Search

Justin Gatwood,1 James E Bailey2 1University of Tennessee Health Science Center, College of Pharmacy, 2University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Center for Health System Improvement, Memphis, TN, USA Abstract: Medication nonadherence is a prevalent public health issue that contributes to significant medical costs and detrimental health outcomes. This is especially true in patients with hypercholesterolemia, a condition affecting millions of American adults and one that is associated with increased risk for coronary and cerebrovascular events. Considering the magnitude of outcomes related to this disease, the medical community has placed significant emphasis on addressing the treatment for high cholesterol, and progress has been made in recent years. However, poor adherence to therapy continues to plague health outcomes and more must be understood and done to address suboptimal medication taking. Here we provide an overview of the reasons for poor medication adherence in patients with hypercholesterolemia and describe recent efforts to curb nonadherence. Suggested approaches for improving medication taking in patients with high cholesterol are also provided to guide practitioners, patients, and payers. Keywords: medication use, lipid management, cardiovascular disease

Background: Despite evidence-based recommendations for HPV vaccination, uptake among young adults is suboptimal. Limited research has explored factors that may influence HPV vaccination among young adults, as well as associated promotion and informational preferences in this group. This study aimed to examine factors associated with HPV vaccination among young adults and preferences for HPV vaccine information and promotion., Methodology: This study utilized a cross-sectional design to examine factors related to HPV vaccination among young adults on a university campus in Tennessee. Data were collected via an online survey administered to students, aged 18-26 years, from March-May 2023. Study measures included sociodemographic characteristics, health/healthcare-related factors, and perception-related measures. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analysis., Results: Out of 402 participants that completed the survey, 209 reported being vaccinated against HPV. In the adjusted model, variables associated with HPV vaccination were perceived risk (adjusted OR [aOR] = 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.05, 1.20), perceived barriers (aOR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.81), higher HPV knowledge (aOR = 1.17; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.33), and receipt of healthcare provider recommendations (aOR = 12.90; 95% CI: 7.08, 23.51)., Conclusions: Study findings suggest that those who are vaccinated were more likely to report receiving healthcare provider recommendations, low perceived barriers, higher HPV knowledge and perceived risk. Future HPV vaccination promotion efforts for young adults may consider increasing HPV vaccine knowledge and awareness, addressing barriers, and strengthening provider recommendations., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Justin Gatwood is an employee of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). Justin Gatwood report grants funding from Merck & Co., GSK, and AstraZeneca for vaccine-related research, and consulting/advising payments from Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Merck & Co. for vaccine-related insight. This does not alter our adherence to al PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials., (Copyright: © 2024 Oyedeji et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Objective: To provide a rationale for a collaborative care model involving oncology and primary care pharmacists to improve the coordination of care of medications for cancer patients with multiple chronic conditions., Data Sources: A review of selected literature and the authors' own research was used. Studies illustrating the gaps in care for medications and pharmacists' roles in oncology and primary care settings from PubMed were reviewed., Data Summary: There has been a substantial increase in the development and utilization of oral anticancer agents (OAAs). Although OAAs offer convenience and flexibility, they also introduce challenges related to medication adherence, monitoring, and managing side effects. Up to 17.5% of patients experience moderate to severe symptoms from OAAs and about 30% report less than excellent medication adherence. Further, studies showed that 30% to 53% of adult cancer patients have at least one chronic condition that complicates their treatment plan due to the need for medications, increasing the risk of drug interactions, side effects, and non-adherence. The Primary Care Oncology Model (PCOM) incorporates both primary care and oncology pharmacists with comprehensive medication review and patient-reported outcome measure, respectively, to enhance medication appropriateness and effectiveness, and improve overall patient experience., Conclusion: Implementing PCOM may improve the medication management of patients taking OAAs for active cancer treatment and chronic medications for their multiple chronic conditions. This collaborative approach can transform patient care by leveraging the expertise of both primary care and oncology pharmacists., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Justin Gatwood is an employee of and holds stock in GSK. Joel Farley has received grant support from AstraZeneca paid to the University of Minnesota and consulting support from AstaLynx Global. Emily Mackler has a board position/co-founder of YesRx, a non-profit organization. Karen Farris has a site PI grant from AstraZeneca to study the model described in this paper.

