Impact of Pharmacy Intervention on Prior Authorization Success and Efficiency at a University Medical Center.
BACKGROUND
Prior authorizations (PAs) may improve appropriate use of prescription medications. Despite potential savings for health insurance plans, the PA process is time consuming for the ordering provider, pharmacy, and patient. The UC Davis Health System (UCDHS) has created a centralized pharmacy-run clinic PA process.


OBJECTIVE
To compare the mean PA processing time between the new centralized clinic and usual care and provide secondary endpoints for PA approval rates, time to prescription fill, time to prescription pick-up, total staff time, and estimated labor costs.


METHODS
This is a prospective observational study comparing sequential PA requests at the UCDHS centralized clinic (intervention) and other UCDHS clinics (usual care) between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2014. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test was used to compare dichotomous outcomes (approval/denial rates) between the 2 groups, controlling for insurance type. A generalized linear model was applied for comparing the continuous outcomes (PA process time, time to first fill, time to pick-up, and cost) with insurance type as covariate.


RESULTS
For the intervention group, 47 PAs were evaluated, and 77 PAs were evaluated in the usual care group. The average PA process time was 0.53 days for the intervention group versus 7.02 days for usual care (P < 0.001), and the PA approval rate was 93% for the intervention group versus 68% for usual care (P < 0.002). The mean time to fill was 2.49 days and 5.52 days for the intervention and usual care clinics, respectively (P = 0.02). The pick-up percentage was 75% versus 52% for intervention and usual care, respectively (P < 0.001). The intervention clinic spent a significantly lower mean time processing PAs (15 minutes vs. 64 minutes) compared with the usual care clinics (P < 0.001). It is estimated that the mean total labor cost per PA at the intervention clinic was $11.50 compared with $37.50 for the usual care clinics (P < 0.001).


CONCLUSIONS
Pharmacy-led interventions in PA processing resulted in a statistically significant benefit in improving time to PA approval, time to first fill, and time to pick-up.


BACKGROUND
No outside funding supported this study. The authors report no conflicting interests. Melnikow and Cutler contributed the study concept and design, with assistance from the other authors. Lester, Barca, and She collected the data, and Xin performed all statistical analysis. Cutler was the major contributor to manuscript preparation, with assistance from the other authors.
1 University of California San Francisco School of Pharmacy, San Francisco, California.
Timothy
T
Cutler
1 University of California San Francisco School of Pharmacy, San Francisco, California.
Yifan
Y
She
1 University of California San Francisco School of Pharmacy, San Francisco, California.
Jason
J
Barca
1 University of California San Francisco School of Pharmacy, San Francisco, California.
Shawn
S
Lester
3 Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California.
Guibo
G
Xing
2 University of California Davis Health System, Sacramento California.
Jigna
J
Patel
3 Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California.
Joy
J
Melnikow
D000046:Academic Medical Centers / Q000458:organization & administration*; D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis; D011307:Drug Prescriptions / Q000191:economics*; D006801:Humans; D016014:Linear Models; D010043:Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care; D010045:Outpatients; D010593:Pharmaceutical Services / Q000191:economics; D010594:Pharmacies / Q000191:economics* / Q000458:organization & administration*; D011446:Prospective Studies
J Am Board Fam Med. 2013 Jan-Feb;26(1):93-5
23288287
Clin Infect Dis. 2010 Sep 15;51(6):718-24
20695800
Health Aff (Millwood). 2009 Jul-Aug;28(4):w533-43
19443477
Ann Pharmacother. 2010 May;44(5):809-18
20388858
Psychiatr Serv. 2011 Feb;62(2):186-93
21285097