A new study shows that patients who use workplace primary care and pharmacy services have higher adherence rates to medications for chronic conditions, suggesting that by investing in integrated workplace health and pharmacy programs companies can realize health care savings while also improving patient outcomes.

The findings, published in the current issue of the American Journal of Managed Care, show that overall adherence to medication was nearly 10 percent (9.72 percent) higher among patients treated in the workplace than those treated in the community. The authors of the study concluded that due to the negative impact on patients’ health and significant costs associated with non-adherence, these results support the concept of workplace health as a means to save “not only health care dollars, but lives as well.”

“This study truly demonstrates the value of the workplace health care model in addressing medication adherence - one of the most challenging and costly obstacles faced by providers and payers of health care,” said Dr. Sharon Frazee, an author of the study and vice president of health research for Take Care Health Systems. “Having care accessibly located at the worksite allows employees to build a trusted, face-to-face relationship with both their clinicians and pharmacists, providing an opportunity to engage in a dialogue about their condition and treatment plan, and ultimately, promote patient adherence through education and communication.”

Low rates of medication adherence are a growing issue for the country’s health, recently referred to as “America’s other drug problem” by The National Council on Patient Information and Education, and can potentially result in serious negative health outcomes for patients. In fact, a report by the World Health Organization stated that the magnitude of non-adherence and the scope of the pathology related to non-adherence are so alarming, that greater health benefits would result from improving adherence to existing treatments than by developing new medical therapies. Additionally, non-adherence takes an economic toll on national health care spending, currently costing an estimated $100 billion a year.

Despite the existence of employer-sponsored workplace health programs for some time, this was the first study of its kind to examine the relationship between the use of employer health offerings at the worksite and adherence to medications.

“The increased use of generic medications, along with increased adherence, decreases overall medication expense,” said Allan Khoury, MD, Chief Medical Officer for Take Care Health Systems. “This leads to better health at a lower cost. This approach is an important lesson for all of American health care.”

The retrospective study looked at data from the health benefit-covered population from eight different locations of a large employer and included current employees, retirees and dependents. The findings for increased adherence were consistent regardless of medication type, number of days supplied or the location of the worksite. Medications used to treat diabetes, heart arrhythmia, hypertension, heart disease and thyroid disorders were included in the study.

This study was the second study in a two-part series on the value of integrated workplace primary care and pharmacy services. Take Care Health Systems previously authored a study published in the April 2007 Journal for Health and Productivity illustrating that when doctors and pharmacists work closely together in a workplace primary care health center, prescribing practices favor older, first-line antibiotics that produce significant savings and provide important therapeutic benefits. The approach, studied at four onsite facilities of an existing Take Care Health Systems client, translated into an estimated potential $1.5 million in savings on antibiotic prescriptions for the host company over three years.

Authors of the study published in the American Journal of Managed Care include: Bruce Sherman, MD, FCCP, FACOEM, director, health and productivity management, Employers Health Coalition of Ohio; and Take Care Health Systems’ colleagues Sharon Glave Frazee, PhD, vice president of health research; Raymond Fabius, MD, CPE, FACPE, strategic advisor to the president; Rochelle Broome, MD FAAFP, regional medical director; James Manfred, RPh, vice president, pharmacy services; and Jeffery Davis, MBA, health informatics analyst.

About Take Care Health Systems

Take Care Health Systems, a wholly owned subsidiary of Walgreens (NYSE, NASDAQ: WAG) and part of Walgreens Health and Wellness division, is the largest and most comprehensive manager of worksite health and wellness centers and convenient care clinics in the country. TCHS is comprised of Take Care Consumer Solutions and Take Care Health Employer Solutions . Take Care Consumer Solutions manages Take Care Clinics at select Walgreens drugstores throughout the country. Patient care at each of the Take Care Clinics is provided by Take Care Health Services, an independently owned state professional corporation established in each market. Take Care Health Employer Solutions manages primary care, health and wellness, occupational health, pharmacy and fitness centers at large employer campuses. Combined, Take Care Health Systems manages more than 700 worksite and retail health care centers.

Source
Walgreens

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit on Wednesday unanimously ruled to lift an injunction blocking Washington state officials from penalizing pharmacists who refused to dispense the emergency contraception pill Plan B, the latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-pill-ruling9-2009jul09,0,6469894.story” target=_new>Los Angeles Times reports (Williams, Los Angeles Times, 7/9). The panel said the district court judge who issued the injunction refused to consider women’s need for EC (Egelko, San Francisco Chronicle, 7/9). The panel’s ruling is part of a larger case before the district court involving the constitutionality of a 2007 state regulation requiring pharmacies to stock and dispense EC. Joyce Roper, an assistant attorney general for Washington state, said the appeals court ruling means that the 2007 regulation will take immediate effect.

