Cargando…

A regional analysis of payer and provider views on cholesterol management: PCSK9 inhibitors as an illustrative alignment model

BACKGROUND: Multiple barriers exist for appropriate use of the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 enzyme inhibitors (PCSK9i) in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) with inadequately controlled hypercholesterolemia despite stan...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McCormick, Dana, Bhatt, Deepak L, Bays, Harold E, Taub, Pam R, Caldwell, Kim A, Guerin, Chris K, Steinhoff, Jeff, Ahmad, Zahid, Singh, Rubina, Moreo, Kathleen, Carter, Jeffrey, Heggen, Cherilyn L, Sapir, Tamar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10391214/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33251993
http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2020.26.12.1517
_version_ 1785082654837702656
author McCormick, Dana
Bhatt, Deepak L
Bays, Harold E
Taub, Pam R
Caldwell, Kim A
Guerin, Chris K
Steinhoff, Jeff
Ahmad, Zahid
Singh, Rubina
Moreo, Kathleen
Carter, Jeffrey
Heggen, Cherilyn L
Sapir, Tamar
author_facet McCormick, Dana
Bhatt, Deepak L
Bays, Harold E
Taub, Pam R
Caldwell, Kim A
Guerin, Chris K
Steinhoff, Jeff
Ahmad, Zahid
Singh, Rubina
Moreo, Kathleen
Carter, Jeffrey
Heggen, Cherilyn L
Sapir, Tamar
author_sort McCormick, Dana
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Multiple barriers exist for appropriate use of the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 enzyme inhibitors (PCSK9i) in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) with inadequately controlled hypercholesterolemia despite standard therapies. Among these barriers, high payer rejection rates and inadequate prior authorization (PA) documentation by providers hinder optimal use of PCSK9i. OBJECTIVES: To (a) identify and discuss provider and payer discordances on barriers to authorization and use of PCSK9i based on clinical and real-world evidence and (b) align understanding and application of clinical, cost, safety, and efficacy data of PCSK9i. METHODS: Local groups of 3 payers and 3 providers met in 6 separate locations across the United States through a collaborative project of AMCP and PRIME Education. Responses to selected pre- and postmeeting survey questions measured changes in attitudes and beliefs regarding treatment barriers, lipid thresholds for considering PCSK9i therapy, and tactics for improving PA processes. Statistical analysis of inter- and intragroup changes in attitudes were performed by Cox proportional hazards test and Fisher’s exact test for < 5 variables. RESULTS: The majority of providers and payers (67%-78%) agreed that high patient copayments and inadequate PA documentation were significant barriers to PCSK9i usage. However, payers and providers differed on beliefs that current evidence does not support PCSK9i cost-effectiveness (6% providers, 56% payers; P = 0.003) and that PA presents excessive administrative burden (72% providers, 44% payers; P = 0.09) Average increases pre- to postmeeting were noted in provider beliefs that properly documented PA forms expedite access to PCSK9i (22%-50% increase) and current authorization criteria accurately distinguish patients who benefit most from PCSK9i (6%-22%). Payers decreased in their belief that current authorization criteria accurately distinguish benefiting patients (72%-50%). Providers and payers increased in their belief that PCSK9i are cost-effective (44%-61% and 28%-50%, respectively) and were more willing to consider PCSK9i at the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol threshold of > 70 mg/dL for patients with ASCVD (78%-83% and 44%-67%, respectively) or FH (22%-39% and 22%-33%). Payers were more agreeable to less stringent PA requirements for patients with FH (33%-72%, P = 0.019) and need for standardized PA requirements (50%-83%, P = 0.034); these considerations remained high (89%) among providers after the meeting. Most participants supported educational programs for patient treatment adherence (83%) and physician/staff PA processes (83%-94%). CONCLUSIONS: Provider and payer representatives in 6 distinct geographic locations provided recommendations to improve quality of care in patients eligible for PCSK9i. Participants also provided tactical recommendations for streamlining PA documentation processes and improving awareness of PCSK9i cost-effectiveness and clinical efficacy. The majority of participants supported development of universal, standardized patient eligibility criteria and PA forms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10391214
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103912142023-08-02 A regional analysis of payer and provider views on cholesterol management: PCSK9 inhibitors as an illustrative alignment model McCormick, Dana Bhatt, Deepak L Bays, Harold E Taub, Pam R Caldwell, Kim A Guerin, Chris K Steinhoff, Jeff Ahmad, Zahid Singh, Rubina Moreo, Kathleen Carter, Jeffrey Heggen, Cherilyn L Sapir, Tamar J Manag Care Spec Pharm Research BACKGROUND: Multiple barriers exist for appropriate use of the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 enzyme inhibitors (PCSK9i) in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) with inadequately controlled hypercholesterolemia despite standard therapies. Among these barriers, high payer rejection rates and inadequate prior authorization (PA) documentation by providers hinder optimal use of PCSK9i. OBJECTIVES: To (a) identify and discuss provider and payer discordances on barriers to authorization and use of PCSK9i based on clinical and real-world evidence and (b) align understanding and application of clinical, cost, safety, and efficacy data of PCSK9i. METHODS: Local groups of 3 payers and 3 providers met in 6 separate locations across the United States through a collaborative project of AMCP and PRIME