4 Things to Consider When Evaluating the eEnablement Landscape

4 Things to Consider When Evaluating the eEnablement Landscape

Last week, I attended CBI’s e-Rx and EHR conference in Philadelphia, where I moderated the panel discussion The Future of eEnablement: Where It’s Heading and How It Will Enhance Pharma Patient Support Programs. My panel answered many important questions surrounding the eEnablement landscape and how manufacturers can use existing strategies and technology to streamline their patient support programs:

1. What data is in the NCPDP standard eRx transaction vs. the average manufacturer patient enrollment form?
While the two transactions are used for different purposes, many of the same data elements (patient and prescriber demographics, prescription information, etc.) are captured on both. The ability to pull information from the eRx transaction and use it to auto-populate an electronic Hub referral form can reduce duplicate data entry and ease the administrative barrier around accessing these programs.

2. What strategies should manufacturers consider to provide broader prescriber coverage and adoption when eEnabling their patient support programs?
Attempting to individually contract with several different ePrescribing and/or electronic health record (EHR) vendors to support these capabilities could prove quite challenging. The panel recommended exploring relationships with eRx/EHR aggregators who have developed a network of partners to increase the overall reach and adoption of these services. The panel also strongly recommended that manufacturers consider working with organizations that have developed an easily adoptable, standard technology chassis for interfacing with a variety of eRx/EHR solutions.

3. What are some of the key challenges around manufacturers collaborating with EHR vendors to integrate their patient support programs into the EHR systems?
This is currently a rapidly evolving, fragmented marketplace. Most EHR systems were originally designed to ensure accurate charge capture to support reimbursement activity, so manufacturer initiatives introduce a very different set of challenges for these applications. The panel stressed that in order to increase the likelihood of adoption, the integration between the EHR system and the manufacturer patient support program must not disrupt the prescriber’s workflow within the EHR.

4. What are some of the benefits that manufacturers realize within their Hub operations when they eEnable a program?
By eEnabling patient support programs, Hubs can potentially gain efficiencies in a variety of operational areas:
• Reduce Hub referral form data entry and the number of incomplete referrals
• As ePrior Authorization (ePA) and eBenefits Investigation (eBI) capabilities become more prevalent, they will start to lower the number of calls between the Hub staff and payers
• In place of manually faxed forms, Hub status updates can be shared with the prescriber via the eRx/EHR platform
• eSignatures can be obtained by patients, alleviating the manual follow-up activity that is currently performed in many Hubs

UBC has been aggressively developing an eEnablement chassis to address many of the opportunities and challenges that were discussed during the CBI conference. Our agnostic technology interface allows us to seamlessly integrate our solution with a variety of eRx/EHR solutions in the marketplace, increasing prescriber coverage and adoption. If you’d like to learn more about eEnablement strategy and what UBC can do for you, please don’t hesitate to contact me.