Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37578793›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

State Telepharmacy Policies and Pharmacy Deserts.

Benjamin Y Urick, Jessica K Adams, Maimuna R Bruce

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Benjamin Y UrickPrime Therapeutics, Eagan, Minnesota.
Jessica K AdamsTelePharm, Iowa City, Iowa.
Maimuna R BruceTelePharm, Iowa City, Iowa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Pharmacy deserts have increased, potentially affecting patient access and care. Historically, telepharmacies have been used to reduce pharmacy deserts to restore access, but states frequently restrict their operation. Objective: To analyze whether telepharmacy policy is associated with pharmacy deserts and access to pharmacy services. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed pharmacy location and census data from 2016 through 2019 for US states with new telepharmacy policies. Nearby control states were used for comparison in a pretest-posttest nonequivalent group design. Statistical analysis was performed from January 2022 to July 2023. Exposure: Intervention states were selected if a change in telepharmacy policy was adopted in 2017 or 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Pharmacy deserts were defined as any geographic area located at least 10 miles from the nearest pharmacy. Primary outcomes included the change in number of telepharmacies, pharmacy deserts, and population in pharmacy deserts. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of telepharmacies located in medically underserved areas or populations (MUA/Ps), and the association between a telepharmacy opening nearby and the transition of a pharmacy desert into a nonpharmacy desert. Results: Twelve US states were included in the study (8 intervention states, 4 control states). Intervention states experienced an increase in the mean number of telepharmacies to 7.25 with a range of 4 (Arizona, Indiana) to 14 (Iowa), but control states remained at a mean of 0.25 telepharmacies with a range of 0 to 1 (Kansas). Compared with controls, intervention states experienced a 4.5% (95% CI, 1.6% to 7.4%) decrease in the percentage of places defined as pharmacy deserts (P = .001) and an 11.1% (95% CI, 2.4% to 22.6%) decrease in the population in a pharmacy desert (P = .03). Telepharmacies were more likely to be located in a MUA/P than traditional pharmacies (preperiod in MUA/P: 63.2% of telepharmacies [12 of 19] vs 33.9% of traditional pharmacies [5984 of 17 511]; P = .01; postperiod in MUA/P: 62.7% of telepharmacies [37 of 59] vs 33.7% of traditional pharmacies [5998 of 17 800]; P < .001). When a telepharmacy was established in pharmacy deserts, 37.5% (30 of 80) no longer met the study's definition of a pharmacy desert the following year. In contrast, only 1.8% of places (68 of 3892) where a nearby telepharmacy did not open experienced this change (χ21=416.4; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, intervention states experienced a reduced population in pharmacy deserts, suggesting an association with new telepharmacy openings. States aiming to improve pharmacy access might consider less restrictive telepharmacy policies to potentially elicit greater patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Pharmaceutical ServicesPharmaciesPharmacyCohort StudiesHumansMedically Underserved Area

Identifiers

PMID37578793
PMCPMC10425826

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.