Impact of a Pharmacy Care Management Service on Health Spending, Resource Use, and Medication Adherence for Medically Complex Medicare Advantage Members
Lidsky, L.; Hallinan, S.; Benner, J.; Jones, S.; Smith, E.; Houck, P.; Stevenson, H.; Yoder, D.; Manolis, C.; Naidoo, A.; Choudhry, N.; Good, C. B.
Show abstract
BACKGROUNDThe Medicare Advantage (MA) program has grown rapidly over the past two decades, particularly among medically complex beneficiaries, which has implications for healthcare utilization, costs, and quality in the MA program. Ensuring safe and effective medication use in this population has been identified as a priority by policymakers, yet there is limited evidence to guide MA plans pharmacy care management efforts. OBJECTIVETo evaluate the impact of an integrated pharmacy care management (PCM) program implemented at a regional Medicare Advantage and Part D (MAPD) plan on 12-month cost outcomes, health services use, and medication adherence quality measures for polypharmacy members enrolled in the program as well as for a subgroup predicted to have high potential cost savings from improved medication adherence. METHODSWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using adjudicated administrative claims data and multi-stage matching methods. The PCM program was offered by telephone to MAPD members who had filled eight or more chronic medications in the 180 days prior to being screened for eligibility. The PCM cohort consisted of individuals enrolled in the PCM program who filled at least one prescription after enrollment, had no evidence of hospice care, and were continuously eligible for health plan benefits for at least 12 months before and 12 months after enrollment. Potential controls were members who met the same criteria but who did not participate in the PCM program and filled prescriptions at non-PCM pharmacies. A commercially available algorithm (the Value of Future Adherence [VFA] score) was used to predict potential future cost savings associated with improved medication adherence for all members at baseline. Control members were matched to PCM members in a 5:1 ratio using a two-stage matching process. Outcomes were measured over 12 months and included per enrollee per month (PEPM) health spending, health resource utilization, and medication adherence for oral diabetes medications, renin-angiotensin system antagonists, and statins. Outcomes were assessed for all members and in the subgroup with high VFA scores. RESULTSA total of 724 PCM members matched to 3,620 control members, with 196 members in the high VFA subgroup. Among all PCM members, there was a $50 (95% CI: $15, $86; p=0.005) PEPM increase in average pharmacy spending compared to controls, and an offsetting $158 (95% CI: -$265, -$51; p=0.004) PEPM decrease in average medical spending, resulting in a $108 (95% CI: -$221, $5; p=0.062) PEPM lower average total cost of care in PCM members after 12 months. Savings were driven primarily by the high VFA subgroup, which incurred an average of $52 (95% CI: -$19, $130; p=0.187) PEPM greater pharmacy spending and $458 (95% CI: -$678, -$233; p<0.001) PEPM less medical spending than controls, for an average decrease of $406 (95% CI: -$645, -$161; p<0.001) PEPM in total cost of care. PCM members experienced a 15% (p=0.008) reduction in inpatient stays compared to control members; high VFA PCM members had 32% (p<0.001) fewer inpatient stays. The PCM program was associated with increases in the percent of members adherent to renin-angiotensin system antagonist, statin, and oral antidiabetic therapy, ranging from 7.3 to 12.9 (p<0.001) percentage points among all PCM members and 12.2 to 14.3 (p<0.05) percentage points for high VFA members. CONCLUSIONThe PCM program was associated with significantly lower medical spending, reduced hospital admissions, and improved adherence to chronic medications in members receiving the program for 12 months. Benefits of the program are greatest among members in the high VFA subgroup. Our findings support the value of an integrated pharmacy care management program in the polychronic MAPD population and underscore the value of targeting the PCM program to members predicted to benefit the most rather than merely on the basis of the number of medications a member is taking.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Covid-19 and Excess Mortality in Medicare Beneficiaries 93%
- Effect of common maintenance drugs on the risk and severity of COVID-19 in elderly patients 92%
- Assessing the impact of community-based interventions on hypertension and diabetes management in three Minnesota communities: findings from the prospective evaluation of US HealthRise programs 91%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Urban-Rural Disparities in Spatio-Temporal Accessibility of Pharmacy Care: A Case Study of Vermont, USA 90%
- Differences in medication reconciliation interventions between six hospitals: a mixed method study 90%
- Measurement Matters: Changing Penalty Calculations under the Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) Cost Hospitals Millions 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- A novel decision modeling framework for health policy analyses when outcomes are influenced by social and disease processes 89%
- Clarifying Values: An Updated and Expanded Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis 87%
- Bias-adjusted predictions of county-level vaccination coverage from the COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey 86%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical Utility of Automatable Prediction Models for Improving Palliative and End-Of-Life Care Outcomes: Towards Routine Decision Analysis Before Implementation 90%
- Measure what matters: counts of hospitalized patients are a better metric for health system capacity planning for a reopening 90%
- Learning Decision Thresholds for Risk-Stratification Models from Aggregate Clinician Behavior 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.