Effects of state surveillance on new post-hospitalization benzodiazepine use.
(65/456)
BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepines (BZD) effectively treat anxiety and insomnia accompanying major health events, including hospitalizations. Prescribing regulations to decrease BZD misuse may negatively impact therapeutic uses. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of a Triplicate Prescription Program (TPP) on initiation of post-hospitalization BZD prescribing, both overall and among cardiac and cancer patients in the United States. DESIGN: Interrupted time-series of post-hospitalization BZD dispensing events to enrollees in the US Medicaid program in the states of New York (intervention group) and New Jersey (control group), before and after implementation of a TPP. STUDY PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling Medicaid enrollees in New York State (n = 67 962) and New Jersey (n = 71 701), hospitalized between 1 January 1988 and 30 November 1990. INTERVENTION: The New York State TPP, implemented on 1 January 1989, requires physicians to prescribe BZD on triplicate prescription forms for state surveillance. OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates and duration of new post-hospitalization use of BZD and substitute medications. RESULTS: Overall, a sudden and sustained 63.5% decrease [95% confidence interval (CI) -58.6% to -68.3%] in new post-hospitalization BZD dispensing-from a baseline rate of 44 discharges with BZD dispensing per 1000 discharges per month-followed the TPP in New York State, without discontinuity in the control state. Patients hospitalized for acute ischemic cardiac events experienced a 72.5% reduction (95% CI -55.5% to -89.4%), and cancer patients a 69.4% reduction (95% CI -36.7% to -100.0%). The TPP did not preferentially reduce BZD use lasting >2 months. Increased substitute use did not offset reductions in BZD use. CONCLUSIONS: By decreasing new short-term post-hospitalization BZD use, the New York State TPP also had unintended effects. (+info)
Impact of Maine's Medicaid drug formulary change on non-Medicaid markets: spillover effects of a restrictive drug formulary.
(66/456)
BACKGROUND: Market penetration of HMOs affect physician practice styles for non-HMO patients. OBJECTIVE: To study the impact of a restrictive Medicaid drug formulary on prescribing patterns for other patients, ie, so-called spillover effects. DESIGN: A before-and-after, 3-state comparison study. EVENT: On January 1, 2001, Maine's Medicaid program implemented a restrictive drug formulary for the proton pump inhibitor class, with pantoprazole as the only preferred drug. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The Medicaid and non-Medicaid market shares of pantoprazole in Maine (vs New Hampshire and Vermont and among Maine physicians with different Medicaid share of practice. RESULTS: After 3 months, the market share of pantoprazole in Maine (vs 2 control states) increased 79% among Medicaid prescriptions (vs 1%-2%), 10% among cash prescriptions (vs 3%), and 7% among other third-party payer prescriptions (vs 1%). The market shares increased more among Maine physicians with a higher Medicaid share of practice (high vs middle vs low [market]: 16% vs 8% vs 5% [cash]; 11% vs 5% vs 4% [other third-party payers]). Linear regression results indicate that practicing medicine in Maine leads to a 72% increase in pantoprazole share among Medicaid prescriptions (P < .001). In addition, for each 10% Medicaid share of practice in Maine, the share of pantoprazole increases 1.8% among cash prescriptions (P = .01) and 1.4% among other third-party payer prescriptions (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Maine's Medicaid drug formulary generated spillover effects in cash and other third-party payer markets, with somewhat stronger effects in the cash market. (+info)
Effects of a 3-tier pharmacy benefit design on the prescription purchasing behavior of individuals with chronic disease.
