F. Staskon, H. Kirkham, Amy Pfeifer, Richard T. Miller
{"title":"口服肿瘤药物患者管理计划的估计成本和节省:分裂填充组件的影响","authors":"F. Staskon, H. Kirkham, Amy Pfeifer, Richard T. Miller","doi":"10.1200/JOP.19.00069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE: A national specialty pharmacy implemented a split-fill option within an oral oncology patient management program to reduce pharmacy costs and medication wastage resulting from early discontinuations. Payers covered dispensed medications at half-quantity intervals for each dispense up to 3 months. Proactive outreach to patients before they had used up the initial dispensed medication quantity helped assess the patient’s tolerance to the new medication and adverse effects. This study compared costs for patients with a split-fill option to similar costs for patients without this option taking into account patient discontinuation rates, patient-reported adverse effects rates, estimated pharmacy costs, and potential wastage. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients who were new to therapy on a split-fill medication between September 2015 and August 2017. A 1:1 greedy match algorithm was conducted using propensity variables to match patients from each cohort. Per-month discontinuation rates were determined for both split-fill and non–split-fill groups. The non–split-fill potential wastage was calculated as monthly costs for discontinuations in the following month and weighted by split-fill discontinuation rates. RESULTS: Of the 2,363 program patients who met selection criteria for the 11 medications, 671 patients from each group were matched. Payers with a split-fill program had significant medication savings per covered month ($2,147.60 at 1 month) and at a cumulative 6 months. Modeled wastage indicated that payers without a split-fill program could expect to save $2,646.74 monthly by using this option. Both cohorts had similar rates of adverse effects and time until first reported adverse effect. CONCLUSION: In the first 6 months, the split-fill patient managed program had lower discontinuation rates, significantly reduced pharmacy costs, and reduced potential wastage.","PeriodicalId":54273,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oncology Practice","volume":"15 1","pages":"e856 - e862"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1200/JOP.19.00069","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Estimated Cost and Savings in a Patient Management Program for Oral Oncology Medications: Impact of a Split-Fill Component\",\"authors\":\"F. Staskon, H. Kirkham, Amy Pfeifer, Richard T. Miller\",\"doi\":\"10.1200/JOP.19.00069\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PURPOSE: A national specialty pharmacy implemented a split-fill option within an oral oncology patient management program to reduce pharmacy costs and medication wastage resulting from early discontinuations. Payers covered dispensed medications at half-quantity intervals for each dispense up to 3 months. Proactive outreach to patients before they had used up the initial dispensed medication quantity helped assess the patient’s tolerance to the new medication and adverse effects. This study compared costs for patients with a split-fill option to similar costs for patients without this option taking into account patient discontinuation rates, patient-reported adverse effects rates, estimated pharmacy costs, and potential wastage. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients who were new to therapy on a split-fill medication between September 2015 and August 2017. A 1:1 greedy match algorithm was conducted using propensity variables to match patients from each cohort. Per-month discontinuation rates were determined for both split-fill and non–split-fill groups. The non–split-fill potential wastage was calculated as monthly costs for discontinuations in the following month and weighted by split-fill discontinuation rates. RESULTS: Of the 2,363 program patients who met selection criteria for the 11 medications, 671 patients from each group were matched. Payers with a split-fill program had significant medication savings per covered month ($2,147.60 at 1 month) and at a cumulative 6 months. Modeled wastage indicated that payers without a split-fill program could expect to save $2,646.74 monthly by using this option. Both cohorts had similar rates of adverse effects and time until first reported adverse effect. CONCLUSION: In the first 6 months, the split-fill patient managed program had lower discontinuation rates, significantly reduced pharmacy costs, and reduced potential wastage.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Oncology Practice\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"e856 - e862\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1200/JOP.19.00069\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Oncology Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1200/JOP.19.00069\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oncology Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/JOP.19.00069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
Estimated Cost and Savings in a Patient Management Program for Oral Oncology Medications: Impact of a Split-Fill Component
PURPOSE: A national specialty pharmacy implemented a split-fill option within an oral oncology patient management program to reduce pharmacy costs and medication wastage resulting from early discontinuations. Payers covered dispensed medications at half-quantity intervals for each dispense up to 3 months. Proactive outreach to patients before they had used up the initial dispensed medication quantity helped assess the patient’s tolerance to the new medication and adverse effects. This study compared costs for patients with a split-fill option to similar costs for patients without this option taking into account patient discontinuation rates, patient-reported adverse effects rates, estimated pharmacy costs, and potential wastage. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients who were new to therapy on a split-fill medication between September 2015 and August 2017. A 1:1 greedy match algorithm was conducted using propensity variables to match patients from each cohort. Per-month discontinuation rates were determined for both split-fill and non–split-fill groups. The non–split-fill potential wastage was calculated as monthly costs for discontinuations in the following month and weighted by split-fill discontinuation rates. RESULTS: Of the 2,363 program patients who met selection criteria for the 11 medications, 671 patients from each group were matched. Payers with a split-fill program had significant medication savings per covered month ($2,147.60 at 1 month) and at a cumulative 6 months. Modeled wastage indicated that payers without a split-fill program could expect to save $2,646.74 monthly by using this option. Both cohorts had similar rates of adverse effects and time until first reported adverse effect. CONCLUSION: In the first 6 months, the split-fill patient managed program had lower discontinuation rates, significantly reduced pharmacy costs, and reduced potential wastage.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Oncology Practice (JOP) provides necessary information and insights to keep oncology practice current on changes and challenges inherent in delivering quality oncology care. All content dealing with understanding the provision of care—the mechanics of practice—is the purview of JOP. JOP also addresses an expressed need of practicing physicians to have compressed, expert opinion addressing common clinical problems.