Introduction: Increased use of oral anticancer agents (OAAs) has empowered adults with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) to manage their therapy, but this shift may complicate medication use, particularly among adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCC)., Methods: This retrospective cohort study used 2013-2018 commercial and Medicare claims data to assess medication use in adults with CML or CLL. To be included, patients must have been at least 18 years old, diagnosed with and had 2+ claims for an OAA indicated for either CML or CLL, continuously enrolled 12 months before and after OAA initiation, and treated for (2+ fills) at least two select chronic conditions. Proportion of days covered (PDC) determined medication adherence and was compared for 12 months before and after OAA initiation by Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, McNemar's tests, and difference-in-differences models., Results: Among CLL patients, mean OAA adherence in the first year of therapy was 79.8% (SD: 21.1) and 74.7% (SD: 24.9) for commercial and Medicare patients, respectively; mean adherence for CML patients was 84.5% (SD: 15.8) and 80.1% (SD: 20.1) for commercial and Medicare patients, respectively. Adherence and the proportion adherent (PDC ≥ 80%) to comorbid therapies was generally unchanged following OAA initiation. Consistently unremarkable changes in MCC adherence were observed in 12-month difference-in-differences models, but significant decline was observed in MCC adherence after 6 months of OAA use., Conclusions: OAA initiation among adults with CML or CLL was not associated with significant, initial changes to adherence to medications for chronic diseases., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Aims: There are multiple recently approved treatments and a lack of clear standard-of-care therapies for relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). While total cost of care (TCC) by the number of lines of therapy (LoTs) has been evaluated, more recent cost estimates using real-world data are needed. This analysis assessed real-world TCC of R/R DLBCL therapies by LoT using the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus database (1 January 2015-31 December 2021), in US patients aged ≥18 years treated with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) or an R-CHOP-like regimen as first-line therapy., Methods: Treatment costs and resources in the R/R setting were assessed by LoT. A sensitivity analysis identified any potential confounding of the results caused by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare utilization and costs. Overall, 310 patients receiving a second- or later-line treatment were included; baseline characteristics were similar across LoTs. Inpatient costs represented the highest percentage of total costs, followed by outpatient and pharmacy costs., Results: Mean TCC per-patient-per-month generally increased by LoT ($40,604, $48,630, and $59,499 for second-, third- and fourth-line treatments, respectively). Costs were highest for fourth-line treatment for all healthcare resource utilization categories. Sensitivity analysis findings were consistent with the overall analysis, indicating results were not confounded by the COVID-19 pandemic., Limitations: There was potential misclassification of LoT; claims data were processed through an algorithm, possibly introducing errors. A low number of patients met the inclusion criteria. Patients who switched insurance plans, had insurance terminated, or whose enrollment period met the end of data availability may have had truncated follow-up, potentially resulting in underestimated costs., Conclusion: Total healthcare costs increased with each additional LoT in the R/R DLBCL setting. Further improvements of first-line treatments that reduce the need for subsequent LoTs would potentially lessen the economic burden of DLBCL.