(67/456)
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of 3-tier (copayment) pharmacy benefit structures on medication utilization behavior. METHODS: A pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design was employed. Chronic disease sufferers (N=8,132) from a health plan were classified into the following groups: (a) 2-tier copayment moving to a 3-tier structure, (.converting. group), (b) 2-tier staying in a 2-tier structure and, (c) 3-tier staying in a 3-tier structure. The latter 2 were.comparison. groups. Two 7-month time periods were determined: the.preperiod. (June through December 2000) and the.postperiod. (January through July 2001) for a change in pharmacy benefit structure. Pharmacy claims data were used for data collection. Statistical analyses included bivariate tests to evaluate predifferences and postdifferences across study groups. Maximum likelihood estimates from a repeated measures model were used to examine changes in formulary compliance and generic use rates. Discontinuation of nonformulary medications was evaluated using logistic regression. RESULTS: Controlling for demographics, number of comorbidities, disease state, and pharmacy benefit structure, the formulary compliance rate increased by 5.6% for the converting group. No significant increases were seen for the comparison groups. Generic use rates increased by 6 to 8 absolute percentage points for all groups (3.3% to 4.9 % adjusted rates). Converting group members were 1.76 times more likely to discontinue their nonformulary medication than those in the 2-tier comparison group and 1.49 times more likely than those in the 3-tier comparison group. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that shifting individuals from a 2-tier to a 3-tier drug benefit copayment structure resulted in changes in medication utilization. Decision makers need to balance these changes with the potential dissatisfaction that members may express in paying higher copayments. (+info)
Pharmacy benefit forecast for a new interferon Beta-1a for the treatment of multiple sclerosis: development of a first-line decision tool for pharmacy-budget planning using administrative claims data.
(68/456)
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incremental change in pharmacy per-member-permonth (PMPM) costs, according to various formulary designs, for a new interferon beta-1a product (IB1a2) using administrative claims data. METHODS: Cross-sectional sex- and age-specific disease prevalence and treatment rates for relapsing, remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients were measured using integrated medical and pharmacy claims data from a 500,000- member employer group in the southern United States. Migration to IB1a2 from other drugs in the class was based on market-share data for new and existing RRMS patients. Duration of therapy was estimated by analyzing claims for current RRMS therapies. Daily therapy cost was provided by the manufacturer of IB1a2, adjusted for migration from other therapies, and multiplied by estimated volume to predict incremental and total PMPM cost impact. Market-share estimates were used to develop a PMPM cost forecast for the next 2 years. PMPM cost estimates were calculated for preferred (copayment tier 2) and nonpreferred (copayment tier 3) formulary designs with and without prior authorization (PA). One-way sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the influence of product pricing, duration of therapy, and other market factors. RESULTS: Annual incremental PMPM change was $0.047 for the scenario of third copayment tier with PA. The incremental change was greatest for those aged 55 to 65 years ($0.056 PMPM) and did not vary greatly by benefit design. Duration of therapy had the greatest impact on the PMPM estimate across benefit designs. CONCLUSION: IB1a2 will not cause a significant change in managed care pharmacy budgets under a variety of formulary conditions, according to this crosssectional analysis of current care-seeking behavior by RRMS patients. Economic impact may differ if IB1a2 expands RRMS patients. treatment-seeking behavior. (+info)
Selected characteristics of senior citizens prescription drug payment and procurement in 1998 and 2001.
(69/456)
BACKGROUND: People without prescription drug coverage face greater financial burdens and may sometimes be unable to follow the courses of treatment prescribed by their physicians. The U.S. legislature is considering Medicare coverage for prescription drugs and the use of managed care approaches for containing costs associated with senior citizens. prescription drug therapy. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe selected characteristics of senior citizens. prescription drug payment and procurement. METHODS: Data were obtained via mailed survey from national random samples of senior citizens in 1998 and in 2001. Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were used to describe relationships among study variables. RESULTS: Of 2,434 deliverable surveys, 946 (39%) were returned. Of these, 700 (29%) respondents provided usable data for analysis. Results showed that in 2001, compared with 1998, the proportion of senior citizens without any prescription insurance coverage did not change significantly, 29% and 32%, respectively. However, the proportion of respondents with prescription drug coverage who had to share costs of prescriptions through copayments and coinsurance rose significantly, from 69% in 1998 to 89% in 2001. Between 1998 and 2001, the proportion of senior citizens using mail-order pharmacies rose significantly, from 17% to 27%, and the proportion who reported financial hardship also rose, from 19% in 1998 to 31% in 2001. Controlling for year, prescription drug use, and income, logistic regression analysis showed that respondents without any prescription insurance coverage were about 5 times more likely to report financial hardship compared with those having coverage. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of senior citizens without any prescription drug insurance coverage did not change significantly between 1998 and 2001, but cost sharing in terms of the proportion that had cost-sharing requirements and the amount of the cost sharing through copayments and coinsurance rose significantly. Self-reported financial hardship and the use of mail-order pharmacies among seniors increased between 1998 and 2001. (+info)
The effect of incentive-based formularies on prescription-drug utilization and spending.
