Integrating high touch specialty pharmacy services within a neurology clinic to improve medication access and affordability

Abstract

Abstract Background: The cost of medications has been an upfront topic in the public, with 24% of patients reporting difficulty with affordable access, and specialty medications contribute to those concerns through an increase in price by 57% since 2014. Specialty pharmacy services (SPS) were implemented into a neurology clinic to assist with medication coverage and affordability. Aims: To assess the impact of integrating high touch SPS within a neurology clinic by measuring migraine medication affordability. Methods: The dispensing data for patients (1) filling a Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist (CGRPra) and/or onabotulinumtoxin A (Ona A) for migraine through the onsite specialty pharmacy, and (2) being treated through the SPS-affiliated neurology clinic was gathered and analyzed for medication cost coverage and patient financial responsibility. The study endpoints were to observe a minimized patient copay and assess the amount of $0 copays after the initiation of the clinic-based SPS. Results: For the CGRPra group, the SPS were able to reduce the patient responsibility to 2% of the medication cost, and more than 25% of the CGRPra dispenses had a $0 copay. For the Ona A group, comparing January 2018 to January 2019 showed a 185% increase in vials dispensed on pharmacy benefits and a patient responsibility of < 1% medication cost in January 2019 vs 19% in January 2018. The median copay went from $150 in January 2018 to $0 in January 2019. No vials in January 2018 had $0 copays, 20 did in January 2019. Measuring 6 months before SPS were started and 6 months after, the Ona A had similar results as the January comparison, with an increase of 188% dispensed through the pharmacy and the same median copays, $150 vs $0. The number of vials with $0 copay increased from four before SPS to 112 6 months after SPS was integrated. In addition, through the SPS reimbursement audits and benefit verification for Ona A billing, the Ona A reimbursement is projected to increase by $325,000 over 3 years due to switching Medicaid Ona A patients to bill through pharmacy benefits. Conclusions: The implementation of high touch SPS in a clinic can benefit patients through prescription coordination and price mitigation. Through the SPS, patients were responsible for only 2% of the CGRPra cost and < 1% of the Ona A cost. The SPS were able to verify which insurance branch was preferred for Ona A, which helped mitigate patient copays and improved facility financials for Ona A through upfront reimbursement through the preferred method of pharmacy benefits.