Dataset Information

The Tennessee Medicaid medication therapy management program: early stage contextual factors and implementation outcomes

ABSTRACT:

Background

First investigated in the 1990s, medication therapy management (MTM) is an evidence-based practice offered by pharmacists to ensure a patient’s medication regimen is individualized to include the safest and most effective medications. MTM has been shown to a) improve quality of patient care, b) reduces health care costs, and c) lead to fewer medication-related adverse effects. However, there has been limited testing of evidence-based, a-priori implementation strategies that support MTM implementation on a large scale.

Methods

The study has two objectives assessed at the organizational and individual level: 1) to determine the adoption, feasibility, acceptability and appropriateness of a multi-faceted implementation strategy to support the MTM pilot program in Tennessee; and 2) to report on the contextual factors associated with program implementation based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The overall design of the study was a hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation study reporting outcomes of Tennessee state Medicaid’s (TennCare) MTM Pilot program. This paper presents early stage implementation outcomes (e.g., adoption, feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness) and explores implementation barriers and facilitators using the CFIR. The study was assessed at the (a) organizational and (b) individual level. A mixed-methods approach was used including surveys, claims data, and semi-structured interviews. Interview data underwent initial, rapid qualitative analysis to provide real time feedback to TennCare leadership on project barriers and facilitators.

Results

The total reach of the program from July 2018 through June 2020 was 2033 MTM sessions provided by 17 Medicaid credentialed pharmacists. Preliminary findings suggest participants agreed that MTM was acceptable (μ = 16.22, SD = 0.28), appropriate (μ = 15.33, SD = 0.03), and feasible (μ = 14.72, SD = 0.46). Each of the scales had an excellent level of internal (> 0.70) consistency (feasibility, α = 0.91; acceptability, α = 0.96; appropriateness, α = 0.98;). Eight program participants were interviewed and were mapped to the following CFIR constructs: Process, Characteristics of Individuals, Intervention Characteristics, and Inner Setting. Rapid data analysis of the contextual inquiry allowed TennCare to alter initial implementation strategies during project rollout.

Conclusion

The early stage implementation of a multi-faceted implementation strategy to support delivery of Tennessee Medicaid’s MTM program was found to be well accepted and appropriate across multiple stakeholders including providers, administrators, and pharmacists. However, as the early stage of implementation progressed, barriers related to relative priority, characteristics of the intervention (e.g., complexity), and workflow impeded adoption. Programmatic changes to the MTM Pilot based on early stage contextual analysis and implementation outcomes had a positive impact on adoption.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-07193-7.

SUBMITTER: Hohmeier K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8561881 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Policy Points Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Vermont leveraged State Innovation Model awards to implement Medicaid accountable care organizations (ACOs). Flexibility in model design, ability to build on existing reforms, provision of technical assistance to providers, and access to feedback data all facilitated ACO development. Challenges included sustainability of transformation efforts and the integration of health care and social service providers. Early estimates showed promising improvements in hospital-related utilization and Vermont was able to reduce or slow the growth of Medicaid costs. These states are sustaining Medicaid ACOs owing in part to provider support and early successes in generating shared savings. The states are modifying their ACOs to include greater accountability and financial risk.ContextAs state Medicaid programs consider alternative payment models (APMs), many are choosing accountable care organizations (ACOs) as a way to improve health outcomes, coordinate care, and reduce expenditures. Four states (Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Vermont) leveraged State Innovation Model awards to create or expand Medicaid ACOs.MethodsWe used a mixed-methods design to assess achievements and challenges with ACO implementation and the impact of Medicaid ACOs on health care utilization, quality, and expenditures in three states. We integrated findings from key informant interviews, focus groups, document review, and difference-in-difference analyses using data from Medicaid claims and an all-payer claims database.FindingsStates built their Medicaid ACOs on existing health care reforms and infrastructure. Facilitators of implementation included allowing flexibility in design and implementation, targeting technical assistance, and making clinical, cost, and use data readily available to providers. Barriers included provider concerns about their ability to influence patient behavior, sustainability of provider practice transformation efforts when shared savings are reinvested into the health system and not shared with participating clinicians, and limited integration between health care and social service providers. Medicaid ACOs were associated with some improvements in use, quality, and expenditures, including statistically significant reductions in emergency department visits. Only Vermont's ACO demonstrated slower growth in total Medicaid expenditures.ConclusionsFour states demonstrated that adoption of ACOs for Medicaid beneficiaries was both possible and, for three states, associated with some improvements in care. States revised these models over time to address stakeholder concerns, increase provider participation, and enable some providers to accept financial risk for Medicaid patients. Lessons learned from these early efforts can inform the design and implementation of APMs in other Medicaid programs.

