Medicare program; Medicare prescription drug discount card. Interim final rule with comment period.
(49/204)
Section 101, subpart 4 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, codified in section 1860D-31 of the Social Security Act, provides for a voluntary prescription drug discount card program for Medicare beneficiaries entitled to benefits, or enrolled, under Part A or enrolled under Part B, excluding beneficiaries entitled to medical assistance for outpatient prescription drugs under Medicaid, including section 1115 waiver demonstrations. Eligible beneficiaries may access negotiated prices on prescription drugs by enrolling in drug discount card programs offered by Medicare-endorsed sponsors. Eligible beneficiaries may enroll in the Medicare drug discount card program beginning no later than 6 months after the date of enactment of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 and ending December 31, 2005. After December 31, 2005, beneficiaries enrolled in the program may continue to use their drug discount card during a short transition period beginning January 1, 2006 and ending upon the effective date of a beneficiary's outpatient drug coverage under Medicare Part D, but no later than the last day of the initial open enrollment period under Part D. Beneficiaries with incomes no more than 135 percent of the poverty line applicable to their family size who do not have outpatient prescription drug coverage under certain programs--Medicaid, certain health insurance coverage or group health insurance (such as retiree coverage), TRICARE, and Federal employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP)--also are eligible for transitional assistance, or payment of $600 in 2004 and up to $600 in 2005 of the cost of covered discount card drugs obtained under the program. In most cases, any transitional assistance remaining available to a beneficiary on December 31, 2004 may be rolled over to 2005 and applied toward the cost of covered discount card drugs obtained under the program during 2005. Similarly, in most cases, any transitional assistance remaining available to a beneficiary on December 31, 2005 may be applied toward the cost of covered discount card drugs obtained under the program during the transition period. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services will solicit applications from entities seeking to offer beneficiaries negotiated prices on covered discount card drugs. Those meeting the requirements described in the authorizing statute and this rule, including administration of transitional assistance, will be permitted to offer a Medicare-endorsed drug discount card program to eligible beneficiaries. Endorsed sponsors may charge beneficiaries enrolling in their endorsed programs an annual enrollment fee for 2004 and 2005 of no more than $30; CMS will pay this fee on behalf of enrollees entitled to transitional assistance. To ensure that eligible Medicare beneficiaries take full advantage of the Medicare drug discount card program and make informed choices, CMS will educate beneficiaries about the existence and features of the program and the availability of transitional assistance for certain low-income beneficiaries; and publicize information that will allow Medicare beneficiaries to compare the various Medicare-endorsed drug discount card programs. (+info)
Cost-effectiveness analysis and the formulary decision-making process.
(50/204)
BACKGROUND: Faced with high drug expenditures in an environment of cost containment, drug formulary systems, particularly in managed care, have become more dependent on pharmacoeconomic evaluations to assess the value of new products. Within pharmacoeconomics (PE), cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is the most commonly used method. However, current methodological concerns about CEA have limited its practical contribution to the formulary process. Advances in analysis are likely to improve the relevance of CEA over time. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to review CEA, its limitations, and its applications in formulary decision making in order to promote greater utility of CEA for managed care pharmacists. SUMMARY: Enhancements to CEA, such as the development of modeling software, rank-order stability analysis, cost-consequence analysis (CCA), and budget impact analysis are discussed. A combined method of CCA-CEA and standardized guidelines are suggested to improve the impact of CEA in the drug formulary process. CONCLUSION: Along with advances in its methodology and relevant standardized guidelines, CEA will gain increased importance in formulary decision making, helping to assure the goal of cost containment while ensuring quality of care. (+info)
Dry eye moves beyond palliative therapy.
(51/204)
Keratoconjunctivitis sicca, or dry eye syndrome, is a complex condition characterized by inflammation of the ocular surface and tear-producing glands. Emerging awareness of the etiology of dry eye has led to the development of highly effective therapy. When dry eye is controlled, there is significant potential for cost savings. (+info)
Evidence-based and value-based formulary guidelines.
