The Comparative Effectiveness of Mail Order Pharmacy Use vs. Local Pharmacy Use on LDL-C Control in New Statin Users
- 342 Downloads
Mail order pharmacies are commonly used to deliver CVD risk factor medications. Previous studies have shown that mail order pharmacy use is associated with greater medication adherence; however, no studies have examined whether mail order pharmacy use is related to improved CVD risk factor outcomes.
To examine the comparative effectiveness of mail order pharmacy vs. local pharmacy use on LDL-C control in new statin users.
Observational cohort study.
100,298 adult Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) members who were new users of statins between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2007.
The main outcome measure was LDL-C control in the 3–15 month period after statin therapy was initiated.
After adjustment for patient, clinical, and census-block characteristics, and for potential unmeasured differences between mail order and local KPNC pharmacy users with instrumental variables analysis, 85.0% of patients who used the mail order pharmacy to deliver their statin at any time achieved target LDL-C levels compared with 74.2% of patients who only used the local KPNC pharmacy to dispense the statin (p < 0.001). Greater adjusted rates of LDL-C control in mail order pharmacy users were seen across all gender and race/ethnicity subgroups.
Mail order pharmacy use was positively associated with LDL-C control in new statin users. Future research should continue to explore the relationship between mail order pharmacy use and outcomes, and address how to appropriately target mail order services to patients most likely to benefit without compromising patient choice, care, and safety.
KEY WORDShealth services research hyperlipidemia pharmaceutical care
This study was jointly funded by Program Announcement number 04005 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Division of Diabetes Translation) and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Contract no. U58/CCU923527-04-1. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the funding organizations. Dr. Schmittdiel had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the analysis.
Conflicts of Interest
Dr. Schmittdiel serves as an unpaid advisor to the American Diabetes Association and Medco joint medication adherence research collaboration. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to report.
- 1.Pharmaceutical Strategies Group, 2011. http://www.psgconsults.com/resources/pbm_101.pdf. Accessed June 24, 2011.
- 2.Federal Trade Commission. Pharmacy Benefit Managers: Ownership of Mail-Order Pharmacies. Washington, DC: Federal Trade Commission; 2005.Google Scholar
- 3.National Association of Chain Drug Stores, Industry “Facts at a Glance.” http://www.nacds.org/wmspage.cfm?parm1=6536. Accessed June 24, 2011.
- 4.Fein AJ. The impact of Walmart’s National Mail Pharmacy. Drug Channels, September 16, 2009. http://www.drugchannels.net/2009/09/impact-of-walmarts-national-mail.html. Accessed June 24, 2011.
- 5.Johnsrud M, Lawsen KA, Shepherd MD. Comparison of mail order with community pharmacy in plan sponsor cost and member cost in two large pharmacy benefit plans. J Manage Care Pharm. 2007;13(2):122–34.Google Scholar
- 10.Johnson JA, Coons SJ, Hays RD, Sabers D, Jones P, Langley PC. A comparison of satisfaction with mail versus traditional pharmacy services. J Manag Care Pharm. 1997;3:327–37.Google Scholar
- 11.Linton A, Garber M, Fagan NK, Peterson M. Factors associated with choice of pharmacy setting among DoD health care beneficiaries aged 65 years or older. JMCP. 2007;13(8):677–86.Google Scholar
- 12.Liberman JN, Wang Y, Hutchins DS, Slezak J, Shrank WH. Revealed preference for community and mail service pharmacy. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2011;51(1):50–7.Google Scholar
- 15.Duru OK, Schmittdiel J, Dyer W, Parker M, Uratsu C, Chan J, Karter A. Mail order pharmacy use and adherence to diabetes-related medications. Am J Manag Care. 2010;15(1):33–40.Google Scholar
- 25.Newhouse JP, McClellan M. Econometrics in outcomes research: The use of instrumental variables. Annu Rev Publ Health. 1998;19:17–34.Google Scholar
- 28.Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Merz CN, Brewer HB Jr, Clark LT, Hunninghake DB, Pasternak RC, Smith SC Jr, Stone NJ; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; American College of Cardiology Foundation; American Heart Association. Implications of recent clinical trials for the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. Circulation. 2004;110(2):227–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Baum CF, Shaffer ME, Stillman S. Enhanced routines for instrumental variables/generalized method of moments estimation and testing. The Stata Journal. 7(4):465–506.Google Scholar
- 30.Steiner JF, Koepsell TD, Fihn SD, Inui TS. A general method of compliance assessment using centralized pharmacy records. Description and validation. Med Care. 26:814–23.Google Scholar