Project description:BackgroundCaring for a family member with dementia puts caregivers at risk of overburdening. Electronic health (eHealth) support for caregivers offers an opportunity for accessible tailored interventions. The blended care self-management program "Partner in Balance" (PiB) for early-stage dementia caregivers was executed in Dutch dementia care organizations. The program combines face-to-face coaching with tailored Web-based modules. Next to an evaluation of program effectiveness, an evaluation of sampling and intervention quality is essential for the generalizability and interpretation of results.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to describe the process evaluation from the perspective of both family caregivers (participants) and professionals delivering the intervention (coaches) to determine internal and external validity before the effect analysis and aid future implementation.MethodsImplementation, sampling, and intervention quality were evaluated with quantitative and qualitative data from logistical research data, coach questionnaires (n=13), and interviews with coaches (n=10) and participants (n=49). Goal attainment scaling was used to measure treatment-induced change. Analyses were performed with descriptive statistics and deductive content analysis.ResultsThe participation rate of eligible caregivers was 51.9% (80/154). Recruitment barriers were lack of computer and lack of need for support. Young age and employment were considered recruitment facilitators. All coaches attended training and supervision in blended care self-management. Deviations from the structured protocol were reported on intervention time, structure, and feedback. Coaches described an intensified relationship with the caregiver post intervention. Caregivers appreciated the tailored content and positive feedback. The blended structure increased their openness. The discussion forum was appreciated less. Overall, personal goals were attained after the program (T>50). Implementation barriers included lack of financing, time, and deviating target population.ConclusionsParticipants and coaches were satisfied with the intervention, but adapting the content to specific subgroups, for example, younger caregivers, was recommended. Implementation of the program requires more awareness of the benefits of blended care self-management programs and training in tailored self-management skills.Trial registrationDutch Trial Register (NTR): NTR4748; http://www.trialregister.nl (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6vSb2t9Mg).

Project description:Introduction/objectiveThe KidneyIntelX is a multiplex, bioprognostic, immunoassay consisting of 3 plasma biomarkers and clinical variables that uses machine learning to predict a patient's risk for a progressive decline in kidney function over 5 years. We report the 1-year pre- and post-test clinical impact on care management, eGFR slope, and A1C along with engagement of population health clinical pharmacists and patient coordinators to promote a program of sustainable kidney, metabolic, and cardiac health.MethodsThe KidneyIntelX in vitro prognostic test was previously validated for patients with type 2 diabetes and diabetic kidney disease (DKD) to predict kidney function decline within 5 years was introduced into the RWE study (NCT04802395) across the Health System as part of a population health chronic disease management program from [November 2020 to April 2023]. Pre- and post-test patients with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up post KidneyIntelX were assessed across all aspects of the program.ResultsA total of 5348 patients with DKD had a KidneyIntelX assay. The median age was 68 years old, 52% were female, 27% self-identified as Black, and 89% had hypertension. The median baseline eGFR was 62 ml/min/1.73 m2, urine albumin-creatinine ratio was 54 mg/g, and A1C was 7.3%. The KidneyIntelX risk level was low in 49%, intermediate in 40%, and high in 11% of cases. New prescriptions for SGLT2i, GLP-1 RA, or referral to a specialist were noted in 19%, 33%, and 43% among low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients, respectively. The median A1C decreased from 8.2% pre-test to 7.5% post-test in the high-risk group (P < .001). UACR levels in the intermediate-risk patients with albuminuria were reduced by 20%, and in a subgroup treated with new scripts for SGLT2i, UACR levels were lowered by approximately 50%. The median eGFR slope improved from -7.08 ml/min/1.73 m2/year to -4.27 ml/min/1.73 m2/year in high-risk patients (P = .0003), -2.65 to -1.04 in intermediate risk, and -3.26 ml/min/1.73 m2/year to +0.45 ml/min/1.73 m2/year in patients with low-risk (P < .001).ConclusionsDeployment and risk stratification by KidneyIntelX was associated with an escalation in action taken to optimize cardio-kidney-metabolic health including medications and specialist referrals. Glycemic control and kidney function trajectories improved post-KidneyIntelX testing, with the greatest improvements observed in those scored as high-risk.

Project description:Breast cancer tends to occur in an older age group of women also burdened with comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease (CVD). Numerous medications used to manage CVD (e.g., statins and antihypertensives) are hypothesized to alter breast cancer risk, but there are few studies on breast cancer outcomes. The COmmonly used Medications and Breast Cancer Outcomes (COMBO) cohort was developed to study how medications and co-morbidities influence breast cancer prognosis. Cohort study among adult women, diagnosed with incident early stage breast cancer, and enrolled in an integrated health plan. Data sources included health plan administrative databases, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results tumor registry, and medical records. Statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), beta blockers (BB), calcium blockers, and diuretics were the exposures of interest. The outcome was second breast cancer events (SBCE) defined as recurrence or second primary breast cancer. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for SBCE, and components of SBCE. 4,216 women were followed for a median of 6.3 years, and 13.2 % experienced a SBCE (first of: n = 415 recurrences and n = 143 s primary breast cancers). Compared to non-users, we observed an increased risk of second primary breast cancer with ACEI use (HR = 1.66; 95 % CI, 1.06-2.58) and an increased risk of recurrence with BB use (HR = 1.29; 95 % CI, 1.01-1.64). There was suggestion of a reduced risk of SBCE with statin use (HR = 0.82; 95 % CI, 0.62-1.08) and second primary breast cancer with BB use (HR = 0.77; 95 % CI, 0.50-1.19). No differences in outcomes were observed by duration of medication use. A majority of CVD medications evaluated in this study appear safe with respect to SBCE, but ACEI and BB use warrant further evaluation. The study presented is one example of the questions that can be addressed using the COMBO cohort.