Compensation in Canada for Resolving Drug-Related Problems

Poirier, Sylvie; Gariepy, Yves

doi:10.1016/s1086-5802(16)30019-5

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…MedsCheck was the second medication review service to be reimbursed by any provincial drug plan in Canada, with the first being Quebec, which included a medication review for persons taking at least 8 medications in its pharmaceutical opinion program. 16 Medication review services are currently funded in most jurisdictions in Canada, including Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Nova Scotia. Ontario has spent more than $130 million on MCA between inception and March 2013.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uptake of the MedsCheck annual medication review service in Ontario community pharmacies between 2007 and 2013

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uptake of the MedsCheck annual medication review service in Ontario community pharmacies between 2007 and 2013

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Barriers: Prescription volume of pharmacy (>100/day), owner/manager vs staff status (financial gain paid to pharmacy; owners also more experienced and confident in providing service), identifying patients in daily practice who require a switch, time-consuming billing process, inadequate fees for service, lack of awareness of program, questioned appropriateness of switching patients with dexterity issues to dry powder metered-dose inhaler vs nebuliser. (1978-present) 25,40,41 Design: Three-month survey period. Objectives: To describe factors associated with billing for pharmaceutical opinions and refusal to dispense.…”

Section: Home Medicinementioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of remuneration systems for clinical pharmacy care services

Chan¹,

Grindrod²,

Bougher³

et al. 2008

Canadian Pharmacists Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To provide descriptions of existing remuneration models for pharmacist clinical care services and to summarize the existing evaluations of economic, clinical, and humanistic outcome studies of the remuneration models. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, EconLit, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PubMed from date of inception to June 2006. We also searched the World Wide Web, hand-searched pertinent journals and reference lists, and contacted experts in pharmacy practice research. One reviewer assessed titles and, with a second independent reviewer, assessed abstracts and full-text articles for inclusion and abstracted data. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or by a third independent reviewer. We included English language articles that described or evaluated current remuneration systems for pharmacist clinical care services and that involved a substantial number of pharmacists and that were paid by a third party other than the patient. Due to heterogeneity between systems, data were compiled qualitatively. Then, based on these results, an expert panel developed recommendations for implementing a remuneration model into current pharmacy practice in Alberta. Results: We identified 28 remuneration systems. Most commonly, payers were government agencies, and services were directed at the management of chronic diseases or complex medication regimens. While capitation models were evident, most systems provided payment according to each intervention carried out. Program evaluations were available from 14 models, and in many systems, initial uptake by pharmacists was high, but participation dropped after initial enrolment. Conclusion: To ensure that the provision of clinical care services will provide a sustainable avenue of income for pharmacists and costeffective quality care for patients, a viable business model with additional training and support for pharmacists and ongoing program evaluation is needed.

show abstract

“…The origin of the practice of pharmacists billing for medication-related recommendations in Quebec dates back to 1978, with a goal of promoting the optimal use of medications. 48 Pharmacists experienced in providing pharmaceutical opinions over the subsequent 5 years concluded that these written opinions were a good means of communication about a range of medication-related problems encountered in community pharmacy. 49 Policy reviews in 1983 and 1992 aimed to focus the process on the provision of patient-specific recommendations and to decrease the administrative burden for pharmacists.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 49 Policy reviews in 1983 and 1992 aimed to focus the process on the provision of patient-specific recommendations and to decrease the administrative burden for pharmacists. 48 The current process requires that pharmacists send their written treatment recommendations to the original prescriber, who receives them at a variable time point after having seen the patient—and when the patient is not present for further consultation. As no direct discussion or follow-up between the pharmacist and prescriber is required, the prescriber's response to the recommendation, actions taken with the patient to address medication adherence and the patient's response to these actions are not communicated to the pharmacist.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimising the changing role of the community pharmacist: a randomised trial of the impact of audit and feedback

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of comparative performance feedback to community pharmacists on provision of professional services and the quality of patients’ medication use.DesignRandomised, controlled, single-blind trial.SettingAll 1833 community pharmacies in the Quebec province, Canada.Participants1814 pharmacies not opting out and with more than 5 dispensings of the target medications during the 6-month baseline were randomised by a 2×2 factorial design to feedback first for hypertension adherence (907 control, 907 intervention) followed by randomisation for asthma adherence (791 control, 807 intervention). 1422 of 1814 pharmacies had complete information available during the follow-up for hypertension intervention (706 intervention, 716 control), and 1301 of 1598 had the follow-up information for asthma (657 intervention, 644 control).InterventionUsing provincial billing data to measure performance, mailed comparative feedback reported the pharmacy-level percentage of dispensings to patients non-adherent to antihypertensive medications or overusing asthma rescue inhalers.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe number of hypertension/asthma services billed per pharmacy and percentage of dispensings to non-adherent patients over the 12 months post intervention.ResultsFeedback on the asthma measure led to increased provision of asthma services (control 0.2, intervention 0.4, RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.46). However, this did not translate into reductions in patients’ overuse of rescue inhalers (control 45.5%, intervention 44.6%, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.01). For non-adherence to antihypertensive medications, feedback resulted in no difference in either provision of hypertension services (control 0.7, intervention 0.8, RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.82) or antihypertensive treatment adherence (control 27.9%, intervention 28.0%, RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.00). Baseline performance did not influence results, and there was no evidence of a cumulative effect with repeated feedback.ConclusionsComparative pharmacy performance feedback increased the provision of asthma pharmacists’ services but did not improve the performance on medication-use measures. Billing data can be used to evaluate the impact of billable services rendered by pharmacists on the quality of patients’ medication use.

show abstract

Compensation in Canada for Resolving Drug-Related Problems

Cited by 6 publications

References 9 publications

Uptake of the MedsCheck annual medication review service in Ontario community pharmacies between 2007 and 2013

Uptake of the MedsCheck annual medication review service in Ontario community pharmacies between 2007 and 2013

A systematic review of remuneration systems for clinical pharmacy care services

Optimising the changing role of the community pharmacist: a randomised trial of the impact of audit and feedback

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About