Objective:
To evaluate the impact of interventions in a focused home infusion/specialty pharmacy based inhibitor management program on patient outcomes including, adherence, retention, prescriber communication.
Methods:
From our bleeding disorders patients’ databases between April 1, 2013 and March 31, 2014 (12 month period), prescriptions and assessment records were analyzed for patients with hemophilia A or B with inhibitors and those with acquired inhibitors. 49 unique patient records were reviewed, care managers were interviewed, and interventions were highlighted.
Results:
44 patients had Hemophilia A with an inhibitor, 2 had an inhibitor to Hemophilia B and 3 had acquired hemophilia. Hemophilia A patients had a diagnosis of severe hemophilia A (39), Moderate (2), Mild (2). 1 Hemophilia B patient was severe and the other moderate. Total number of active inhibitor patients on service (with a detectable Bethesda Unit titre) increased from 22 to 30 over this same period. 8 patients left service during the year due to insurance changes (4), and transfer to HTC’s 340B program (4). At the beginning of the study period, a multidisciplinary inhibitor management team (HTC experienced RN’s, RPh, SW, PT, Patient Advocate, and Hispanic Coordinator) was assembled and goals and processes for patient review and intervention were established. Monthly and ad hoc patient review meetings were implemented. Multiple barriers to adherence were encountered including immigration issues, language barriers, transportation issues, potential for caregiver burnout, storage and security of product concerns, relocations, product allergies, and needle phobia. Team worked collaboratively with HTC and other prescribers to intervene successfully in these issues. Interventions included long term twice daily nursing, securing an immigration attorney, hemophilia experienced translators, social worker, and physical therapist interventions, links to foundations for financial support, product bridge for insurance lapses, lab monitoring and reporting to HTC for remote patients, obtaining equipment (locking refrigerator) and protective supplies/ cooling compression cuffs. 30 patients received immune tolerance therapy during the study period. Of these, 25 were treated by an HTC and 5 were not. 10 patients on ITI achieved an “undetectable” inhibitor status during the study period. 8 were followed by an HTC and 2 were not. No patients were lost to therapy/management. All patients maintained positive interactions with prescribers and follow up visits.
Conclusion:
Inhibitor patients can be very challenging to manage. A focused, multidisciplinary inhibitor management team can extend the comprehensive model to the home, promote patient/prescriber/treatment team collaboration, and target interventions that enhance outcomes.