Publications

The scope of community pharmacy practice has expanded beyond the provision of drug product to include the provision of patient care services. Likewise, the community pharmacist's approach to patient safety must also expand beyond prevention of errors during medication dispensing to include optimization of medications and prevention of adverse events throughout the entire medication use process. Connectivity to patient data and other health care providers has been a long-standing challenge in community pharmacy with implications for the delivery and safety of patient care. We describe three innovative advances in connectivity in community pharmacy practice that enhance patient safety in the provision of community pharmacist patient care services across the entire medication use process. Specifically, we discuss the growing use of immunization information systems, quality improvement platforms, and health information exchanges in community pharmacy practice and their implications for patient safety.

Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are units of measure for a particular profession that describe the professional's unique abilities and work. EPAs can be used in two ways: as a link between individual competencies for mastery and overall professional responsibilities in practice; and as a mechanism for faculty to assess the student's progression using levels of decreasing supervision. Currently used in medical education, implementation and utilization of EPAs within pharmacy education has potential benefits and challenges. This article will describe, highlight benefits of, and share mitigation strategies for implementing EPAs within pharmacy education.

BACKGROUND: Although research conducted within the military has assessed the health and mental health problems of military personnel, little information exists about personnel who seek care outside the military. The purpose of this study is to clarify the personal characteristics, mental health diagnoses, and experiences of active duty U.S. military personnel who sought civilian sector services due to unmet needs for care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, multi-method study included 233 clients, based in the United States, Afghanistan, South Korea, and Germany, who obtained care between 2013 and 2016 from a nationwide network of volunteer civilian practitioners. A hotline organized by faith-based and peace organizations received calls from clients and referred them to the network when the clients described unmet needs for physical or mental health services. Intake and follow-up interviews at 2 wk and 2 mo after intake captured demographic characteristics, mental health diagnoses, and reasons for seeking civilian rather than military care. Non-parametric bootstrap regression analyses identified predictors of psychiatric disorders, suicidality, and absence without leave (AWOL). Qualitative analyses of clients' narratives clarified their experiences and reasons for seeking care. The research protocol has been reviewed and approved annually by the Institutional Review Board at the University of New Mexico.

RESULTS: Depression (72%), post-traumatic stress disorder (62%), alcohol use disorder (27%), and panic disorder (25%) were the most common diagnoses. Forty-eight percent of clients reported suicidal ideation. Twenty percent were absence without leave. Combat trauma predicted post-traumatic stress disorder (odds ratio [OR] = 8.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.66, 47.12, p = 0.01) and absence without leave (OR = x3.85, 95% CI 1.14, 12.94, p = 0.03). Non-combat trauma predicted panic disorder (OR = 3.64, 95% CI 1.29, 10.23, p = 0.01). Geographical region was associated with generalized anxiety disorder (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.49, 0.99, p = 0.05). Significant predictors were not found for major depression, alcohol use disorder, or suicidal ideation. Clients' narrative themes included fear of reprisal for seeking services, mistrust of command, insufficient and unresponsive services, cost as a barrier to care, deception in recruitment, voluntary enlistment remorse, guilt about actual or potential killing of combatants or non-combatant civilians, preexisting mental health disorders, family and household challenges that contributed to distress, and military sexual trauma.

CONCLUSIONS: Our work clarified substantial unmet needs for services among active duty military personnel, the limitations of programs based in the military sector, and the potential value of civilian sector services that are not linked to military goals. We and our institutional review board opted against using a control group that would create ethical problems stemming from the denial of needed services. For future research, an evaluative strategy that can assess the impact of civilian services and that reconciles ethical concerns with study design remains a challenge. Due to inherent contradictions in the roles of military professionals, especially the double agency that makes professionals responsible to both clients and the military command, the policy alternative of providing services for military personnel in the civilian sector warrants serious consideration, as do preventive strategies such as non-military alternatives to conflict resolution.

BACKGROUND: Rounding checklists are an increasingly common quality improvement tool in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, effectiveness studies have shown conflicting results. We sought to understand ICU providers' perceptions of checklists, as well as barriers and facilitators to effective utilisation of checklists during daily rounds.

OBJECTIVES: To understand how ICU providers perceive rounding checklists and develop a framework for more effective rounding checklist implementation.

METHODS: We performed a qualitative study in 32 ICUs within 14 hospitals in a large integrated health system in the USA. We used two complementary data collection methods: direct observation of daily rounds and semistructured interviews with ICU clinicians. Observations and interviews were thematically coded and primary themes were identified using a combined inductive and deductive approach.

