获得同步用药的医疗保险受益人的医疗资源利用情况。

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Prajakta H. Waghmare, Chien-Yu Huang, Heather A. Jaynes, Wendy M. Green, Margie E. Snyder, Alan J. Zillich
{"title":"获得同步用药的医疗保险受益人的医疗资源利用情况。","authors":"Prajakta H. Waghmare,&nbsp;Chien-Yu Huang,&nbsp;Heather A. Jaynes,&nbsp;Wendy M. Green,&nbsp;Margie E. Snyder,&nbsp;Alan J. Zillich","doi":"10.1016/j.japh.2024.102145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>An appointment-based medication synchronization (ABMS) is a service whuch aligns patients’ chronic medications to a predetermined routine pickup date and includes a comprehensive medication review or other clinical appointment at the pharmacy.</p></div><div><h3>Objective(s)</h3><p>We compared healthcare utilization outcomes (outpatient, inpatient, emergency department visits, and pharmacy utilization) of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in a med-sync program to beneficiaries not enrolled in such a program.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This retrospective cohort study included Medicare beneficiaries obtaining medications from pharmacies providing ABMS. All Medicare inpatient, outpatient, emergency, and pharmacy claims data from 2014 to 2016 obtained from the Research Data Assistance Center. These pharmacy claims were used to create med-sync (n = 13,193) and non–med-sync cohorts (n = 156,987). All patients were followed longitudinally for 12 months before and after a 2015 index or enrollment date. Baseline characteristics were used to create a logistic regression model for propensity score matching. A 1:1 greedy nearest neighbor matching algorithm was adapted for sequentially matching both cohorts. Difference in differences (DID) was used to compare mean changes in health care utilization outcomes (outpatient, inpatient, ED visits, and pharmacy utilization) between cohorts.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>After matching, 13,193 beneficiaries in each cohort were used for analysis. DIDs for mean of health care utilizations were statistically significantly lower in the med-sync cohort than the non–med-sync cohort for outpatient visits (DID 0.012, <em>P</em> = 0.0073) and pharmacy utilization (DID 0.013, <em>P</em> &lt; 0.0001). There was not a statistically significant DID for inpatient and ED visits between cohorts.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Outpatient and pharmacy utilization changes were statistically significantly lower in the med-sync cohort than the non–med-sync cohort in the 12 months after enrollment. Lower pharmacy utilization could be caused by reducing duplicate prescriptions during synchronized refills or optimization of therapy during medication reviews if patients are enrolled in appointment-based model med-sync.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50015,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Pharmacists Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health care resource utilization in Medicare beneficiaries obtaining medication synchronization\",\"authors\":\"Prajakta H. Waghmare,&nbsp;Chien-Yu Huang,&nbsp;Heather A. Jaynes,&nbsp;Wendy M. Green,&nbsp;Margie E. Snyder,&nbsp;Alan J. Zillich\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.japh.2024.102145\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>An appointment-based medication synchronization (ABMS) is a service whuch aligns patients’ chronic medications to a predetermined routine pickup date and includes a comprehensive medication review or other clinical appointment at the pharmacy.</p></div><div><h3>Objective(s)</h3><p>We compared healthcare utilization outcomes (outpatient, inpatient, emergency department visits, and pharmacy utilization) of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in a med-sync program to beneficiaries not enrolled in such a program.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This retrospective cohort study included Medicare beneficiaries obtaining medications from pharmacies providing ABMS. All Medicare inpatient, outpatient, emergency, and pharmacy claims data from 2014 to 2016 obtained from the Research Data Assistance Center. These pharmacy claims were used to create med-sync (n = 13,193) and non–med-sync cohorts (n = 156,987). All patients were followed longitudinally for 12 months before and after a 2015 index or enrollment date. Baseline characteristics were used to create a logistic regression model for propensity score matching. A 1:1 greedy nearest neighbor matching algorithm was adapted for sequentially matching both cohorts. Difference in differences (DID) was used to compare mean changes in health care utilization outcomes (outpatient, inpatient, ED visits, and pharmacy utilization) between cohorts.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>After matching, 13,193 beneficiaries in each cohort were used for analysis. DIDs for mean of health care utilizations were statistically significantly lower in the med-sync cohort than the non–med-sync cohort for outpatient visits (DID 0.012, <em>P</em> = 0.0073) and pharmacy utilization (DID 0.013, <em>P</em> &lt; 0.0001). There was not a statistically significant DID for inpatient and ED visits between cohorts.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Outpatient and pharmacy utilization changes were statistically significantly lower in the med-sync cohort than the non–med-sync cohort in the 12 months after enrollment. Lower pharmacy utilization could be caused by reducing duplicate prescriptions during synchronized refills or optimization of therapy during medication reviews if patients are enrolled in appointment-based model med-sync.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50015,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Pharmacists Association\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Pharmacists Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1544319124001651\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Pharmacists Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1544319124001651","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:预约用药同步化(ABMS)是一种将患者的慢性病用药与预先确定的常规取药日期相一致的服务,其中包括在药房进行全面用药检查或其他临床预约。我们比较了加入药物同步计划的医疗保险受益人与未加入此类计划的受益人的医疗利用结果(门诊、住院、急诊就诊和药房利用):这项回顾性队列研究包括从提供 ABMS 的药房获取药物的医疗保险受益人。从研究数据援助中心(ResDAC)获得了 2014 年至 2016 年的所有医疗保险住院、门诊、急诊和药房报销数据。这些药房理赔数据被用于创建药物同步(med-sync)(n=13,193)和非药物同步(n=156,987)队列。在 2015 年索引/注册日期前后,对所有患者进行了为期 12 个月的纵向随访。基线特征被用于创建倾向评分匹配的逻辑回归模型。采用 1:1 贪心近邻匹配算法对两个队列进行顺序匹配。采用差分法(DID)比较不同组群之间医疗保健使用结果(门诊、住院、急诊就诊和药房使用)的平均变化:匹配后,每个队列中有 13 193 名受益人被用于分析。在门诊就诊(DID:0.012,P=0.0073)和药房使用(DID:0.013,P=0.0073)方面,与非医疗同步队列相比,医疗同步队列的医疗使用平均值的 DID 明显较低:与非医疗同步队列相比,医疗同步队列在入组后 12 个月内的门诊和药房使用率变化明显较低。药房使用率降低的原因可能是,如果患者加入了 ABM 医学同步,在同步补药过程中减少了重复处方,或在药物审查过程中优化了治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Health care resource utilization in Medicare beneficiaries obtaining medication synchronization