Background: Previous studies have created plant-based diet indices to assess the health effects of specific dietary patterns., Objective: To examine the association between the plant-based content of diet and fasting insulin in adults from the NHANES 2017-2018 database., Methods: Demographic, dietary, lab and clinical data and fasting insulin were obtained from the NHANES 2017-2018 database. From two 24-h dietary recalls, we created a plant-based diet index (PDI) and a healthy plant-based diet index (hPDI). A high PDI score indicated more plants were consumed versus animal foods. A high hPDI score indicated healthier, plant materials (whole grains, whole fruits, vegetables, legumes, vegetable oils, seeds and nuts) were consumed. The relationships between the natural log of fasting insulin, PDI, and hPDI were analyzed using multiple linear regression adjusting for body mass index (BMI) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT)., Results: Analyses were based on 1,714 participants, 897 women and 817 men with a median age of 52 years. In this sample, 610 (35.6%) were white, 407 (23.8%) were black, 231 (13.5%) were Mexican, 207 (12.1%) were Asian, 157 (9.2%) were other Hispanic, and 102 (6%) were other or mixed race. Median fasting insulin was 9.74 μU/mL (IQR: 6.2, 15.56). For every 1 unit increase in PDI, the natural log of fasting insulin decreased 0.0068 ± 0.003 μU/mL (CI: -0.00097, -0.013) (p = 0.02). After adjusting for BMI and ALT, the PDI did not significantly predict fasting insulin as the association was not robust due to multicollinearity. The hPDI was inversely and significantly associated with the natural log of fasting insulin (-0.0027 ± 0.00134, CI: -0.000087, -0.0053) (p = 0.043) in a multivariable model including BMI and ALT., Conclusion: A healthy plant-based diet is associated with a decrease in fasting insulin levels. Healthfulness of the diet is an important factor when considering the benefit of a plant-based diet., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Purpose: The goal of this study is to determine barriers and facilitators to the implementation of medication adherence interventions to support cancer patients taking novel, targeted oral anticancer agents (OAAs)., Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews using a semi-structured guide from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We used purposive sampling to identify clinicians (physicians, pharmacists, nurse practitioners, nurses) and administrators (leadership from medicine, pharmacy, and nursing) who delivered care and/or oversee care delivery for patients with chronic leukemia prescribed an OAA., Results: A total of 19 individuals participated in an interview (12 clinicians and 7 administrators), with 10 primarily employed by an academic cancer center; 5 employed by the community cancer center; and 4 employed by the integrated health-system specialty pharmacy. Barriers identified included low awareness of adherence interventions, difficulty in adherence measurement, complexity of designing and implementing a structured adherence intervention, and competing priorities. Facilitators identified included support of hospital administrators, value for pharmacists, and willingness to embrace change. Participants also made recommendations moving forward including standardizing workflow, designating champions, iterating implementation strategies, and improving communication between clinicians and with patients., Conclusion: Individual and system level factors were identified as determinants of implementation effectiveness of medication adherence interventions. A multidisciplinary advisory panel will be assembled to design comprehensive and actionable strategies to refine and implement a structured intervention to improve medication adherence in cancer patients., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: Benyam Muluneh is a consultant for Servier and his spouse is employed by Novartis; Michele Muir *and JB Collins are* a post-doctoral fellow with GlaxoSmithKline, Emily Mackler has research funding with Astra Zeneca; William Wood has research funding with Genentech and Pfizer; Leah Zullig has research funding with Proteus Digital Health, PhRMA Foundation and is a consultant for Novartis and Pfizer;, (Copyright: © 2023 Muluneh et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Objective: To evaluate the cost utility of a glaucoma medication-enhancing intervention compared to standard of care over a lifetime from the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) payer perspective., Design: Model-based cost-utility analysis of a glaucoma medication-enhancing intervention from a randomized clinical trial., Subjects: Veterans with glaucoma, or suspected glaucoma who were prescribed topical glaucoma medications, had their visual field assessed within the last 9 months, and endorsed poor glaucoma medication adherence., Methods: Veterans were randomized either to a behavioral intervention to promote adherence or to a standard of care (control) session about general eye health. A decision analytic model was developed to simulate