INTRODUCTION: The cost and burden associated with prior authorization (PA) for specialty medications are concerns for oncologists, but the impact of the PA process on care delivery has not been well described. We examined PA processes and approval patterns within a high-volume breast oncology clinic at a major academic cancer center. METHODS: We met with institutional staff to create a PA workflow and process map. We then abstracted pharmacy and medical records for all patients with breast cancer (N = 279) treated at our institution who required a PA between May and November 2015 (324 prescriptions). We examined PA approval rates, time to approval, and associations of these outcomes with the type of medication being prescribed, patient demographics, and method of PA. RESULTS: Seventeen possible process steps and 10 decision points were required for patients to obtain medications requiring a PA. Of the 324 PAs tracked, 316 (97.5%) were approved on the first PA request after an average time of 0.82 days (range, 0 to 14 days). Approximately half of PAs were for either palbociclib (26.5%) or pegfilgrastim (22.2%), and 13.6% of PAs were for generic hormonal therapy. Requirements to fax PA requests were associated with greater delay in approval time (1.31 v 0.17 days for online requests; P < .001). The use of specialty pharmacies increased staff burden and delays in medication receipt. CONCLUSION: The PA process is complicated and labor intensive. Given the high PA approval rate, it is unlikely that PA requirements reduce medication utilization in practice, and these requirements may impose unnecessary burdens on patient care. The goals and requirements for PAs should be readdressed.
INTRODUCTION: The cost and burden associated with prior authorization (PA) for specialty medications are concerns for oncologists, but the impact of the PA process on care delivery has not been well described. We examined PA processes and approval patterns within a high-volume breast oncology clinic at a major academic cancer center. METHODS: We met with institutional staff to create a PA workflow and process map. We then abstracted pharmacy and medical records for all patients with breast cancer (N = 279) treated at our institution who required a PA between May and November 2015 (324 prescriptions). We examined PA approval rates, time to approval, and associations of these outcomes with the type of medication being prescribed, patient demographics, and method of PA. RESULTS: Seventeen possible process steps and 10 decision points were required for patients to obtain medications requiring a PA. Of the 324 PAs tracked, 316 (97.5%) were approved on the first PA request after an average time of 0.82 days (range, 0 to 14 days). Approximately half of PAs were for either palbociclib (26.5%) or pegfilgrastim (22.2%), and 13.6% of PAs were for generic hormonal therapy. Requirements to fax PA requests were associated with greater delay in approval time (1.31 v 0.17 days for online requests; P < .001). The use of specialty pharmacies increased staff burden and delays in medication receipt. CONCLUSION: The PA process is complicated and labor intensive. Given the high PA approval rate, it is unlikely that PA requirements reduce medication utilization in practice, and these requirements may impose unnecessary burdens on patient care. The goals and requirements for PAs should be readdressed.
Authors: Alok A Khorana; Katherine Tullio; Paul Elson; Nathan A Pennell; Stephen R Grobmyer; Matthew F Kalady; Daniel Raymond; Jame Abraham; Eric A Klein; R Matthew Walsh; Emily E Monteleone; Wei Wei; Brian Hobbs; Brian J Bolwell Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-03-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Marie Louise Edwards; Perry T Yin; Michael Kuehn; Keith Bratti; Noam Kirson; Anupam Jena; Scott Howell Journal: Pharmacoecon Open Date: 2022-07-23
Authors: Marie Louise Edwards; Perry T Yin; Michael Kuehn; Keith Bratti; Noam Kirson; Anupam B Jena; Scott Howell Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-09-20 Impact factor: 3.752