Washington State Pharmacy Association Outcomes and Research Workgroup March 16th, 2016 Members in attendance: Dale Christensen, Steve Riddle, Angela Stewart, Jenny Bacci, Loann Nguyen, Eric Lintner, Jocelyn Calado, Krystalyn Weaver, Steve Pickette, Terri Fagen, Steve Pickette, Terri O’Sullivan, Jenny Arnold Agenda Items Background Discussion Action Welcome and Introductions During our first meeting we discussed None None Recap of Discussion from clinical outcomes that pharmacist’s ….minutes will be formally kept for Previous Meeting impact and that can be measured. future meetings and distributed after Steve Riddle The discussion evolved into a each session. narrowing of the research initiatives focusing on the impact of the how ESSB 5557 has changed how pharmacists provide care, and may impact patient care. Focus of our Research At our initial WG meeting, several  Overarching research aim: “How do we measure and None. Steve Riddle broad general quality measures were record the outcome of this policy change in It was recognized that we will likely briefly outlined and discussed (e.g. Washington?” revisit this topic in our early meetings Healthier WA, Triple Aims,  There was a good discussion about this proposed aim. to further solidify our goals. HEDIS/NCQA, structure, process, There was concern for how this might limit our outcomes, etc). It was acknowledged research. Also, it was noted that it may be difficult to that many were broad organizational translate clinical outcomes of patients into the impact policy goals and that the ability to of ESSB 5557. measure specific pharmacist impact  Several scenarios around the various ways of targeting while controlling for or holding all research were discussed, including: other intervening factors can be very o the subject… a patient or targeted group of patients costly and difficult. based on a disease Since that meeting, Dale and Steve o the particular service model of care (eg., Pharmacist- (Chairs) worked with Jenny to MD vs Pharmacist-PA or only Pharmacist (referral determine what the goal of this system) general project was and how that o the practice setting: (eg, home, community, NH, ECF, related to the proposed research. It clinic, hospital) was postulated that we are trying to o the provider group and their needs (eg, ability to show how policy changes in our state see more pts with the same or better quality or will impact pharmacy practice and the provide better care to targeted patients (e.g. poly- downstream outcomes related to that disease, poly-drug)., (practice changes, access to care, o the payer perspective, such as cost impact, impact patient outcomes, cost outcomes, etc. on QOC measures (NCQA, HEDIS, Healthier WA) o the policy impact (eg, success of 5557 as a policy to be advocated ( with or without tweaks) to other states and/or we could consider breadth of adoption, economic and quality impact, identifying and working through barriers related to the policy.  After some discussion the group seemed to coalesce around the idea of related our outcomes to the unique opportunity in our state related to the policy change. The goal would be to provide information and data that might support the value of similar practice policies in other states. This should not limit our ability to target different types of research in a variety of settings using a mix of desired outcomes.  The goal of the group will be to help define the focus for the research, then engage potential researchers (most likely via an RFP process) to encourage this work and perhaps provide toolkits or other information that