Background

An appointment-based medication synchronization (ABMS) is a service whuch aligns patients’ chronic medications to a predetermined routine pickup date and includes a comprehensive medication review or other clinical appointment at the pharmacy.

Objective(s)

We compared healthcare utilization outcomes (outpatient, inpatient, emergency department visits, and pharmacy utilization) of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in a med-sync program to beneficiaries not enrolled in such a program.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included Medicare beneficiaries obtaining medications from pharmacies providing ABMS. All Medicare inpatient, outpatient, emergency, and pharmacy claims data from 2014 to 2016 obtained from the Research Data Assistance Center. These pharmacy claims were used to create med-sync (n = 13,193) and non–med-sync cohorts (n = 156,987). All patients were followed longitudinally for 12 months before and after a 2015 index or enrollment date. Baseline characteristics were used to create a logistic regression model for propensity score matching. A 1:1 greedy nearest neighbor matching algorithm was adapted for sequentially matching both cohorts. Difference in differences (DID) was used to compare mean changes in health care utilization outcomes (outpatient, inpatient, ED visits, and pharmacy utilization) between cohorts.

Results

After matching, 13,193 beneficiaries in each cohort were used for analysis. DIDs for mean of health care utilizations were statistically significantly lower in the med-sync cohort than the non–med-sync cohort for outpatient visits (DID 0.012, P = 0.0073) and pharmacy utilization (DID 0.013, P < 0.0001). There was not a statistically significant DID for inpatient and ED visits between cohorts.

Conclusion

Outpatient and pharmacy utilization changes were statistically significantly lower in the med-sync cohort than the non–med-sync cohort in the 12 months after enrollment. Lower pharmacy utilization could be caused by reducing duplicate prescriptions during synchronized refills or optimization of therapy during medication reviews if patients are enrolled in appointment-based model med-sync.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
336
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Pharmacists Association is the official peer-reviewed journal of the American Pharmacists Association (APhA), providing information on pharmaceutical care, drug therapy, diseases and other health issues, trends in pharmacy practice and therapeutics, informed opinion, and original research. JAPhA publishes original research, reviews, experiences, and opinion articles that link science to contemporary pharmacy practice to improve patient care.
×
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