(52/204)
Health plans and hospitals have long used drug formularies, but the processes by which formulary committees made decisions have typically lacked transparency and scientific rigor. A growing number of organizations have begun implementing formulary guidelines issued by the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP). These guidelines call for health plans to request formally that drug companies present a standardized "dossier" that contains detailed information not only on the drug's effectiveness and safety but also on its economic value relative to alternative therapies. This paper describes the guidelines, reviews progress to date, and analyzes several critical issues for the future. (+info)
Physicians' views of formularies: implications for Medicare drug benefit design.
(53/204)
As Congress considers introducing a drug benefit for Medicare, it will more than likely adopt a program that uses a formulary. We examined data from the Community Tracking Study Physicians Survey, a large, nationally representative study of physicians, to learn about physicians' views of formularies. Our results suggest that several aspects of formularies are associated with physicians' positive views about them. Policymakers should consider imposing limits on the number of competing Medicare formularies operating in a particular area, promoting the adoption and use of information technology, and incorporating financial incentives for physicians to adhere to formularies. (+info)
How do incentive-based formularies influence drug selection and spending for hypertension?
(54/204)
This study examined the association between incentive-based formularies and antihypertensive drug selection and spending. We compared the use of drugs from five drug classes by the number of tiers and copayment differentials. We found that raising copayments within a single-tier formulary system had a relatively modest impact on use of antihypertensives, compared with raising them in multi-tier systems. Likelihood of using ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers was lower among two-tier plans with generic/brand differentials of dollars 10 relative to flat-copayment plans. Incentive formularies were associated with lower total antihypertensive spending by plans, but enrollees paid more out of pocket. (+info)
Consumer attitudes and factors related to prescription switching decisions in multitier copayment drug benefit plans.
(55/204)
OBJECTIVES: To examine patient attitudes related to formulary medications and medication-related decision making in multitier copayment prescription drug plans. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional retrospective analysis. METHODS: Data were collected via mail survey from a random sample of 25,008 members of a managed care organization. The selected members were enrolled in a variety of 2- and 3-tier copayment plans and were taking prescription medication to treat 1 or more of 5 chronic disease states. RESULTS: Most respondents did not believe that formulary drugs were safer or more effective than nonformulary drugs, but 39.7% thought that formulary drugs were relatively less expensive. Most respondents appeared willing to consider switching from a nonformulary drug to a formulary drug with a lower copayment. The percent of respondents who reported they would be very unlikely or unlikely to switch was only 15.3% for a new prescription and 24.2% for a refill prescription. Medication efficacy and physician opinion were important factors in plan members' switching decisions. Cost was an important factor for some members, but older plan members were less likely to report that cost was important. CONCLUSIONS: Multitier plan members generally believed that drugs are placed on the formulary for reasons of cost rather than safety or efficacy. Most plan members were receptive to switching from a nonformulary to a formulary medication, but financial incentives alone may not convince some plan members to make the switch. (+info)
Physician satisfaction with formulary policies: is it access to formulary or nonformulary drugs that matters most?
(56/204)
OBJECTIVE: To assess physician satisfaction with Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) formulary policies and to examine the correlation between physician satisfaction and perceived access to formulary and nonformulary medications. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey with specific questions on access to formulary and nonformulary medications. Statistical analyses included assessment of associations between physician satisfaction and various measures of access. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Initial sample of 4015 staff physicians working in VA healthcare facilities. Responses were received from 1812 (49%) of the 3682 physicians in the final eligible sample population. RESULTS: Most clinicians (72%) reported that their local formulary covered more than 90% of the medications they wanted to prescribe. Most (73%) agreed that drug restrictions were important to contain costs, and 86% agreed that it was important for VA to choose "best-value" drugs. Respondents reported an 89% approval rate for nonformulary drugs, though 31% indicated that approvals routinely took 3 or more days. We found strong associations between physician satisfaction and self-reported approval rates for nonformulary drugs (P = .001), timely approval of nonformulary requests (P < .001), and percentage of nonformulary prescriptions as a proportion of overall prescriptions at a regional level (P< .01). There was no significant correlation between physician satisfaction and number of medications added to regional formularies or with drug costs per unique patient. CONCLUSIONS: VA physicians were generally supportive of VA formulary policies including choosing best-value drugs to control pharmaceutical expenditures. Nevertheless, access to nonformulary drugs and timely approval of requests for nonformulary medications were strong predictors of clinician satisfaction and support for cost-containment measures. (+info)