RESULTS: We conducted 89 interviews and performed 114 hours of observation. Among study ICUs, 12 used checklists and 20 did not. Participants described the purpose of rounding checklists as a daily reminder for evidence-based practices, a tool for increasing shared understanding of patient care across care providers and a way to increase the efficiency of rounds. Checklists were perceived as not helpful when viewed as overstandardising care and when they are not relevant to a particular ICU's needs. Strategies to improve checklist implementation include attention to the brevity and relevance of the checklist to the particular ICU, consistent use over time, and integration with daily work flow.

CONCLUSION: Our results provide potential insights about why ICU rounding checklists frequently fail to improve outcomes and offer a framework for effective checklist implementation through greater feedback and accountability.

BACKGROUND: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has implemented robust strategies to monitor prescription opioid dispensing, but these strategies have not accounted for opioids prescribed by non-VA providers. State-based prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are a potential tool to identify VA patients' receipt of opioids from non-VA prescribers, and recent legislation requires their use within VA.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate VA physicians' perspectives and experiences regarding use of PDMPs to monitor Veterans' receipt of opioids from non-VA prescribers.

DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews.

PARTICIPANTS: Forty-two VA primary care physicians who prescribed opioids to 15 or more Veterans in 2015. We sampled physicians from two states with PDMPs (Massachusetts and Illinois) and one without prescriber access to a PDMP at the time of the interviews (Pennsylvania).

APPROACH: From February to August 2016, we conducted semi-structured telephone interviews that addressed the following topics regarding PDMPs: overall experiences, barriers to optimal use, and facilitators to improve use.

KEY RESULTS: VA physicians broadly supported use of PDMPs or desired access to one, while exhibiting varying patterns of PDMP use dictated by state laws and their clinical judgment. Physicians noted administrative burdens and incomplete or unavailable prescribing data as key barriers to PDMP use. To facilitate use, physicians endorsed (1) linking PDMPs with the VA electronic health record, (2) using templated notes to document PDMP use, and (3) delegating routine PDMP queries to ancillary staff.

CONCLUSIONS: Despite the time and administrative burdens associated with their use, VA physicians in our study broadly supported PDMPs. The application of our findings to ongoing PDMP implementation efforts may strengthen PDMP use both within and outside VA and improve the safe prescribing of opioids.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence and consequences of receiving prescription opioids from both the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Medicare Part D.

METHODS: Among US veterans enrolled in both VA and Part D filling 1 or more opioid prescriptions in 2012 (n = 539 473), we calculated 3 opioid safety measures using morphine milligram equivalents (MME): (1) proportion receiving greater than 100 MME for 1 or more days, (2) mean days receiving greater than 100 MME, and (3) proportion receiving greater than 120 MME for 90 consecutive days. We compared these measures by opioid source.

RESULTS: Overall, 135 643 (25.1%) veterans received opioids from VA only, 332 630 (61.7%) from Part D only, and 71 200 (13.2%) from both. The dual-use group was more likely than the VA-only group to receive greater than 100 MME for 1 or more days (34.3% vs 10.9%; adjusted risk ratio [ARR] = 3.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.9, 3.1), have more days with greater than 100 MME (42.5 vs 16.9 days; adjusted difference = 16.4 days; 95% CI = 15.7, 17.2), and to receive greater than 120 MME for 90 consecutive days (7.8% vs 3.1%; ARR = 2.2; 95% CI = 2.1, 2.3).

CONCLUSIONS: Among veterans dually enrolled in VA and Medicare Part D, dual use of opioids was associated with more than 2 to 3 times the risk of high-dose opioid exposure.

OBJECTIVES: To compare healthcare quality, utilization, and patient satisfaction between provider-led health plans (PLHPs) and non-PLHPs.

STUDY DESIGN: Observational study of 2016 Medicare Advantage (MA) plans.

METHODS: We included 3 quality outcomes (MA Star Rating System, Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set [HEDIS] effectiveness aggregate score, and HEDIS access aggregate score), 4 utilization outcomes (HEDIS average procedure rates, discharge rates, inpatient days, and readmission probability), and 1 patient satisfaction outcome (National Committee for Quality Assurance consumer satisfaction rating). We performed regression analysis to compare the 8 selected outcomes between PLHPs and non-PLHPs, controlling for key covariates, including region, profit status, patient risk, and patient-related and provider-related demographics.

RESULTS: Our sample included 64 contracts offered by 31 PLHPs (representing 3,197,284 enrollees) and 311 contracts offered by 55 non-PLHPs (representing 13,881,210 enrollees). Compared with non-PLHPs, in our primary multivariable model, PLHPs were associated with higher star ratings (β = 0.41; 95% CI, 0.15-0.67), effectiveness scores (β = 3.11; 95% CI, 1.43-4.80), and patient satisfaction (β = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.30-0.84), and lower procedure rates (β = -0.47; 95% CI, -0.79 to -0.16). There were no significant differences in access, discharges, inpatient days, and readmission probability. The association between PLHPs and outcomes differed by plan size, nonprofit status, and region.

CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of care within a PLHP was associated with improved quality, effectiveness, and patient satisfaction, as well as lower procedure rates. As providers bear increasing financial risk under alternative payment models, there is momentum to integrate healthcare provision and payment through PLHPs. Our results demonstrate the potential of such organizations to deliver high-quality care, although opportunities remain to optimize utilization.

BACKGROUND: Overlapping use of opioids and benzodiazepines is associated with increased risk for overdose. Veterans receiving medications concurrently from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Medicare may be at higher risk for such overlap.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between dual use of VA and Medicare drug benefits and receipt of overlapping opioid and benzodiazepine prescriptions.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional.

SETTING: VA and Medicare.

PARTICIPANTS: All veterans enrolled in VA and Medicare Part D who filled at least 2 opioid prescriptions in 2013 (n = 368 891).

MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes were the proportion of patients with a Pharmacy Quality Alliance (PQA) measure of opioid-benzodiazepine overlap (≥2 filled prescriptions for benzodiazepines with ≥30 days of overlap with opioids) and the proportion of patients with high-dose opioid-benzodiazepine overlap (≥30 days of overlap with a daily opioid dose >120 morphine milligram equivalents). Augmented inverse probability weighting regression was used to compare these measures by prescription drug source: VA only, Medicare only, or VA and Medicare (dual use).

RESULTS: Of 368 891 eligible veterans, 18.3% received prescriptions from the VA only, 30.3% from Medicare only, and 51.4% from both VA and Medicare. The proportion with PQA opioid-benzodiazepine overlap was larger for the dual-use group than the VA-only group (23.1% vs. 17.3%; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.27 [95% CI, 1.24 to 1.30]) and Medicare-only group (23.1% vs. 16.5%; aRR, 1.12 [CI, 1.10 to 1.14]). The proportion with high-dose overlap was also larger for the dual-use group than the VA-only group (4.7% vs. 2.3%; aRR, 2.23 [CI, 2.10 to 2.36]) and Medicare-only group (4.7% vs. 2.9%; aRR, 1.06 [CI, 1.02 to 1.11]).

LIMITATION: Data are from 2013 and cannot capture medications purchased without insurance; unmeasured confounding may remain in this cross-sectional study.

CONCLUSION: Among a national cohort of veterans dually enrolled in VA and Medicare, receiving prescriptions from both sources was associated with greater risk for receiving potentially unsafe overlapping prescriptions for opioids and benzodiazepines.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about physicians' approaches to adopting new cardiovascular drugs and how adoption varies between drugs of differing novelty.

METHODS: Using data on dispensed prescriptions from IMS Health's Xponent™ database, we created a cohort of all primary care physicians (PCPs) and cardiologists in Pennsylvania who regularly prescribed anticoagulants, antihypertensives and statins from 2007 to 2011. We examined prescribing of three new cardiovascular drugs of differing novelty: dabigatran, aliskiren and pitavastatin. Outcomes were rapid adoption of each new drug, defined by early and sustained monthly prescribing detected by group-based trajectory models, by physicians within the first 15 months of marketplace introduction.

RESULTS: 5953 physicians regularly prescribed each drug class. The majority of physicians (63.8%) adopted zero new drugs in the first 15 months, 35.0% rapidly adopted one or two, and 1.2% rapidly adopted all three. Physicians were more likely to rapidly adopt the most novel drug, dabigatran (27.3%), than aliskiren (10.5%) or pitavastatin (8.0%). Physician specialty and sex were the most consistent predictors of adoption. Compared to PCPs, cardiologists were more likely to rapidly adopt dabigatran (Adjusted Odds Ratio 8.90, 95% confidence interval 7.42-10.67; P<0.001) aliskerin (2.05, CI 1.56-2.69; P<0.001) and pitavastatin (3.44, CI 2.60-4.57; P<0.001). Female physicians were less likely to adopt dabigatran (0.71, CI 0.59-0.85; P <0.001) and aliskiren (0.64, CI 0.49-0.83; P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: Physicians vary in their prescribing of recently-introduced cardiovascular drugs. Though most physicians did not rapidly adopt any new cardiovascular drugs, drug novelty and cardiology training were associated with greater adoption.

We experimentally demonstrate a source of nearly pure single photons in arbitrary temporal shapes heralded from a parametric down-conversion (PDC) source at telecom wavelengths. The technology is enabled by the tailored dispersion of in-house fabricated waveguides with shaped pump pulses to directly generate the PDC photons in on-demand temporal shapes. We generate PDC photons in Hermite-Gauss and frequency-binned modes and confirm a minimum purity of 0.81, even for complex temporal shapes.