OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of 3 different appointment-based model (ABM) designs on medication adherence and medication use outcomes controlling for patient and pharmacy characteristics. METHODS: This study was a retrospective cohort analysis in a large grocery store chain from January 1, 2012, to October 31, 2015. A total of 500 comparison and 613 intervention patients in 3 different model designs were analyzed. The outcome measures were proportion of days covered for selected medication classes, number of fills, administered vaccinations, number of trips, statin use in persons with diabetes, use of high-risk medications in older adults, and medication therapy for persons with asthma. RESULTS: After adjusting for relevant covariates, the authors found that all of the ABM designs significantly increased the number of fills after enrollment. Model designs 1 and 3 also significantly reduced the number of trips after enrollment: 4.5 fewer trips (95% CI -5.3 to -3.8; P < 0.05) for model 1 and 1.9 fewer trips (95% CI -3 to -0.9; P < 0.05) for model 3. Models 1 and 3 increased the percentage of patients considered to be adherent for diabetes medications and increased the number of vaccinations patients received. Models 1 and 2 significantly increased the percentage of patients considered to be adherent for statins. No model design was significantly associated with statin use in diabetes, high-risk medication use in older adults, nor percentage of patients considered to be adherent for the hypertension measure. CONCLUSION: All of the ABM designs were effective at increasing the number of fills after enrollment. This paralleled an increase in percentage of patients considered to be adherent to diabetes and statin therapies after enrollment. Models that included face-to-face delivery of the appointment and telephonic synchronization, or face-to-face delivery for all components, increased the number of vaccinations that patients received after enrollment and significantly reduced the number of trips a patient made to the pharmacy.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of 3 different appointment-based model (ABM) designs on medication adherence and medication use outcomes controlling for patient and pharmacy characteristics. METHODS: This study was a retrospective cohort analysis in a large grocery store chain from January 1, 2012, to October 31, 2015. A total of 500 comparison and 613 intervention patients in 3 different model designs were analyzed. The outcome measures were proportion of days covered for selected medication classes, number of fills, administered vaccinations, number of trips, statin use in persons with diabetes, use of high-risk medications in older adults, and medication therapy for persons with asthma. RESULTS: After adjusting for relevant covariates, the authors found that all of the ABM designs significantly increased the number of fills after enrollment. Model designs 1 and 3 also significantly reduced the number of trips after enrollment: 4.5 fewer trips (95% CI -5.3 to -3.8; P < 0.05) for model 1 and 1.9 fewer trips (95% CI -3 to -0.9; P < 0.05) for model 3. Models 1 and 3 increased the percentage of patients considered to be adherent for diabetes medications and increased the number of vaccinations patients received. Models 1 and 2 significantly increased the percentage of patients considered to be adherent for statins. No model design was significantly associated with statin use in diabetes, high-risk medication use in older adults, nor percentage of patients considered to be adherent for the hypertension measure. CONCLUSION: All of the ABM designs were effective at increasing the number of fills after enrollment. This paralleled an increase in percentage of patients considered to be adherent to diabetes and statin therapies after enrollment. Models that included face-to-face delivery of the appointment and telephonic synchronization, or face-to-face delivery for all components, increased the number of vaccinations that patients received after enrollment and significantly reduced the number of trips a patient made to the pharmacy.
Authors: Rebecca M Fitzpatrick; Matthew J Witry; William R Doucette; Kelly Kent; Michael J Deninger; Randy P Mcdonough; Stevie Veach Journal: Pharm Pract (Granada) Date: 2019-05-30