The plaintiffs in the case, Stromans — a supermarket pharmacy owner — and two pharmacists employed elsewhere, argued that the state regulation requiring pharmacists to stock and dispense EC violated their First Amendment right to freedom of religion (Los Angeles Times, 7/9). The regulation said that pharmacies must stock and fill legally prescribed prescriptions but allowed individual pharmacists to object on moral or religious grounds if another pharmacist was available, in person or by telephone, to fill the order (San Francisco Chronicle, 7/9). The plaintiffs argued that the regulation would force them to choose between following their religious beliefs and keeping their jobs. They contended that EC prevents implantation of a fertilized egg, which they equated with abortion. The U.S. District Court in Seattle awarded the plaintiffs the temporary injunction in November 2007, pending trial on the constitutionality of the regulation (Los Angeles Times, 7/9).

Plan B contains a high dose of a drug found in most birth control pills that generally prevents ovulation or the fertilization of an egg. Recent research suggests that it does not prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus (Woodward, AP/Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 7/8). FDA in April lowered the age limit for nonprescription purchase of Plan B from 18 to 17 (San Francisco Chronicle, 7/9).

Appeals Panel Returns Case to District Court

The appeals court panel ruled that the freedom to exercise one’s religion “does not relieve an individual of the obligation to comply with a valid and neutral law of general applicability.” The panel added, “Any refusal to dispense — regardless of whether it is motivated by religion, morals, conscience, ethics, discriminatory prejudices or personal distaste for a patient — violates the rules” (Los Angeles Times, 7/9). The panel ordered the district judge to reconsider the 2007 regulation under Supreme Court standards that allow states to pass neutral laws that may affect religious practices.

According to the panel, the regulation does not aim to interfere with religious practices or beliefs and is intended to promote patients’ health. In addition, the panel said the district court judge did not consider how the injunction would affect “sexually active women of childbearing age who will be denied reasonable access to Plan B” (San Francisco Chronicle, 7/9). According to the Times, the panel’s ruling could foretell future judgments in the case, including that a patient’s right to timely medication surpasses a pharmacist’s personal beliefs (Los Angeles Times, 7/9).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women’s Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women’s Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

The American Pharmacists Association (APhA), the national professional society of pharmacists, announces that nominations are now being accepted for the Association’s practitioner awards and honors. Presentation of these awards is scheduled for the APhA Annual Meeting and Exposition in Washington, DC, March 12-15, 2010. Nominations must be received at APhA headquarters by September 15, 2009. APhA’s awards recognition program is American pharmacy’s most comprehensive recognition program.

Guidelines for nominations, the nomination form, and complete criteria for each award are available at http://www.pharmacist.com/awards. Please submit all nomination materials to: APhA Awards and Honors Program- Attention: Meredith Nelson, 2215 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20037-2985, or email to mnelson@aphanet.org. Nominator and support signatures are required on all letters. Please indicate which awards or honors you wish to make a nomination. For additional questions please contact Meredith Nelson at (202) 429-7559.

Awards

Daniel B. Smith Practice Excellence Award: Established in 1964, the award recognizes an APhA member, in any practice setting, who has distinguished himself or herself and the profession by outstanding performance. APhA Academy of Pharmacy Practice and Management (APhA-APPM)

Distinguished Achievement Awards: APhA-APPM seeks to recognize pharmacists who have made significant or sustained contributions to the provision of pharmaceutical care within one of the six practice areas represented by the APhA-APPM Sections. APhA presents a Distinguished Achievement Award in each of the following areas: Administrative Practice, Clinical/Pharmacotherapeutic Practice, Community and Ambulatory Practice, Hospital and Institutional Practice, Nuclear Pharmacy Practice and Specialized Pharmacy Practice.

APhA Academy of Pharmacy Practice and Management (APhA-APPM) Merit Award: Established in 1989, this award recognizes pharmacy practitioners for single, outstanding, distinctive achievement that has promoted or elevated the standard of practice. Up to five recipients may be selected for this award each year.

APhA Fellow (selected by APhA-APPM): This honor recognizes APhA members, with a minimum of 10 years of exemplary professional experience and achievements in professional practice, who have rendered outstanding service to the profession through activities in APhA and in other organizations. The selection of Fellows is made by the respective Academies. Up to 10 APhA Fellows can be selected by APhA-APPM each year.

Source
American Pharmacists Association (APhA)