Cost Effectiveness of a Pharmacist-Led Information Technology Intervention for Reducing Rates of Clinically Important Errors in Medicines Management in General Practices (PINCER)

Abstract

Background Most Canadian provinces and territories rely on the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) to provide recommendations regarding public reimbursement of cancer drugs. The pCODR review process considers four dimensions of value-clinical benefit, economic evaluation, patient-based values and adoption feasibility-but they do not define weights for individual decision criteria or an acceptable threshold for any of the criteria. Given this implicit review process, it is of interest to understand which factors appear to carry the most weight in pCODR recommendations using a revealed preferences approach. Methods Using publicly available decision summaries (n = 91) describing submissions and resulting recommendations 2011-2017, we extracted ten attributes that characterized each submission. Using logistic regression, we identified statistically significant attributes and estimated their relative impact in final recommendations.Results Clinical aspects appear to carry the greatest weight in the decision to reject or not reject, along with aspects of patient value (treatments with no alternatives were less likely to be rejected). Cost effectiveness does not appear to play a role in the initial decision to reject or not reject but is critical in full versus conditional approvals. There is evidence of a maximum acceptable threshold of around $Can140,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Conclusion A set of factors driving pCODR recommendations is identifiable, supporting the consistency of the review process. However, the implicit nature of the review process and the difficulty of extracting and interpreting some of the attribute levels used in the analysis suggests that the process may still lack full transparency. Key PointsWe characterize the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) process as two stages: a decision to reject or not reject, followed by a decision to recommend full or condition approval (conditional on non-rejection).Clinical aspects appear to carry the greatest weight in the decision to reject or not reject, whereas value for money had the greatest weight in full versus conditional approvals. Notwithstanding pCODR's implicit review process, there appears to be an identifiable and consistent set of factors driving pCODR recommendations.

Cost‐Effectiveness of Pharmacist‐Led Deprescribing ofNSAIDsin Community‐Dwelling Older Adults

“…Additionally, a community pharmacist‐led complex intervention in the primary care setting in the United Kingdom reduced prescribing errors of NSAIDs and associated GI adverse outcomes, and it was the dominant strategy (less costly and more effective) compared with simple feedback . The results of the latter report lend support to our study, highlighting the crucial role that community pharmacists can play to reduce the use of PIMs and related adverse outcomes resulting in improvement in quality of life, reduced use of health services, and cost savings.…”

The economics of medicines optimization: policy developments, remaining challenges and research priorities

“…This link may be more or less evidence based; for example, restricting the use of non-steroid anti-inflammatories in people with previous gastro-intestinal bleeding has a strong evidence base, whereas avoiding cardio-selective beta-blockers in people with asthma does not. 118 Within each of these process categories, there is little standardization of definition or measurement, making further comparison between studies especially problematic. In addition, the link between the same intermediate measure and final outcomes may depend on the disease areas considered.…”

Cost Effectiveness of Support for People Starting a New Medication for a Long-Term Condition Through Community Pharmacies: An Economic Evaluation of the New Medicine Service (NMS) Compared with Normal Practice

“…Here, we simulated the effect of observed adherence increases on patient outcomes and NHS costs by designing economic models for each drug–disease pair. We developed this method previously in a cross-therapeutic intervention focused on medication errors [ 22 ]. Here, we combine the results from the NMS trial with projected harm from non-adherence to generate estimates of patient outcomes and NHS costs (Fig.…”