lifelong costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for an intervention tested in a randomized clinical trial at a single VA eye clinic. Costs included direct medical costs that the VA payer would incur, as informed initially by the clinical trial and then by published estimates. Health-state quality of life was based on published utility values. Scenario analyses included addition of booster interventions, a 3% decline in chance of staying medication adherent annually, and the combination of the two. Analyses were also conducted in the following subgroups: those with companion versus not, and those with once-daily versus more than once-daily dosing frequency., Main Outcome Measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)., Results: Compared to standard of care, the intervention dominated resulting in lower costs ($23 339.28 versus $23 504.02) and higher QALYs (11.62 versus 11.58). Among the 4 subgroups, the intervention dominated for 3 of them. In the fourth subgroup, those with more than once-daily dosing, the ICER was $2625/QALY. Compared to standard of care, an intervention with booster interventions led to an ICER of $3278/QALY. Assuming both a 3% annual loss in chance of continuing to be adherent and addition of booster interventions, the ICER increased to $71 371/QALY., Conclusions: From a VA payer perspective over a lifetime, the glaucoma medication-enhancing behavioral intervention dominated standard of care in terms of generating cost savings and greater QALYs., Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: In the last several decades, vaccine hesitancy has become a significant global public health concern. The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been on the United States of America (USA) market since 2006, with extended approval up to age 45 granted in 2018. To date, there is limited research evaluating barriers and facilitators related to HPV vaccine initiation among adults and the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on individuals' vaccine-related behaviors. This study's main objective was to characterize the contributing factors that could promote or inhibit HPV vaccine uptake for adults., Methods: A qualitative approach consisting of focus group discussions (FGDs) was used for this study. The FGD guide was informed by concepts from the Transtheoretical Model, Health Belief Model, and Social Cognitive Theory. All virtual FGDs were led by two researchers, who recorded audio for data collection. The data were transcribed by a third party, and the transcripts were imported into Dedoose ® software and analyzed using the six steps recommended by thematic analysis., Results: A total of 35 individuals participated in 6 focus groups over a 6-month period. Thematic analysis revealed four themes: (1) Intrinsic motivators for HPV vaccination, (2) Extrinsic motivators for HPV vaccination, (3) Vaccine promotion strategies, and (4) Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on vaccine hesitancy., Conclusion: Both intrinsic and extrinsic factors play a role in influencing HPV vaccine uptake, and such considerations can guide efforts to improve the odds of HPV vaccination in working-age adults.

Objective. Blended learning combines traditional face-to-face education with online instruction. This learner-centered approach has been shown to improve student engagement, critical thinking, and performance outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess and trend student pharmacist perceptions of blended and online learning used to teach pharmacy management, leadership, and economics within a Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) curriculum. Methods. Qualitative methods were employed using in-depth, semistructured interviews. Second- and third-year student pharmacists were recruited by purposeful and snowball sampling and interviewed to a point of saturation. The interview guide was based on social cognitive theory. Themes identified through initial deductive thematic analysis were categorized by the three domains of social cognitive theory: cognitive, behavioral, and environmental factors. The coding team additionally analyzed the transcripts using inductive thematic analysis to ensure no themes outside of social cognitive theory were missed. Results. Twenty students were interviewed. Themes reveal perceptions that blended learning facilitated greater understanding of course material, increased motivation among learners, provided more flexibility in workload completion, and was a more enjoyable way to learn compared to traditional didactic instruction. Furthermore, blended learning offered additional distinct advantages over traditional and online-only pedagogies. Conclusion. Student pharmacists perceived blended and online learning positively and acceptable for the delivery of a pharmacy course on management, leadership, and economics over traditional didactic instruction. Blended learning may enhance innovation, leadership, management, and economics content delivery and the student learning experience., (© 2023 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy.)

