may be associated with improved contraceptive continuation by preventing breaks in coverage through the provision of a greater supply of medication. Efforts are needed to educate prescribing providers on the importance of dispensing 6 months or greater contraceptive supply.
自 2016 年以来,已有 11 个州扩大了药剂师的范围,包括直接开具荷尔蒙避孕药的处方。配给超过 1 个月的供应量与改善避孕持续率和减少覆盖中断有关。关于药剂师处方避孕及其与传统基于诊所的处方相比的结果的数据很少。
比较药剂师和基于诊所的处方之间荷尔蒙避孕药的供应数量。通过描述对有荷尔蒙避孕药联合使用禁忌的妇女的处方实践来评估处方模式。还描述了直接从药剂师处寻求荷尔蒙避孕的妇女的特征。
设计、地点和参与者:这项队列研究调查了 2019 年 1 月 30 日至 11 月 1 日期间在加利福尼亚州、科罗拉多州、夏威夷州和俄勒冈州的药店就诊的 18 至 50 岁的妇女,她们的荷尔蒙避孕是由临床医生或药剂师开具的。
药剂师或基于诊所的避孕处方。
配给的避孕供应月数。
招募了 410 名妇女(平均[标准差]年龄,27.1[7.7]岁),她们直接从药剂师(n=144)或传统临床医生处方(n=266)获得避孕。从药剂师处获得避孕的妇女明显更年轻(82[56.9%]与 115[43.2%]参与者年龄在 18-24 岁之间;P=0.03),教育程度较低(38[26.4%]与 100[37.6%]有学士学位;P=0.002),并且无保险的可能性更高(16[11.1%]与 8[3.0%]参与者;P=0.001)与从临床医生处获得处方的妇女相比。药剂师开出 6 个月或更长时间的避孕药的可能性明显高于临床医生(6.9%与 1.5%,P<0.001),开出仅 1 个月供应量的可能性明显低于临床医生(42[29.2%]与 118[44.4%]处方;P<0.001)。在控制所有协变量的情况下,与接受临床医生治疗的妇女相比,接受药剂师治疗的妇女获得 6 个月或更长时间避孕药的可能性更高(优势比=3.55;95%置信区间,1.88-6.70)。药剂师与临床医生开出孕激素避孕药的可能性相同,适用于有雌激素潜在禁忌的妇女(n=60 名妇女;8[20.0%]与 6[30.0%],P=0.52)。
这些发现表明,药剂师开避孕药处方可能通过提供更大剂量的药物来防止覆盖中断,从而与改善避孕持续率有关。需要努力教育处方提供者,以确保配给 6 个月或更长时间的避孕供应。