Value-Based Pharmacy Initiatives, Center for High Value HealthCare, UPMC Health Plan, Pittsburgh, PA.
Health Economics, UPMC Health Plan, Pittsburgh, PA.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2021 Feb;27(2):147-156. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2021.27.2.147.
Although medication therapy management (MTM) has specific eligibility criteria and is mandated for specific Medicare Part D enrollees, some health plans have expanded MTM eligibility beyond the minimum criteria to include other Medicare Part D enrollees, Medicaid, and commercial health plan patients. Differences exist in the mode of delivery, location of services, type of personnel involved in managing the service, and the subsequent outcomes. The type and intensity of MTM services delivered have evolved with time to more streamlined and robust interventions, necessitating ongoing evaluation of the effect on clinical and economic outcomes. To assess the effect of changes to an existing MTM program on cost of care, utilization, and medication adherence. UPMC Health Plan made changes to an existing MTM program by expanding eligibility (customized by the type of health plan), intervention types, pharmacist involvement, and patient followup contacts. After matching our intervention cohort (identified January 2017-June 2018) with the pre-2016 MTM historical controls (patients identified January 2014-June 2015 who would have been eligible if we used the intervention cohort eligibility criteria), we estimated that the effect of the program changes with a difference-in-difference model (preintervention [2014-2016] and postintervention [2017-2019]). Outcomes of interest included cost (total cost of care including medical, pharmacy, and unplanned care [i.e., unscheduled health care use such as emergency department visits] in 2017 U.S. dollars); utilization; medication adherence (proportion of days covered); and return on investment (ROI). Target population included continuously enrolled patients aged ≥ 21 years in the commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid health plans. Total propensity score-matched members was 10,747, 55% of which were in the historic control group. The average (SD) ages after matching the groups were similar (historical control group: 57.08 years [14.23], intervention group: 56.79 years [14.21]) and the majority was female (57%). Comorbidities identified most for patients included hypertension (77%), dyslipidemia (70%), and diabetes (52%). Forty-one percent were in the commercial, 37% in the Medicaid, and 23% in the Medicare health plans. Proportion of care activities undertaken in the intervention period compared with the control period were significantly different: "sent letter to physician" (67% vs. 87%), "sent letter to member" (15% vs. 0%), "pharmacist phone call to physician" (15% vs. 0.1%), and "pharmacist phone call to member" (13% vs. 7%). There were statistically significant reductions in unplanned care across all health plans especially in the Medicare population, in total cost of care, and increases in medication adherence in 4 therapeutic classes: anticoagulants (OR = 1.25, = 0.005), cardiac medications (OR = 1.20, < 0.001), statins (OR = 1.21, < 0.001), and antidepressants (OR = 1.15, < 0.001). There was a positive ROI of $18.50 per dollar spent, which equated to a cumulative net savings of $11 million over 24 months. In a large health plan, expanding MTM eligibility, intensifying patient follow-up contact and pharmacist involvement, and improving provider awareness had favorable clinical and economic benefits. There was no funding for this project except employees' time. All authors are employees of UPMC and have no conflicts of interest to report.
虽然药物治疗管理(MTM)有特定的资格标准,并针对特定的医疗保险 D 部分参保人强制要求,但一些健康计划将 MTM 的资格扩大到超出最低标准的范围,包括其他医疗保险 D 部分参保人、医疗补助和商业健康计划患者。在服务的提供方式、服务地点、参与管理服务的人员类型以及随后的结果方面存在差异。MTM 服务的类型和强度随着时间的推移不断发展,变得更加精简和有力,这就需要对其对临床和经济结果的影响进行持续评估。为了评估对现有 MTM 计划进行更改对护理成本、利用和药物依从性的影响。UPMC 健康计划通过扩大资格(按健康计划类型定制)、干预类型、药剂师参与和患者随访联系来对现有 MTM 计划进行更改。在将干预队列(2017 年 1 月至 2018 年 6 月确定)与 2016 年之前的 MTM 历史对照(2014 年 1 月至 2015 年 6 月确定,如果我们使用干预队列的资格标准,这些患者将有资格)进行匹配后,我们使用差异差异模型(干预前[2014-2016]和干预后[2017-2019])估计了计划变更的效果。感兴趣的结果包括成本(包括医疗、药房和计划外护理[即急诊就诊等未计划的医疗保健使用]的 2017 年美元总成本);利用;药物依从性(覆盖天数比例);和投资回报率(ROI)。目标人群包括商业、医疗保险和医疗补助健康计划中连续参保的 21 岁及以上患者。总倾向得分匹配成员为 10747 人,其中 55%为历史对照组。匹配后两组的平均(SD)年龄相似(历史对照组:57.08 岁[14.23],干预组:56.79 岁[14.21]),且大多数为女性(57%)。为患者确定的最常见合并症包括高血压(77%)、血脂异常(70%)和糖尿病(52%)。41%在商业计划中,37%在医疗补助计划中,23%在医疗保险计划中。与对照组相比,干预期间开展的护理活动比例明显不同:“给医生寄信”(67%对 87%),“给成员寄信”(15%对 0%),“药剂师给医生打电话”(15%对 0.1%)和“药剂师给成员打电话”(13%对 7%)。所有健康计划的计划外护理均显著减少,特别是在医疗保险人群中,总护理成本增加,4 种治疗类别的药物依从性增加:抗凝剂(OR=1.25, =0.005)、心脏药物(OR=1.20, <0.001)、他汀类药物(OR=1.21, <0.001)和抗抑郁药(OR=1.15, <0.001)。每花费 1 美元就有 18.50 美元的正投资回报率,这相当于在 24 个月内累计节省了 1100 万美元。在一家大型健康计划中,扩大 MTM 的资格、加强患者随访联系和药剂师的参与,并提高提供者的认识,具有良好的临床和经济效益。该项目没有资金,除了员工的时间。所有作者均为 UPMC 的员工,没有利益冲突需要申报。