We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Case study using descriptive analysis to estimate hidden costs in processing third party prescriptions.
Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association : APhA 2000 September
OBJECTIVE: To identify and quantify additional hidden costs associated with processing third party prescriptions.
DESIGN/SETTING: Using time and motion techniques, the frequency of rejected third party prescriptions and the time involved to resolve those rejections were measured in one supermarket chain pharmacy and one independent pharmacy. From this information, additional costs attributed to processing third party prescriptions were calculated.
RESULTS: In a market where almost 95% of all prescriptions are third party reimbursed, payers rejected 18.7% and 22.3% of the prescriptions submitted by the supermarket chain and independent pharmacies, respectively. Additional or hidden costs for rejected prescriptions averaged $1.10 at the supermarket chain pharmacy and $1.54 at the independent pharmacy, with the difference attributable to the higher level of pharmacy staff involvement in resolving rejections at the independent pharmacy. When additional costs for all third party prescriptions were calculated, the average additional cost per third party prescription dropped to $0.44 for the supermarket chain pharmacy and $0.61 for the independent pharmacy.
CONCLUSION: Increasing pharmacist availability for pharmaceutical care requires decreasing time spent in the dispensing process, especially resolving third party problems. Systems analysis and time and motion techniques were effectively used to more accurately measure the time and costs associated with processing third party prescriptions. Actual costs found in this study were considerable, but significantly less than those reported previously in studies using estimates and surveys.
DESIGN/SETTING: Using time and motion techniques, the frequency of rejected third party prescriptions and the time involved to resolve those rejections were measured in one supermarket chain pharmacy and one independent pharmacy. From this information, additional costs attributed to processing third party prescriptions were calculated.
RESULTS: In a market where almost 95% of all prescriptions are third party reimbursed, payers rejected 18.7% and 22.3% of the prescriptions submitted by the supermarket chain and independent pharmacies, respectively. Additional or hidden costs for rejected prescriptions averaged $1.10 at the supermarket chain pharmacy and $1.54 at the independent pharmacy, with the difference attributable to the higher level of pharmacy staff involvement in resolving rejections at the independent pharmacy. When additional costs for all third party prescriptions were calculated, the average additional cost per third party prescription dropped to $0.44 for the supermarket chain pharmacy and $0.61 for the independent pharmacy.
CONCLUSION: Increasing pharmacist availability for pharmaceutical care requires decreasing time spent in the dispensing process, especially resolving third party problems. Systems analysis and time and motion techniques were effectively used to more accurately measure the time and costs associated with processing third party prescriptions. Actual costs found in this study were considerable, but significantly less than those reported previously in studies using estimates and surveys.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app