Objectives: To determine the combined impact of provider-facing and text message-based, patient nudges on herpes zoster vaccine series completion., Methods: Following a period during which Kroger Health implemented provider facing nudges, select US patients that initiated herpes zoster vaccination were randomized to receive timed text messages when the second dose was due and available as part of a quality improvement exercise. Main comparisons were between patients intervened by provider nudge only and those intervened by both provider and patient nudges. Data were assessed by GEE-basedlogistic and linear regression, controlling for available patient- and store-level characteristics, and geospatial analyses., Results: During the baseline period, 100,627 adults received at least one HZ vaccine dose and 83.9% completed the series within 6 months over 88.6 days (SD: 26.53) on average. In the intervention period, 120,339 adults were vaccinated at least once and series completion was 88.3% (both provider nudges and text messaging) and 85.3% (not texted) during this observation window (both p < 0.0001). Time between doses was shorter for those who received text messages compared to both the baseline period and those in the intervention period that were not texted (both p < 0.001). Controlling for multiple characteristics, the odds of completion improved in the intervention period compared to baseline (OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.033-1.111), but a noticeably higher completion odds was observed amongst patients who received a text message in the intervention period (OR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.286-1.414). Adjusting for patient and pharmacy factors, those who were texted received their second herpes zoster vaccine dose 8.6 days sooner (95% CI: -9.08 - -8.17, p < 0.0001) compared to those intervened by the provider nudge only., Conclusion: The combined use of clinical and patient-focused nudges is a simple mechanism by which pharmacies and other health care access points can address the multi-dose vaccine needs of diverse patient populations., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Justin Gatwood, Kenneth Hohmeier, Tracy Hagemann, and Chi-Yang Chiu report grant funding from Merck & Co. and GlaxoSmithKline for vaccine-related research. Olivia Kinney and Andrea Brookhart are employees of the Kroger Co. Justin Gatwood reports consulting payments from Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Merck & Co. for vaccine-related insight. This study was funded by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). GSK was provided with the opportunity to review a preliminary version of this manuscript for factual accuracy, but the authors are solely responsible for the final content and interpretation., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This publication represents the first to report global information on characteristics and requirements of doctoral programs in the pharmaceutical sciences in schools/colleges of Pharmacy. Survey responses (140 responses) were received from doctoral programs in 23 countries, with the greatest number of responses obtained from Japan, followed by India and the United States. Program characteristics and requirements, and student and faculty information, including graduate placement, in programs in Asia, North America, Europe, Africa and Australia were compared. Survey responses indicated differences in entrance requirements for doctoral programs with minimum requirements being a bachelor's degree, pharmacy degree or master's degree, including a M.Phil. degree. Programs differed widely in size in all geographical areas, but there was a similar emphasis on core educational learning outcomes (core competencies) and Ph.D. graduation requirements including qualifying examinations, thesis defense with internal and external reviewers and requirements for peer-reviewed publications. Additionally, three-quarters of programs indicated that there was external review of their programs every 2-4 or 5-7 years. Female students and female faculty mentors represented about 50% of students/faculty in programs in most geographical areas. Placement of students after graduation indicated that the highest percentage went into the pharmaceutical industry in Asia (predominantly India) and North America, with a lower percentage in Europe, Africa and Australia., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interests The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 American Pharmacists Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Information on master's programs in the pharmaceutical sciences is lacking; this manuscript addresses this gap in the literature, by reporting on the results of an international survey performed in 2021 of master's programs in the pharmaceutical sciences offered at Schools/Colleges of Pharmacy. Ninety-six responses were received from universities from 23 countries, with the greatest number of responses obtained from India, followed by the United States and Japan. Master's programs in the pharmaceutical sciences are generally full time and 2 years in duration. Only 3% of programs were reported to be examination-based, while the remaining 97% had a research component with 70% of programs having a thesis defense with external and/or