As with clinical laboratories, worker shortage is affecting large retail pharmacy chains and independent pharmacies alike
Staffing shortages in clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups caused by the Great Resignation is having a similar impact on retail pharmacy chains. Consequently, pharmacy chains are reducing store hours and even closing sites, according to USA Today.
As Dark Daily covered in “Clinical Laboratories Suffer During the ‘Great Resignation,” the US Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that from August 2021 through December 2021, the healthcare and social assistance workforce saw nearly 2.8 million workers quit—an average of 551,000 people during each of those months. By comparison, in December 2020, 419,000 healthcare workers left their jobs.
Pharmacies now report similar shortages in qualified workers, partly due to the sharp decrease in revenue from COVID-19 vaccinations, but also due to worker burnout. Both developments have counterparts in clinical laboratories as well.
“I’m concerned that without the help from the COVID-19 vaccinations that everyone needed, these pharmacies that were able to tough it out for another year or two might not be able to continue,” B. Douglas Hoey, PharmD, CEO of the National Community Pharmacists Association (NCPA), told USA Today. Clinical laboratories that processed large numbers of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics have experienced the same sudden drop in revenue causing similar difficulties maintaining staffing levels. (Photo copyright: Cardinal Health.)
Staffing Shortages Leading to Safety Concerns
According to the Washington Post’s coverage of a study conducted in 2021 of 6,400 pharmacists in various retail and hospital environments, a majority did not feel they could conduct their jobs efficiently or safely.
“75% of the pharmacists in [the] survey disagreed with the statement ‘Sufficient time is allocated for me to safely perform patient care/clinical duties.’”
“71% said there were not enough pharmacists working to ‘meet patient care/clinical duties.’”
“65% said ‘payment for pharmacy services’ did not support their ‘ability to meet clinical and non-clinical duties.’”
“Workplace conditions have pushed many pharmacists and pharmacy teams to the brink of despair,” said the board of trustees of the American Pharmacists Association (APhA) in a press release, the Washington Post reported. “Pharmacy burnout is a significant patient safety issue. It is impacting patients today with delayed prescription fulfillment, unacceptable waits for vaccines and testing, and potential errors due to high volume, long hours, and pressure to meet performance metrics.”
This is a sentiment that has been repeated across every facet of healthcare—including in clinical laboratories—where staff shortages are being felt.
Shortage of Pharmacists or Lack of Morale?
In “Drugstores Make Slow Headway on Staffing Problems,” the Associated Press outlined from where it believes the staffing problems originate. “There isn’t a shortage of pharmacists. There’s just a shortage of pharmacists who want to work in those high-stress environments that aren’t adequately resourced,” Richard Dang, PharmD, Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacy at the University of Southern California (USC), told the Associated Press.
“The pressure never let up. No matter how mind-numbing and repetitive the work could get, we had to work with constant vigilance, as there was absolutely no room for error,” Bator wrote.
“We techs were left unsupported and unmentored throughout the pandemic,” she continued. “No one cared if we were learning or growing in our job, and there was little encouragement for us to enter training or residency programs. We were just expendable foot soldiers: this is not a policy that leads to long-term job retention.”
Healthcare workers feeling burnt out and under-appreciated during the pandemic led to mass resignations that produced staffing shortages throughout the industry. It appears this trend has caught up to pharmacies as well.
Workforce Wasn’t Ready
Local and chain pharmacies played an important role in the COVID-19 pandemic. Pharmacists distributed COVID-19 tests and treatment to their communities. But for many it was a struggle to keep up.
Stefanie Ferreri, PharmD, Distinguished Professor in Pharmacy Practice and Chair of the Division of Practice Advancement and Clinical Education at University of North Carolina’s Eshelman School of Pharmacy, told the Associated Press that she felt the expanding role of pharmacies in public health was “awesome” but stated that “the workforce wasn’t quite ready” for what took place during the pandemic.
Much like Bator recounted in her essay, pharmacy workers suddenly had new responsibilities, longer working hours, and little room for error.
“There are multiple stories about pharmacists just getting overwhelmed. The stress level and burnout is high,” Dima M. Qato, PharmD, PhD, told USA Today. Qato is Hygeia Centennial Chair and Associate Professor (with tenure) in the Titus Family Department of Clinical Pharmacy at the University of Southern California. “So, pharmacists leave, and stores have to shorten” their hours, she added.
Scheduling and Patience Can Help
What can be done to soften some of the issues staff shortages are causing? Ferreri suggests that pharmacies set appointment times for regular customers so that a pharmacist’s workload can be more predictable. An appointment system can ease stress for both the pharmacist and patient. Ferreri advises customers to be patient when it comes to their prescriptions. She suggests patients give pharmacies more than a day’s notice for refills.
