Variation in medication therapy management delivery: Implications for health care policy

15Citations
Citations of this article
54Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Medication therapy management (MTM) program evaluations have revealed mixed outcomes, with some studies finding favorable outcomes and others finding no differences between patients who received MTM versus those who did not. One possible reason for outcomes variability is differences in delivery of MTM programs. The Chronic Care Model (CCM) provides a framework for how health care organizations can improve care for the chronically ill through 6 elements: organization of health care, delivery system design, clinical information systems, decision support, self-management, and linkages to community resources. OBJECTIVE: To apply the CCM to understand variation in MTM delivery and formulate policy recommendations. METHODS: This study used a mixed-methods descriptive analysis of MTM delivery. Investigators conducted visits to a purposeful sample of MTM practices to observe MTM and interview participants. The pharmacists and staff of these practices completed a modified Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (ACIC). Pairs of investigators analyzed interview transcripts to identify themes. Demographics and ACIC scores were summarized using descriptive statistics. After analysis, investigators discussed overarching themes and policy implications organized by CCM elements. RESULTS: Seven practices participated, and 87 participants were interviewed. Based on ACIC scores, MTM patient volume, and payer mix, practices were categorized as Early Maturity Level or Later Maturity Level. From the model, organization of health care themes included whether MTM was the practice's core competence, belief/confidence in the MTM process, lack of formal rewards, and the influence of organizational goals and external environment. Delivery system design themes pertained to the extent that MTM processes were formalized. Clinical information systems themes were the extent to which systems were influenced by payers, efficiency strategies, and the accuracy and availability of information. In considering clinical decision support themes, alert design limitations and variation in user approaches to alerts based on experience were noted. We observed strong support for patient self-management; when present, barriers were attributed to the patient, MTM provider, or payer. Referral to community resources was minimal. Numerous policy implications were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Our research identified numerous ways by which MTM delivery varies, particularly by MTM practice maturity level. These findings provide evidence for several policy changes that could be considered to optimize MTM delivery, encourage alignment with the CCM, and promote practice maturation.

References Powered by Scopus

Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic

13098Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Qualitative data analysis for health services research: Developing taxonomy, themes, and theory

2535Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Medication therapy management in pharmacy practice: Core elements of an MTM service model (version 2.0)

0
325Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Standards in medication review: An international perspective

21Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Nationwide estimates of medication therapy management delivery under the Medicare prescription drug benefit

18Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Medication therapy management delivery by community pharmacists: Insights from a national sample of Medicare Part D beneficiaries

16Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Snyder, M. E., Jaynes, H. A., Gernant, S. A., Lantaff, W. M., Hudmon, K. S., & Doucette, W. R. (2018). Variation in medication therapy management delivery: Implications for health care policy. Journal of Managed Care and Specialty Pharmacy, 24(9), 896–902. https://doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2018.24.9.896

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 10

63%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

19%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

13%

Researcher 1

6%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 6

32%

Nursing and Health Professions 6

32%

Medicine and Dentistry 4

21%

Social Sciences 3

16%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free