Advertisement

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy

, Volume 39, Issue 4, pp 750–758 | Cite as

Cost analysis for the implementation of a medication review with follow-up service in Spain

  • Aranzazu Noain
  • Victoria Garcia-CardenasEmail author
  • Miguel Angel Gastelurrutia
  • Amaia Malet-Larrea
  • Fernando Martinez-Martinez
  • Daniel Sabater-Hernandez
  • Shalom I. Benrimoj
Research Article

Abstract

Background Medication review with follow-up (MRF) is a professional pharmacy service proven to be cost-effective. Its broader implementation is limited, mainly due to the lack of evidence-based implementation programs that include economic and financial analysis. Objective To analyse the costs and estimate the price of providing and implementing MRF. Setting Community pharmacy in Spain. Method Elderly patients using poly-pharmacy received a community pharmacist-led MRF for 6 months. The cost analysis was based on the time-driven activity based costing model and included the provider costs, initial investment costs and maintenance expenses. The service price was estimated using the labour costs, costs associated with service provision, potential number of patients receiving the service and mark-up. Main outcome measures Costs and potential price of MRF. Results A mean time of 404.4 (SD 232.2) was spent on service provision and was extrapolated to annual costs. Service provider cost per patient ranged from €196 (SD 90.5) to €310 (SD 164.4). The mean initial investment per pharmacy was €4594 and the mean annual maintenance costs €3,068. Largest items contributing to cost were initial staff training, continuing education and renting of the patient counselling area. The potential service price ranged from €237 to €628 per patient a year. Conclusion Time spent by the service provider accounted for 75–95% of the final cost, followed by initial investment costs and maintenance costs. Remuneration for professional pharmacy services provision must cover service costs and appropriate profit, allowing for their long-term sustainability.

Keywords

Community pharmacy Cost analysis Implementation Medication review Professional pharmacy services Spain Sustainability 

Notes

Funding

This study was funded by Cinfa Laboratories.

Conflicts of interest

All the authors have declared they have no conflict of interest.

Availability of data and materials

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author (VGC). The data are not publicly available due to relevant data protection laws.