“I think on both sides of the counter, we need to all have grace and realize this is a very challenging and stressful time for everyone,” said Brigid Groves, PharmD, Vice President, Pharmacy Practice at the American Pharmacists Association.
With burnout, staff shortages, and stress affecting nearly every aspect of the healthcare industry, having patience with each other will go a long way to helping clinical laboratories, pharmacies, and patients navigate the road ahead.
Growing interest in more transparency for the prices of prescription drugs is reflected in a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) that highlights disparities in pharma prices for patients, pharmacies, and payers
However, while reference pricing and pricing databases help savvy patients compare prices across a range of procedures, much about pharmaceutical pricing remains shrouded in mystery. This is why calls for greater transparency in how prescription drugs are priced are increasing as well.
The Trump administration, state governments, and advocacy groups have each targeted drug costs as a problem in the current healthcare system. And a March 2018 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) may further fuel the fires facing big pharma.
Overpayments and the Silence Behind Them
Analyzing 9.5 million claims from Optum’s Clinformatics Data Mart over the first half of 2013, researchers found that approximately 23% of all claims involved overpayments—situations in which the co-pay charged to the patient exceeded what the insurer paid the pharmacy to fill the prescription.
While data from 2013 might not reflect the current state of pharmaceutical pricing, the study brings exposure to trends in both politics and media coverage surrounding the industry.
The study authors found that overpayments totaled $135-million in 2013. Generic medications saw a higher portion of overpayments with more than one in four generic prescriptions costing patients more than what payers paid the pharmacy. However, in the 6% of claims involving branded medication, overpayments were nearly twice as high with an average overpayment of $13.46 per claim.
The researchers also cited data from a National Community Pharmacists Association (NCPA) survey of 628 pharmacies in which 49% claimed to have seen 10-50 occurrences of “clawback fees” in the past month. A further 35% reported seeing more than 50 clawback fees in the past month. These “fees” are part of contractual obligations that payers can use to recoup such overpayments to pharmacies.
Other contractual arrangements, such as “gag clauses” (AKA, non-disclosure agreements), wherein pharmacists cannot disclose to patients when their copay exceeds the cost of filling the prescription without coverage, have garnered coverage in the media.
The Hill recently outlined efforts from senators to stop this practice for both traditional insurance plans and Medicare Advantage and Part D participants. “Americans have the right to know which payment method—insurance or cash—would provide the most savings when purchasing prescription drugs,” Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) told The Hill.
Rebates, Secretive Deals, and Red Tape in Government Crosshairs
Rebates are another contested aspect of current pricing models. Traditionally, pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) serve as a middleman between pharmaceutical companies and pharmacies to negotiate prices and maintain markets. PBMs negotiate deals for insurers in the form of rebates. Insurers, however, are using these savings to offer lower premiums, rather than forwarding the savings directly to the customer.
UnitedHealthcare unveiled plans to pass these rebates directly to consumers in early March, The Hill reported.
In a press release, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Alex M. Azar II stated, “Today’s announcement by UnitedHealthcare is a prime example of the movement toward transparency and lower drug prices for millions of patients that the Trump Administration is championing. Empowering patients and providers with the information and control to put them in the driver’s seat is a key part of our strategy … to bring down the price of drugs and make healthcare more affordable.” (Photo copyright: Washington Post.)
The Trump Administration also recently outlined their new “American Patients First” plan for reducing drug prices and out-of-pocket costs for patients.
Key elements of their proposed approach include:
Eliminating gaming of regulations, such as the Risk Evaluation and Mitigating Strategies (REMS) requirements manufacturers use to avoid sending samples to creators of generics;
Restricting rebates through Anti-Kickback Statue revisions; and,
Eliminating gag clauses or clawback fees.
However, pharma industry coverage of the plan is mixed. MarketWatch sees little to worry about, predicting, “[the plan] isn’t expected to hurt drug makers or pharmacy-system middlemen.” Meanwhile, Forbes claims, “[the plan] represents a sea of change in pharmaceutical pricing policy, one that will have a significant effect on drug prices in the future.”
Anatomic pathology groups, medical laboratories, and other diagnostics providers can view this as yet another example of healthcare providers trying to shore up financials and protect profits by protecting sensitive pricing information, as the industry faces increasing scrutiny. Nevertheless, regardless of the outcome, these latest trends emphasize the role that transparency is likely to play—and how clinical laboratories will be impacted—as healthcare reform progresses, both in terms of public relations and regulatory requirements.