(70/456)
BACKGROUND: Many employers and health plans have adopted incentive-based formularies in an attempt to control prescription-drug costs. METHODS: We used claims data to compare the utilization of and spending on drugs in two employer-sponsored health plans that implemented changes in formulary administration with those in comparison groups of enrollees covered by the same insurers. One plan simultaneously switched from a one-tier to a three-tier formulary and increased all enrollee copayments for medications. The second switched from a two-tier to a three-tier formulary, changing only the copayments for tier-3 drugs. We examined the utilization of angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, proton-pump inhibitors, and 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins). RESULTS: Enrollees covered by the employer that implemented more dramatic changes experienced slower growth than the comparison group in the probability of the use of a drug and a major shift in spending from the plan to the enrollee. Among the enrollees who were initially taking tier-3 statins, more enrollees in the intervention group than in the comparison group switched to tier-1 or tier-2 medications (49 percent vs. 17 percent, P<0.001) or stopped taking statins entirely (21 percent vs. 11 percent, P=0.04). Patterns were similar for ACE inhibitors and proton-pump inhibitors. The enrollees covered by the employer that implemented more moderate changes were more likely than the comparison enrollees to switch to tier-1 or tier-2 medications but not to stop taking a given class of medications altogether. CONCLUSIONS: Different changes in formulary administration may have dramatically different effects on utilization and spending and may in some instances lead enrollees to discontinue therapy. The associated changes in copayments can substantially alter out-of-pocket spending by enrollees, the continuation of the use of medications, and possibly the quality of care. (+info)
Medicare program; Medicare prescription drug discount card. Interim final rule with comment period.
(71/456)
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)
Verification of a decision analytic model assumption using real-world practice data: implications for the cost effectiveness of cyclo-oxygenase 2 inhibitors (COX-2s).
(72/456)
OBJECTIVE: To verify the gastroprotective agent (GPA) rate assumption used in cost-effectiveness models for cyclo-oxygenase 2 inhibitors (COX-2s) and to re-estimate model outcomes using GPA rates from actual practice. METHODS: Prescription and medical claims data obtained from January 1, 1999, through May 31, 2001, from a large preferred provider organization in the Midwest, were used to estimate GPA rates within 3 groups of patients aged at least 18 years who were new to nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and COX-2 therapy: all new NSAID users, new NSAID users with a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or osteoarthritis (OA), and a matched cohort of new NSAID users. RESULTS: Of the more than 319,000 members with at least 1 day of eligibility, 1900 met the study inclusion criteria for new NSAID users, 289 had a diagnosis of OA or RA, and 1232 were included in the matched cohort. Gastroprotective agent estimates for nonselective NSAID and COX-2 users were consistent across all 3 samples (all new NSAID users, new NSAID users with a diagnosis of OA or RA, and the matched cohort), with COX-2 GPA rates of 22%, 21%, and 20%, and nonselective NSAID GPA rates of 15%, 15%, and 18%, respectively. Re-estimation of the cost-effectiveness model increased the cost per year of life saved for COX-2s from $18,614 to more than $100,000. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to COX-2 cost-effectiveness model assumptions, the rate of GPA use is positive and marginally higher among COX-2 users than among nonselective NSAID users. These findings call into question the use of expert opinion in estimating practice pattern model inputs prior to a product's use in clinical practice. A re-evaluation of COX-2 cost-effectiveness models is warranted. (+info)