Education. Responses to selected pre- and postmeeting survey questions measured changes in attitudes and beliefs regarding treatment barriers, lipid thresholds for considering PCSK9i therapy, and tactics for improving PA processes. Statistical analysis of inter- and intragroup changes in attitudes were performed by Cox proportional hazards test and Fisher’s exact test for < 5 variables. RESULTS: The majority of providers and payers (67%-78%) agreed that high patient copayments and inadequate PA documentation were significant barriers to PCSK9i usage. However, payers and providers differed on beliefs that current evidence does not support PCSK9i cost-effectiveness (6% providers, 56% payers; P = 0.003) and that PA presents excessive administrative burden (72% providers, 44% payers; P = 0.09) Average increases pre- to postmeeting were noted in provider beliefs that properly documented PA forms expedite access to PCSK9i (22%-50% increase) and current authorization criteria accurately distinguish patients who benefit most from PCSK9i (6%-22%). Payers decreased in their belief that current authorization criteria accurately distinguish benefiting patients (72%-50%). Providers and payers increased in their belief that PCSK9i are cost-effective (44%-61% and 28%-50%, respectively) and were more willing to consider PCSK9i at the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol threshold of > 70 mg/dL for patients with ASCVD (78%-83% and 44%-67%, respectively) or FH (22%-39% and 22%-33%). Payers were more agreeable to less stringent PA requirements for patients with FH (33%-72%, P = 0.019) and need for standardized PA requirements (50%-83%, P = 0.034); these considerations remained high (89%) among providers after the meeting. Most participants supported educational programs for patient treatment adherence (83%) and physician/staff PA processes (83%-94%). CONCLUSIONS: Provider and payer representatives in 6 distinct geographic locations provided recommendations to improve quality of care in patients eligible for PCSK9i. Participants also provided tactical recommendations for streamlining PA documentation processes and improving awareness of PCSK9i cost-effectiveness and clinical efficacy. The majority of participants supported development of universal, standardized patient eligibility criteria and PA forms. Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy 2020-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10391214/ /pubmed/33251993 http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2020.26.12.1517 Text en Copyright © 2020, Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research
McCormick, Dana
Bhatt, Deepak L
Bays, Harold E
Taub, Pam R
Caldwell, Kim A
Guerin, Chris K
Steinhoff, Jeff
Ahmad, Zahid
Singh, Rubina
Moreo, Kathleen
Carter, Jeffrey
Heggen, Cherilyn L
Sapir, Tamar
A regional analysis of payer and provider views on cholesterol management: PCSK9 inhibitors as an illustrative alignment model
title A regional analysis of payer and provider views on cholesterol management: PCSK9 inhibitors as an illustrative alignment model
title_full A regional analysis of payer and provider views on cholesterol management: PCSK9 inhibitors as an illustrative alignment model
title_fullStr A regional analysis of payer and provider views on cholesterol management: PCSK9 inhibitors as an illustrative alignment model
title_full_unstemmed A regional analysis of payer and provider views on cholesterol management: PCSK9 inhibitors as an illustrative alignment model
title_short A regional analysis of payer and provider views on cholesterol management: PCSK9 inhibitors as an illustrative alignment model
title_sort regional analysis of payer and provider views on cholesterol management: pcsk9 inhibitors as an illustrative alignment model
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10391214/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33251993
http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2020.26.12.1517
work_keys_str_mv AT mccormickdana aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT bhattdeepakl aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT baysharolde aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT taubpamr aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT caldwellkima aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT guerinchrisk aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT steinhoffjeff aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT ahmadzahid aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT singhrubina aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT moreokathleen aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT carterjeffrey aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT heggencherilynl aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT sapirtamar aregionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT mccormickdana regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT bhattdeepakl regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT baysharolde regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT taubpamr regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT caldwellkima regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT guerinchrisk regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT steinhoffjeff regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT ahmadzahid regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT singhrubina regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT moreokathleen regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT carterjeffrey regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT heggencherilynl regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel
AT sapirtamar regionalanalysisofpayerandproviderviewsoncholesterolmanagementpcsk9inhibitorsasanillustrativealignmentmodel