internal examiners. Master's programs tended to be larger in Asia and Europe than in North America; as well, programs in North America tended to have more international students. Didactic coursework was included in 96% of master's programs in North America, but only in 38% of Asian and 58% of European programs. The predominant placement of graduates from master's programs in Asia was in the pharmaceutical industry (70%); this contrasted with programs in Europe, Africa and North America where 28-36% enter careers in the pharmaceutical industry and higher percentages enter Ph.D. programs. The major challenge identified by programs was funding of faculty and of graduate students, although decreasing career opportunities was identified as a challenge in Asia and Africa., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 American Pharmacists Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

BACKGROUND: Despite the effectiveness of vaccines, US adult vaccination rates remain low. This is especially true for the influenza vaccine, which is recommended annually and widely available. The accessibility of community pharmacies as convenient places to receive influenza vaccines has been shown to increase uptake. However, use of mail order pharmacies may reduce in-person pharmacist encounters and reduce the likelihood that users receive annual influenza vaccines. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between the type of pharmacy a patient uses and their likelihood of receiving an influenza vaccine. METHODS: This cross-sectional cohort study used the 2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to observe noninstitutionalized US adult pharmacy users. Pharmacy type was dichotomized into community use only vs any mail order pharmacy use. Multivariable weighted logistic regression was used to identify associations between the type of pharmacy used and influenza vaccination, adjusting for sociodemographic, health status, and health care access and utilization confounders. All analyses were stratified by age (< 65 and ≥ 65 years). RESULTS: The aged younger than 65 years and aged 65 years and older samples had 8,074 and 4,037 respondents who represented 95,930,349 and 40,163,276 weighted observations, respectively. Compared with community pharmacy users, mail order users were more likely to be aged 65 and older, be White, have high income, and have a usual source of care ( P < 0.0001). Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) for influenza vaccination were significantly lower among community pharmacy users than mail order users among individuals aged younger than 65 years (AOR=0.71; 95% CI = 0.580.87) but was not significant among those aged 65 years and older (AOR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.69-1.09). CONCLUSIONS: Community pharmacy users aged younger than 65 years are less likely to receive the influenza vaccine than their mail order pharmacy user counterparts. These counterintuitive results could be caused by residual confounding due to differences in factors that influence pharmacy use type and vaccination likelihood. Further exploration is needed to account for differences between these populations that independently drive vaccination choice. DISCLOSURES: Dr Burbage was a fellow in the Real World Evidence, Population Health and Quality Research Postdoctoral Fellowship Program in collaboration with University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy and Pharmacy Quality Alliance, and supported by Janssen Scientific Affairs at the time of this study. She is now employed by Janssen Scientific Affairs. Dr Parikh is an employee of Pharmacy Quality Alliance. Dr Campbell was employed by Pharmacy Quality Alliance at the time of the study. He is now employed by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. Dr Ramachandran has received an unrelated research contract with Pharmacy Quality Alliance. Dr Gatwood has received vaccine-related research grants from Merck & Co. and GlaxoSmithKline unrelated to this project and consulting fees for a vaccine-related expert panel with Merck & Co. unrelated to this manuscript and is an advisory board member with Janssen Scientific Affairs. Dr. Urick was employed by the UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy at the time of this writing and is currently employed by Prime Therapeutics. He has received community pharmacy-related consulting fees from Cardinal Health and Pharmacy Quality Solutions unrelated to this work. Dr Ozawa has a research grant from Merck & Co. unrelated to this project. This project did not receive funding from any agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Introduction: A new recombinant herpes zoster vaccine has advanced efforts to prevent shingles, but its multidose regimen introduces potential barriers to full protection that must be managed by community pharmacies. To address this potential patient management challenge, a pharmacy records clinical support tool was implemented to assist pharmacy staff in managing herpes zoster vaccine dose completion., Methods: Beginning in November 2018, a large community pharmacy chain (operating in 36 states) implemented a provider nudge within its clinical decision support tool across all locations that fit seamlessly into the existing workflow, alerting the pharmacy