For full functionality of this publication it is necessary to enable Javascript.

Click here to see instructions how to enable JavaScript in your web browser.


<--

Original Article
Impact of a Regional Pharmacy Call Center on Telephone
Access Metrics Within the Veterans Health Administration

Christina A. White, PharmD, MBA, BCPS*; Marshall R. Jones, PharmD, MBA†; Melanie K. Kuester, PharmD, BCPS‡; Kelly L. Myers, BS-BBA/Mgt, HAC§; and Barbara A. Schnarr, RPh¶

Original Article
Impact of a Regional Pharmacy Call Center on Telephone
Access Metrics Within the Veterans Health Administration

Christina A. White, PharmD, MBA, BCPS*; Marshall R. Jones, PharmD, MBA†; Melanie K. Kuester, PharmD, BCPS‡; Kelly L. Myers, BS-BBA/Mgt, HAC§; and Barbara A. Schnarr, RPh¶

Original Article
Impact of a Regional Pharmacy Call Center on Telephone
Access Metrics Within the Veterans Health Administration

Christina A. White, PharmD, MBA, BCPS*; Marshall R. Jones, PharmD, MBA†; Melanie K. Kuester, PharmD, BCPS‡; Kelly L. Myers, BS-BBA/Mgt, HAC§; and Barbara A. Schnarr, RPh¶

Abstract

Purpose: To establish a cost-effective centralized pharmacy call center to serve the patients of Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) 11 that would meet established performance metrics.

Methods: A pilot project began in August 2011 with the Indianapolis VA Medical Center (VAMC) and the Health Resource Center (HRC) in Topeka, Kansas. The Indianapolis VAMC used a first-call resolution business model consisting of pharmacy technicians receiving tier 1 phone calls that could be escalated to a tier 2 line that consisted of lead technicians and pharmacists, while the HRC utilized general telephone agents that would transfer unresolved calls to the primary facility. Pre- and post-VISN 11 Pharmacy Call Center performance metrics were compared for each of the 7 facilities in the network with the goals being monthly average abandoned call rate less than 5% and average speed to answer less than 30 seconds. Cost per call was also compared.

Results: The average abandoned call rate for the network during the year prior to VISN 11 Pharmacy Call Center implementation (August 2010-July 2011) was 15.66% and decreased to 3% in July 2014. The average abandoned call rate decreased for each individual facility. In fiscal year 2014, the VISN 11 Pharmacy Call Center was operating at a cost of $4.35 per call while providing more services than the HRC, resulting in less workload being transferred back to the individual facilities.

Conclusion: A centralized VISN pharmacy call center is a reasonable alternative to individual facility call centers or the HRC.

 

Key Words—hospital pharmacy, hospitals, telemedicine, telephone, veterans

Hosp Pharm—2015;50:370-375

Abstract

Purpose: To establish a cost-effective centralized pharmacy call center to serve the patients of Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) 11 that would meet established performance metrics.

Methods: A pilot project began in August 2011 with the Indianapolis VA Medical Center (VAMC) and the Health Resource Center (HRC) in Topeka, Kansas. The Indianapolis VAMC used a first-call resolution business model consisting of pharmacy technicians receiving tier 1 phone calls that could be escalated to a tier 2 line that consisted of lead technicians and pharmacists, while the HRC utilized general telephone agents that would transfer unresolved calls to the primary facility. Pre- and post-VISN 11 Pharmacy Call Center performance metrics were compared for each of the 7 facilities in the network with the goals being monthly average abandoned call rate less than 5% and average speed to answer less than 30 seconds. Cost per call was also compared.

Results: The average abandoned call rate for the network during the year prior to VISN 11 Pharmacy Call Center implementation (August 2010-July 2011) was 15.66% and decreased to 3% in July 2014. The average abandoned call rate decreased for each individual facility. In fiscal year 2014, the VISN 11 Pharmacy Call Center was operating at a cost of $4.35 per call while providing more services than the HRC, resulting in less workload being transferred back to the individual facilities.

Conclusion: A centralized VISN pharmacy call center is a reasonable alternative to individual facility call centers or the HRC.

 

Key Words—hospital pharmacy, hospitals, telemedicine, telephone, veterans

Hosp Pharm—2015;50:370-375

Abstract

Purpose: To establish a cost-effective centralized pharmacy call center to serve the patients of Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) 11 that would meet established performance metrics.

Methods: A pilot project began in August 2011 with the Indianapolis VA Medical Center (VAMC) and the Health Resource Center (HRC) in Topeka, Kansas. The Indianapolis VAMC used a first-call resolution business model consisting of pharmacy technicians receiving tier 1 phone calls that could be escalated to a tier 2 line that consisted of lead technicians and pharmacists, while the HRC utilized general telephone agents that would transfer unresolved calls to the primary facility. Pre- and post-VISN 11 Pharmacy Call Center performance metrics were compared for each of the 7 facilities in the network with the goals being monthly average abandoned call rate less than 5% and average speed to answer less than 30 seconds. Cost per call was also compared.

Results: The average abandoned call rate for the network during the year prior to VISN 11 Pharmacy Call Center implementation (August 2010-July 2011) was 15.66% and decreased to 3% in July 2014. The average abandoned call rate decreased for each individual facility. In fiscal year 2014, the VISN 11 Pharmacy Call Center was operating at a cost of $4.35 per call while providing more services than the HRC, resulting in less workload being transferred back to the individual facilities.

Conclusion: A centralized VISN pharmacy call center is a reasonable alternative to individual facility call centers or the HRC.

 

Key Words—hospital pharmacy, hospitals, telemedicine, telephone, veterans

Hosp Pharm—2015;50:370-375

 

 

Hosp Pharm 2013;50(5):370–375

2015 © Thomas Land Publishers, Inc.

www.hospital-pharmacy.com

doi: 10.1310/hpj5005-370