Implementing real-time prescription benefit tools: Early experiences from 5 academic medical centers

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Jing Luo , Rachel Wong , Tanvi Mehta , Jeremy I. Schwartz , Jeremy A. Epstein , Erika Smith , Nitu Kashyap , Fasika A. Woreta , Kristian Feterik , Michael J. Fliotsos , Bradley H. Crotty
{"title":"Implementing real-time prescription benefit tools: Early experiences from 5 academic medical centers","authors":"Jing Luo ,&nbsp;Rachel Wong ,&nbsp;Tanvi Mehta ,&nbsp;Jeremy I. Schwartz ,&nbsp;Jeremy A. Epstein ,&nbsp;Erika Smith ,&nbsp;Nitu Kashyap ,&nbsp;Fasika A. Woreta ,&nbsp;Kristian Feterik ,&nbsp;Michael J. Fliotsos ,&nbsp;Bradley H. Crotty","doi":"10.1016/j.hjdsi.2023.100689","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Medication price transparency tools are increasingly available, but data on their use, and their potential effects on prescribing behavior, patient out of pocket (OOP) costs, and clinician workflow integration, is limited.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To describe the implementation experiences with real-time prescription benefit (RTPB) tools at 5 large academic medical centers and their early impact on prescription ordering.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, we systematically collected information on the characteristics of RTPB tools through discussions with key stakeholders at each of the five organizations. Quantitative encounter data, prescriptions written, and RTPB alerts/estimates and prescription adjustment rates were obtained at each organization in the first three months after “go-live” of the RTPB system(s) between 2019 and 2020.</p></div><div><h3>Main measures</h3><p>Implementation characteristics, prescription orders, cost estimate retrieval rates, and prescription adjustment rates.</p></div><div><h3>Key results</h3><p>Differences were noted with respect to implementation characteristics related to RTPB tools. All of the organizations with the exception of one chose to display OOP cost estimates and suggested alternative prescriptions automatically. Differences were also noted with respect to a patient cost threshold for automatic display. In the first three months after “go-live,” RTPB estimate retrieval rates varied greatly across the five organizations, ranging from 8% to 60% of outpatient prescriptions. The prescription adjustment rate was lower, ranging from 0.1% to 4.9% of all prescriptions ordered.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In this study reporting on the early experiences with RTPB tools across five academic medical centers, we found variability in implementation characteristics and population coverage. In addition RTPB estimate retrieval rates were highly variable across the five organizations, while rates of prescription adjustment ranged from low to modest.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":29963,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare-The Journal of Delivery Science and Innovation","volume":"11 2","pages":"Article 100689"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare-The Journal of Delivery Science and Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213076423000167","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Medication price transparency tools are increasingly available, but data on their use, and their potential effects on prescribing behavior, patient out of pocket (OOP) costs, and clinician workflow integration, is limited.

Objective

To describe the implementation experiences with real-time prescription benefit (RTPB) tools at 5 large academic medical centers and their early impact on prescription ordering.

Design

and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, we systematically collected information on the characteristics of RTPB tools through discussions with key stakeholders at each of the five organizations. Quantitative encounter data, prescriptions written, and RTPB alerts/estimates and prescription adjustment rates were obtained at each organization in the first three months after “go-live” of the RTPB system(s) between 2019 and 2020.

Main measures

Implementation characteristics, prescription orders, cost estimate retrieval rates, and prescription adjustment rates.

Key results

Differences were noted with respect to implementation characteristics related to RTPB tools. All of the organizations with the exception of one chose to display OOP cost estimates and suggested alternative prescriptions automatically. Differences were also noted with respect to a patient cost threshold for automatic display. In the first three months after “go-live,” RTPB estimate retrieval rates varied greatly across the five organizations, ranging from 8% to 60% of outpatient prescriptions. The prescription adjustment rate was lower, ranging from 0.1% to 4.9% of all prescriptions ordered.

Conclusions

In this study reporting on the early experiences with RTPB tools across five academic medical centers, we found variability in implementation characteristics and population coverage. In addition RTPB estimate retrieval rates were highly variable across the five organizations, while rates of prescription adjustment ranged from low to modest.

实施实时处方福利工具:5个学术医疗中心的早期经验
背景药物价格透明度工具越来越多,但关于其使用及其对处方行为、患者自付费用和临床医生工作流程集成的潜在影响的数据有限。目的介绍实时处方效益(RTPB)工具在5个大型学术医疗中心的实施经验及其对处方订购的早期影响。设计和参与者:在这项横断面研究中,我们通过与五个组织的主要利益相关者进行讨论,系统地收集了有关RTPB工具特征的信息。在2019年至2020年RTPB系统“上线”后的前三个月内,每个组织都获得了定量遭遇数据、开具的处方、RTPB警报/估计和处方调整率。主要衡量指标包括实施特征、处方订单、成本估计检索率和处方调整率。关键结果注意到与RTPB工具相关的实现特征存在差异。除一个组织外,所有组织都选择自动显示OOP成本估计和建议的替代处方。在用于自动显示的患者成本阈值方面也注意到了差异。RTPB估计,在“上线”后的前三个月,五个组织的检索率差异很大,门诊处方的检索率从8%到60%不等。处方调整率较低,占所有处方的0.1%至4.9%不等。结论在这项报告了五个学术医疗中心使用RTPB工具的早期经验的研究中,我们发现实施特征和人群覆盖率存在差异。此外,五个组织的RTPB估计检索率变化很大,而处方调整率从低到适中不等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: HealthCare: The Journal of Delivery Science and Innovation is a quarterly journal. The journal promotes cutting edge research on innovation in healthcare delivery, including improvements in systems, processes, management, and applied information technology. The journal welcomes submissions of original research articles, case studies capturing "policy to practice" or "implementation of best practices", commentaries, and critical reviews of relevant novel programs and products. The scope of the journal includes topics directly related to delivering healthcare, such as: ● Care redesign ● Applied health IT ● Payment innovation ● Managerial innovation ● Quality improvement (QI) research ● New training and education models ● Comparative delivery innovation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信