staff of the need for a patient's second dose. Initial and second doses were followed over 2 overlapping, 10-month periods before and after system launch. Differences in vaccine completion rates before and after the system was operational were assessed by chi-square tests and predictors of completion, controlling for store- and patient-level characteristics, and were analyzed by multivariable logistic regression and generalized linear models throughout 2021., Results: Across 2,271 pharmacies, 71,459 and 41,982 initial doses of the herpes zoster vaccine were given in the baseline and intervention period, respectively. The proportion of patients completing both doses increased slightly after system implementation (before: 71.9%, after: 75.2%; p&lt;0.0001). However, dramatic improvements in time to dose completion were observed (before: 109.8 days, after: 93.3 days; p&lt;0.001), and changes were significant in stores in all but 4 states., Conclusions: Results suggest that the use of a clinical nudge improved the occurrence of and time to herpes zoster vaccine dose completion in adults across the U.S., (Copyright © 2022 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Increased use of oral anticancer agents (OAAs) has empowered adults with multiple myeloma (MM) to manage their oncolytic therapy, but such a shift may result in issues with medication use, particularly among patients being concurrently treated for pre-existing, multiple chronic conditions., Methods: This retrospective cohort study used 2013-2018 commercial and Medicare claims data to assess medication use in adults with MM. To be included, adults (18 years and older) must have been diagnosed with and had 2+ claims for an OAA, had continuous enrollment for 12 months before and after OAA initiation, and have been previously diagnosed with and had prescription fills for 2+ select chronic conditions. The proportion of days covered metric assessed medication adherence and was compared for 12 months before and after the OAA initiation by Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, McNemar's tests, and difference-in-differences models., Results: The mean OAA adherence in the first year of therapy was 58.3% (standard deviation: 24.5) and 65.1% (standard deviation: 27.01) for commercial and Medicare patients, respectively. Adherence and the proportion adherent (proportion of days covered ≥ 80%) to comorbid therapies generally declined in the first year after OAA initiation. Changes in medication use were particularly noticeable among those on antihypertensive therapy: adjusted analyses uncovered a 2.5% (Medicare) and 5.2% (commercial) difference in adherence to these medications between those initially adherent and nonadherent to OAA therapy (both P < .05)., Conclusion: Initiating OAA therapy in adults with MM may complicate an already complex treatment regimen, resulting in poor overall medication adherence in patients with multiple comorbid conditions.

Improvements in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), and multiple myeloma (MM) treatment options have increased the 5-year survival rates for patients with these hematologic malignancies. In addition to cancer management, these patients may need help to manage multiple chronic conditions (MCC). The overall objective of this study is to examine the impact and implementation of a model that coordinates care between oncology and primary care pharmacists for people taking an oral anti-cancer agent (OAAs) and medications for comorbid chronic conditions. This is a multi-center, prospective, single-arm pilot study that will recruit up to 40 patients from Michigan Medicine and Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC). Eligible participants will be 18 years of age or older, prescribed an OAA, have a diagnosis of either CML, CLL or MM, and be diagnosed with and taking medication for at least two specified chronic conditions. The Pharmacists Coordinated Care Oncology Model (PCOM) is a two-month intervention that builds upon current pharmacist clinical responsibilities. Generally, participants will complete a patient-reported outcome measure at 2 and 6 weeks post-OAA initiation that is sent to their oncology pharmacist, and they will also receive a comprehensive medication review at week 4 from a primary care pharmacist for their chronic medications. The pharmacists will communicate about the results via electronic medical record (EMR) and intervene if necessary. The primary endpoints are (1) dose-adjusted OAA proportion of days covered (PDC), and (2) PDC for chronic condition medications. PDCs will be determined via prescription records. The association of OAA and chronic medication PDCs will be quantified via correlation and chi-squared tests. The association between symptom experience and OAA adherence will be examined via correlation analyses. For implementation, characteristics of patient participants, feasibility, acceptability, adoption, fidelity, and trialability will be described. Data will be collected via EMR and pharmacist and patient interviews. Median/IQR for acceptability, adoption and fidelity will be reported, and patient interviews will be analyzed using a grounded theory approach and pharmacist interviews will be analyzed using thematic analyses., (© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.)