Supplementary material

11096_2017_454_MOESM1_ESM.docx (97 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 97 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    World Health Organization. The world health report: primary health care now more than ever. Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2008. [Cited 21 Dec 2015]. (ISBN: 9789241563734). http://www.who.int/whr/2008/whr08_en.pdf.
  2. 2.
    Al Hamid A, Ghaleb M, Aljadhey H, Aslanpour Z. A systematic review of hospitalization resulting from medicine-related problems in adult patients. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2014;78(2):202–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fick DM, Cooper JW, Wade WE, Waller JL, Maclean JR, Beers MH. Updating the Beers criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults: results of a US consensus panel of experts. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163(22):2716–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hovstadius B, Petersson G. The impact of increasing polypharmacy on prescribed drug expenditure—a register-based study in Sweden 2005–2009. Health Policy. 2013;109(2):166–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rotta I, Salgado TM, Silva ML, Correr CJ, Fernandez-Llimos F. Effectiveness of clinical pharmacy services: an overview of systematic reviews (2000–2010). Int J Clin Pharm. 2015;37(5):687–97.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Garcia-Cardenas V, Armour C, Benrimoj SI, Martinez-Martinez F, Rotta I, Fernandez-Llimos F. Pharmacists’ interventions on clinical asthma outcomes: a systematic review. Eur Respir J. 2016;47(4):1134–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Machado M, Bajcar J, Guzzo GC, Einarson TR. Sensitivity of patient outcomes to pharmacist interventions. Part I: systematic review and meta-analysis in diabetes management. Ann Pharmacother. 2007;41(10):1569–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Machado M, Bajcar J, Guzzo GC, Einarson TR. Sensitivity of patient outcomes to pharmacist interventions. Part II: systematic review and meta-analysis in hypertension management. Ann Pharmacother. 2007;41(11):1770–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ocampo CC, Garcia-Cardenas V, Martinez-Martinez F, Benrimoj SI, Amariles P, Gastelurrutia MA. Implementation of medication review with follow-up in a Spanish community pharmacy and its achieved outcomes. Int J Clin Pharm. 2015;37(5):931–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jodar-Sanchez F, Malet-Larrea A, Martin JJ, Garcia-Mochon L, Lopez Del Amo MP, Martinez-Martinez F, et al. Cost-utility analysis of a medication review with follow-up service for older adults with polypharmacy in community pharmacies in Spain: the conSIGUE program. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015;33(6):599–610.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Benrimoj SI, Feletto E, Gastelurrutia MA, Martinez-Martinez F, Faus MJ. A holistic and integrated approach to implementing cognitive pharmaceutical services. Ars Pharm. 2010;51:69–87.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Accounting Management Commission. Cost Strategic Management. Document 23. 1st ed. Madrid: Spanish Association of Accounting and Business Management; 2001. p. 120.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaplan R, Robert S. Research opportunities in management accounting. J Manag Acc Res. 1993;5:1–14.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rupp M, Warholak T. Evaluation of e-prescribing in chain community pharmacy: best-practice recommendations. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2008;48(3):364–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Doucette W, McDonough R, Mormann M, Vaschevici R, Urmie J, Patterson B. Three-year financial analysis of pharmacy services at an independent community pharmacy. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2012;52(2):181–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liu Y, Nevins J, Carruthers K, Doucette W, McDonough R, Pan X. Osteoporosis risk screening for women in a community pharmacy. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2007;47(4):521–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    McDonough RP, Harthan AA, McLeese KE, Doucette WR. Retrospective financial analysis of medication therapy management services from the pharmacy’s perspective. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2010;50(1):62–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Anderson S, Schumock G. Evaluation and justification of clinical pharmacy services. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2009;9(6):539–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Plumridge R, Wojnar-Horton R. A review of the pharmacoeconomics of pharmaceutical care. Pharmacoeconomics. 1998;14(2):175–89.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Martinez-Martinez F, García-Cardenas V, Sanz-Benito L, Varas R, Gastelurrutia M, Sabater-Hernandez D, et al. [conSIGUE Program. Evaluation of the clinical, economic and humanistic impact of medication review with follow-up in aged patients using polypharmacy]. Vitae. 2013;20(Suppl1):S15–S8.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Martinez-Martinez F, Farragher T, Faus M, Garcia-Cardenas V, Gastelurrutia M, Jodar F. Clinical, economic and humanistic outcomes of medication review with follow-up in aged polypharmacy patients in the Spanish community pharmacy. Madrid: General Council of Spanish Pharmacists; 2014. [Cited 19 Dec 2015]. (ISBN: 9788487276835). http://www.pharmaceutical-care.org/archivos/992/V2-Resultados-Definitivos-Programa-Consigue-Impacto-2011-2014.pdf.
  22. 22.
    Pharmaceutical Care Forum. Expert Panel. Consensus Document. Madrid: General Council of Spanish Pharmacists; 2010. [Cited 19 Feb 2015]. (ISBN: 9788469112434). http://www.portalfarma.com/inicio/atencionfarmaceutica/forodeattfarma/Documents/DocumentodeConsensodeForo2008.pdf.
  23. 23.
