Lynnholck2890

This article examines payer-provider partnerships in social determinants of health (SDoH) interventions, identifies important factors for an approach centered around return on investment (ROI) using integrated delivery and finance systems as case studies, and advocates for increased collaboration between payers and providers when addressing SDoH. Despite the numerous examples where payers and providers have attempted to independently address SDoH, there is limited evidence for the success of these interventions. Since most stakeholders individually do not have access to financial and clinical data, identifying an ROI for SDoH interventions is logistically challenging, but even when these data are available, stakeholders may not want to share their learnings due to negative findings and/or unwillingness to share proprietary information. These issues are further amplified by the effects of COVID-19 and its worsening effect on widening health disparities, but many payers and providers have risen to the challenge together. This article advocates for the importance of payer-provider partnerships to address SDoH and uses examples of integrated delivery and finance systems as case studies of how these partnerships could function. DISCLOSURES No outside funding supported the writing of this article. Hartle is employed by Geisinger Health System. The other authors have nothing to disclose.BACKGROUND 50% of prescriptions dispensed in the United States are not taken as prescribed, leading to approximately 125,000 deaths and 10% of hospitalizations per year. Incentives are effective in improving medication adherence; however, information about patient perceptions regarding incentives is lacking. OBJECTIVES To (1) explore perceived appropriateness of incentives among patients prescribed at least 1 medication for chronic hypertension, hyperlipidemia, heart disease, diabetes, and/or asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and (2) examine associations between perceived appropriateness and patient characteristics. METHODS A cross-sectional online survey was administered via Qualtrics Panels to US adults taking at least 1 prescription medication for a chronic condition. selleck kinase inhibitor The results describe patient preference for financial or social recognition-based incentive, perceived appropriateness of adherence incentives (5-point Likert scale), self-reported adherence (Medometer), and demographics. Analyses R = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.98-0.99) were significant predictors. CONCLUSIONS The majority of patients perceived incentives as appropriate and preferred financial incentives over social recognition-based incentives. Perceived appropriateness for medication adherence incentives was less likely among certain groups of patients, such as those with Hispanic ethnicity, lower annual income, no college degree, and higher levels of adherence. These characteristics should be taken into account when structuring incentives. DISCLOSURES This study was funded by the Auburn University's Intramural Grants Program. Hansen, Qian, and Garza are affiliated with Auburn University. Hansen has provided expert testimony for Daiichi Sankyo and Takeda on unrelated matters. The other authors have no potential conflicts of interest to declare. This study was presented as a poster presentation at the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy Annual Meeting held July 2018 in Boston, MA.BACKGROUND Medication nonadherence in individuals with type 2 diabetes can lead to poor glycemic control, resulting in increased risk for diabetes-related complications. OBJECTIVE To examine associations between factors (ie, drug coverage satisfaction and cost-reducing behavior) and medication nonadherence among Medicare beneficiaries with type 2 diabetes. METHODS We analyzed the 2016 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey Public Use File for beneficiaries aged 65 years and older with reported type 2 diabetes (n=1,430; weighted n=5,846,943). Medicare beneficiaries were considered to have medication nonadherence if they reported skipping doses or taking smaller doses than prescribed. A survey-weighted logistic model, adjusted for sociodemographics and comorbidities, was conducted to examine associations of drug coverage satisfaction and cost-reducing behavior with medication nonadherence. RESULTS Among Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older with type 2 diabetes, 10.3% reported medication nonadherence. In the adjusted analysis, the risk for medication nonadherence was higher among those who were dissatisfied with the amount paid for medications (OR = 2.43; P = 0.002) compared with those who were satisfied, and those who spent less on basic needs to save for medications were more likely to report medication nonadherence (OR = 2.23; P = 0.011) than those who did not. CONCLUSIONS Our findings suggest that medication nonadherence among Medicare beneficiaries with type 2 diabetes is associated with dissatisfaction with the amount paid for medications and cost-reducing behavior. Interventions that lower medication costs for Medicare beneficiaries may help to improve medication adherence among this at-risk population. DISCLOSURES No outside funding supported this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.BACKGROUND Pimavanserin is approved for treatment of Parkinson disease (PD)-related psychosis, but its use has been associated with an increased risk of death during clinical trials, as well as during postmarketing surveillance. Previous reports on the association between pimavanserin and mortality have not taken into account limitations of data sources nor included comparable populations or comparisons to relevant treatment alternatives. OBJECTIVE To conduct a comparative pharmacovigilance assessment of pimavanserin vs treatment alternatives and by restricting surveillance data to more representative populations. METHODS This was a retrospective analysis of adverse event case reports submitted to the FDA's Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) from 2016 through 2019 quarter 3 (Q3). FAERS data are collected from the full population, were further restricted to only those with PD, and were based on PD medication use. Reports were assessed for exposure to pimavanserin, clozapine, quetiapine, haloperidol, and other atypical antipsychotics.