OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to contrast experiences and opinion of providers in military treatment facilities, where a single formulary is used, with those of community providers where multiple formularies and preferred lists are commonly encountered. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted cross-sectional surveys. SETTING: The study was conducted at military and community practices that serve military beneficiaries. PARTICIPANTS: We studied randomly selected clinicians, stratified by military treatment facility (MTF) size or number of military beneficiaries served. The final samples included 566 eligible MTF and 557 private clinicians, with 69% and 38% response rates, respectively. OUTCOME MEASURES: We wanted to determine experiences with and opinions of formularies and/or preferred lists and related policies. RESULTS: Sixty-three percent of military providers were very familiar with formulary content and 60% with nonformulary request procedures; 67% thought their formulary was up-to-date and 84% felt Pharmacy & Therapeutics (P&T) committees were responsive to providers. In contrast, 23% of community providers felt very familiar with (multiple) formulary content and 10% with nonformulary request procedures. Only 15% perceived that formularies were current and 34% thought P&T committees were responsive to providers. Statistically significant differences remained after analysis of potential bias. CONCLUSIONS: Community providers were less aware and less satisfied with pharmacy benefits management policies than military providers, likely as a result of their daily interactions with multiple, unrelated pharmacy management systems. Addressing the problems expressed by community providers is imperative for pharmacy benefits managers.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to contrast experiences and opinion of providers in military treatment facilities, where a single formulary is used, with those of community providers where multiple formularies and preferred lists are commonly encountered. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted cross-sectional surveys. SETTING: The study was conducted at military and community practices that serve military beneficiaries. PARTICIPANTS: We studied randomly selected clinicians, stratified by military treatment facility (MTF) size or number of military beneficiaries served. The final samples included 566 eligible MTF and 557 private clinicians, with 69% and 38% response rates, respectively. OUTCOME MEASURES: We wanted to determine experiences with and opinions of formularies and/or preferred lists and related policies. RESULTS: Sixty-three percent of military providers were very familiar with formulary content and 60% with nonformulary request procedures; 67% thought their formulary was up-to-date and 84% felt Pharmacy & Therapeutics (P&T) committees were responsive to providers. In contrast, 23% of community providers felt very familiar with (multiple) formulary content and 10% with nonformulary request procedures. Only 15% perceived that formularies were current and 34% thought P&T committees were responsive to providers. Statistically significant differences remained after analysis of potential bias. CONCLUSIONS: Community providers were less aware and less satisfied with pharmacy benefits management policies than military providers, likely as a result of their daily interactions with multiple, unrelated pharmacy management systems. Addressing the problems expressed by community providers is imperative for pharmacy benefits managers.
Authors: William H Shrank; Sarah A Fox; Adele Kirk; Susan L Ettner; Clairessa H Cantrell; Peter Glassman; Steven M Asch Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: C Jason Wang; Mihir H Patel; Anthony J Schueth; Melissa Bradley; Shinyi Wu; Jesse C Crosson; Peter A Glassman; Douglas S Bell Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2009-04-23 Impact factor: 4.497