    Everaert P, Bruggerman W. Time-driven activity-based costing: exploring the underlying model. Cost Manag. 2007;21(2):16–20.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kaplan RS, Anderson SR. Time-driven activity based-costing. A simpler and more powerful path to higher profits. 5th ed. Boston: Harvard Business Press; 2007. p. 265. (ISBN: 1422101711).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Noain M, Gastelurrutia M, Martínez-Martínez F, Benrimoj S. Costs’ identification of the sustainable provision of the medication management service. Pharm Care Esp. 2014;16(5):180–92.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Spanish Goverment. [Resolution of the 7th January 2011 by the General Labour Office, registering and publishing the XXIII colective agreement for community pharmacies]; 2011. [Cited 12 Sept 2015]. http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2011/01/24/pdfs/BOE-S-2011-20.pdf.
  27. 27.
    Asesoria Especializada en Farmacias. [Annual community pharmacy report]. Aspime; 2011. [Cited 20 Sept 2015]. http://www.aspime.es/asesoramiento/InformeAnualOficinasdeFarmacia2011ASPIMEVersionweb.pdf.
  28. 28.
    Spanish Goverment. [Law 26/2009, 23rd December, of General National State Budget for 2010. BOE No. 309, 24th December 2009]; 2009. [Cited 2 Nov 2015]. http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2009/12/24/pdfs/BOE-A-2009-20765.pdf.
  29. 29.
    Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality; 2012. [Cited 16 Dec 2015]. http://www.seg-social.es/Internet_6/Trabajadores/Afiliacion/Afiliaciondetrabaja7332/index.htm.
  30. 30.
    National Statistics Institute. [Working time survey]; 2000. [Cited 2 Nov 2015]. http://www.ine.es/dynt3/inebase/index.htm?type=pcaxis&path=/t22/p186/a2000&file=pcaxis&L=0.
  31. 31.
    Financial Accounting Standards Board. [Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts No. 6. Elements of Financial Statements]; 1985. [Cited 1 July 2015]. http://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/Document_C/DocumentPage?cid=1218220132802&acceptedDisclaimer=true.
  32. 32.
    Fontanesi J, Jue-Leong S. Logistical and fiscal sustainability of a school-based, pharmacist-administered influenza vaccination program. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2012;52(5):e74-e79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 July 2002 on the application of international accounting standards. 2008. [Cited 22 Jan 2015]. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV:l26040.
  34. 34.
    Spanish Goverment. [Law 1515/2007, 16th November, aproving the general accounting plan for small and medium business and specific accounting criteria for microbusiness. BOE No. 279. 21st November 2007]; 2007. [Cited 8 Sept 2015]. http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2007/11/21/pdfs/A47560-47566.pdf.
  35. 35.
    Huttin C. A critical review of the remuneration systems for pharmacists. Health Policy. 1996;36:53–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Vogler S, Zimmermann N, Leopold C, de Joncheere K. Pharmaceutical policies in European countries in response to the global financial crisis. South Med Rev. 2011;4(2):69–79.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Houle SK, Grindrod KA, Chatterley T, Tsuyuki RT. Paying pharmacists for patient care: a systematic review of remunerated pharmacy clinical care services. Can Pharm J. 2014;147(4):209–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gastelurrutia MA, Benrimoj SI, Castrillon CC, Casado de Amezua MJ, Fernandez-Llimos F, Faus MJ. Facilitators for practice change in Spanish community pharmacy. Pharm World Sci. 2009;31(1):32–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gil M, Benrimoj S, Martínez-Martínez F, Cardero M, Gastelurrutia M. Priorization of facilitators for the implementation of medication review with follow-up service in Spanish community pharmacies through exploratory factor analysis. Aten Primaria. 2013;45(7):368–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Garcia-Cardenas V, Benrimoj SI, Ocampo CC, Goyenechea E, Martinez-Martinez F, Gastelurrutia MA. Evaluation of the implementation process and outcomes of a professional pharmacy service in a community pharmacy setting. A case report. Res Soc Adm Pharm. 2016. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2016.05.048.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Noain M, Gastelurrutia M, Martínez-Martínez F, Benrimoj S. Potential remuneration models for medication review with follow-up service in community pharmacy. Pharm Care Esp. 2015;17(4):423–41.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mossialos E, Courtin E, Naci H, Benrimoj S, Bouvy M, Farris K, et al. From, “retailers” to health care providers: transforming the role of community pharmacists in chronic disease management. Health Policy. 2015;119(15):628–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rosenthal M, Grindrod K, Lynd L, Marra C, Bougher D, Wilgosh C, et al. Pharmacists´perspectives on providing chronic disease management services in the community—part II: development and implementation of services. Can Pharm J. 2009;142(6):284–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Brummel A, Lustig A, Westrich K, Evans M, Plank G, Penso J, et al. Best practices: improving patient outcomes and costs in an ACO through comprehensive medication therapy management. JMCP. 2014;20(12):1152–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Houle SK, Grindrod KA, Chatterley T, Tsuyuki RT. Paying pharmacists for patient care: a systematic review of remunerated pharmacy clinical care services. Can Pharm J (Ott). 2014;147(4):209–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Roberts AS, Benrimoj SI, Chen TF, Williams KA, Aslani P. Practice change in community pharmacy: quantification of facilitators. Ann Pharmacother. 2008;42(6):861–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aranzazu Noain
    • 1
  • Victoria Garcia-Cardenas
    • 2
    Email author
  • Miguel Angel Gastelurrutia
    • 1
  • Amaia Malet-Larrea
    • 3
  • Fernando Martinez-Martinez
    • 1
  • Daniel Sabater-Hernandez
    • 2
  • Shalom I. Benrimoj
    • 2
  1. 1.Pharmaceutical Care Research Group, Faculty of PharmacyUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain
  2. 2.Graduate School of HealthUniversity of Technology SydneySydneyAustralia
  3. 3.Pharmaceutical Technology Department, Faculty of PharmacyUniversity of the Basque CountryVitoriaSpain

Personalised recommendations