Abstract
Ontario's pharmacist medication review program, “Meds Check,” has been expanded beyond those who are regularly covered by the Ontario Drug Benefit (ODB) Program. All residents in Ontario who regularly take 3 or more prescription drugs are now eligible for government-funded, annual one-on-one consultations with a pharmacist, to help ensure they are taking the drugs properly and safely.
Expansion of this pharmacist professional service is welcome news for the Ontario Pharmacists' Association (OPA). It provides pharmacists with an additional revenue source, and benefits patients and the broader health care system, says the CEO of the OPA, Donnie Edwards.
“Meds Check not only improves patient outcomes and safety, but also helps reduce other costs, such as the cost of emergency room visits,” he says. “This investment will ultimately save the province money.”
When first introduced April 1, the once-a-year medication reviews were provided to ODB recipients on 3 or more prescription medications. Pharmacists are paid a professional fee of $50 for each review.
“The government saw fairly quickly that with the large numbers of people getting the reviews, it made perfect sense to expand it to all Ontarians,” Mr. Edwards says. “It didn't make sense for a pharmacist to be telling a 64-year-old gentleman who recently had a heart attack that he had to wait until he was 65 to get this service free of charge.”
The province is using television commercials, bus shelter ads, and other means to promote Meds Check and pharmacists have received patient packages and shelf information for use in their pharmacies.
Concerns remain about pharmacy revenues
The launch of pharmacist professional services in Ontario was one of the changes brought about by the Transparent Drug Systems for Patients Act (TDSPA). Other changes, which have reduced pharmacists' revenues in some areas, have not been as welcome.
And the financial stresses may affect pharmacists' ability to fully participate in the medication review service, says Mr. Edwards.
“While pharmacists welcome the idea of meeting with their patients every year, many are worried they won't be able to meet the demand because they are struggling to remain viable,” he says. “Some pharmacies have had to scale back and lay off part-time staff, for example, and these kinds of changes further limit the time they have available for patient care.”
The OPA continues to negotiate with the province to address issues with the reporting framework for professional allowances. One concern is that the code of conduct governing how professional allowance revenue may be used is too restrictive with regards to paying pharmacists' wages and benefits for counselling services. Mr. Edwards says the framework also imposes an administrative burden on pharmacists by requiring them to detail how they invest professional allowances in services for all patients, not just those covered by the ODB Program. “We understand the need to report on the public side. That creates transparency,” he says. “But we don't believe we should be detailing everything on the private and third-party side of the business. This requires a lot of extra time for paper work that could better be spent with patients.”