Medicare prescription drug benefit progress report: findings from a 2006 national survey of seniors.
(1/178)
A national survey in 2006 found that Part D secured drug coverage for most seniors who were without it in 2005, prior to the Medicare drug benefit. Seniors without drug coverage in 2006 generally fell into two groups: those in relatively good health and those potentially difficult to reach. Compared with seniors covered through employer plans or the Department of Veterans Affairs, Part D enrollees had higher out-of-pocket spending and greater cost-related nonadherence. Low-income subsidies offered protection against high out-of-pocket spending; without them, one-third of Part D enrollees at or below 150 percent of poverty paid more than $100 a month for their medications. (+info)
Pharmacy benefit caps and the chronically ill.
(2/178)
In this paper we examine medication use among retirees with employer-sponsored drug coverage both with and without annual benefit limits. We find that pharmacy benefit caps are associated with higher rates of medication discontinuation across the most common therapeutic classes and that only a minority of those who discontinue use reinitiate therapy once coverage resumes. Plan members who reach their cap are more likely than others to switch plans and increase their rate of generic use; however, in most cases, the shift is temporary. Given the similarities between these plans and Part D, we make some inferences about reforms for Medicare. (+info)
The Medicare Modernization Act and reimbursement for outpatient chemotherapy: do patients perceive changes in access to care?
(3/178)
BACKGROUND: The primary objectives were to measure and compare time to initiation of chemotherapy for patients undergoing treatment either before or after the enactment of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA), and to measure and compare the location of care for patients undergoing chemotherapy either before or after the enactment of the MMA. METHODS: A Web-based survey was conducted of a convenience sample of patients with cancer. RESULTS: A total of 1421 respondents completed the survey, 684 in the pre-MMA group and 737 in the post-MMA group. Respondents aged >or=65 years in both the pre-MMA and post-MMA groups had a median waiting time to chemotherapy of 3.0 weeks (P = .74). Most respondents aged >or=65 years received chemotherapy in outpatient hospital infusion centers or centers affiliated with private practices (73% in the pre-MMA group vs 62% in the post-MMA group; P = .02). However, in multivariate analysis there was no statistically significant difference in treatment location between the pre-MMA and post-MMA cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the findings do not support generalizations from anecdotal reports that patients have been affected by the change in reimbursement to oncologists for chemotherapy as a result of the MMA. The analysis may be confounded by payments to physicians in the concurrent Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services cancer demonstration project because these payments may have delayed changes in care. Moreover, research is needed to examine the effects of the legislation on vulnerable populations. (+info)
Toward a rational, value-based drug benefit for Medicare.
(4/178)
A major challenge facing Congress is what changes, if any, to make to Medicare Part D. With the apparent failure of the Democrats' attempt to remove the prohibition on government intervention in drug price negotiations, the party's next steps are unclear. One suggested option is a plan administered by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), to compete with private plans and facilitate a transition to a more rational structure. We discuss issues surrounding the design of such a mechanism and how it might provide a transition toward a more rational and sustainable drug benefit in the longer term. (+info)
The impact of Medicare Part D on prescription drug use by the elderly.
(5/178)
This study investigates the effect of Medicare Part D on the elderly's prescription drug use and out-of-pocket costs using a difference-in-differences research design. We estimate that Medicare Part D reduced user cost among the elderly by 18.4 percent, increased their use of prescription drugs by about 12.8 percent, and increased total U.S. usage by 4.5 percent in 2006. The estimated crowd-out rate was about 72 percent: Every seven prescriptions paid for by the government crowded out five other prescriptions and resulted in only two additional prescriptions used. This does not necessarily mean that Medicare Part D is an economically inefficient program. (+info)
Medicare program; revisions to the Medicare Advantage and Part D prescription drug contract determinations, appeals, and intermediate sanctions processes. Final rule with comment period.
(6/178)
This rule with comment period finalizes the Medicare program provisions relating to contract determinations involving Medicare Advantage (MA) organizations and Medicare Part D prescription drug plan sponsors, including eliminating the reconsideration process for review of contract determinations, revising the provisions related to appeals of contract determinations, and clarifying the process for MA organizations and Part D plan sponsors to complete corrective action plans. In this final rule with comment period, we also clarify the intermediate sanction and civil money penalty (CMP) provisions that apply to MA organizations and Medicare Part D prescription drug plan sponsors, modify elements of their compliance plans, retain voluntary self-reporting for Part D sponsors and implement a voluntary self-reporting recommendation for MA organizations, and revise provisions to ensure HHS has access to the books and records of MA organizations and Part D plan sponsors' first tier, downstream, and related entities. Although we have decided not to finalize the mandatory self-reporting provisions that we proposed, CMS remains committed to adopting a mandatory self-reporting requirement. To that end, we are requesting comments that will assist CMS in crafting a future proposed regulation for a mandatory self-reporting requirement. (+info)
Current implications for the managed care of dementia.
(7/178)
Medicare Part D changes are becoming an increasingly complex issue, presenting a challenge to many physicians treating dementia patients. A 2006 American Medical Directors Association survey found that 70% of its members reported difficulty with the Medicare prescription drug plan, with 28% of all physicians having difficulty in accessing dementia medications. Concerns about medication access are worrisome, particularly in light of data demonstrating their positive effects on behavioral symptoms, which may result in reduced use of psychotropic medications. Strategies for improving access to antidementia medications in nursing homes and assisted living facilities are highlighted, including an overview of appropriate use of antidementia medications (cholinesterase inhibitors and glutamate pathway modifiers), use of nonpharmacologic interventions, risk reduction in patients with dementia, accounting for resident preferences, and proper documentation. Finally, end-of-life issues in advanced dementia and defining quality of life are also addressed in a brief commentary. Recognition and understanding of these issues may improve patient access to medication, leading to improved patient healthcare outcomes and reduced dementia-related healthcare costs. (+info)
Chronic kidney disease and medicare.
(8/178)
BACKGROUND: Since 1972, Medicare has covered the cost of end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Consequently, Medicare pays a large proportion of ESRD's costs. However, before implementation of Medicare Part D, employer health plans paid most ESRD-associated prescription costs. The ESRD population faces significant hurdles when using the new Part D benefit. To understand those challenges, a basic understanding of Part D is needed. SUMMARY: Medicare Part D has unique implications for chronic kidney disease (CKD) populations (dialysis, kidney transplant, and CKD patients not on dialysis). Approximately 405,000 ESRD patients were eligible for Part D coverage in 2006. Drug coverage is available for many drugs via Medicare Part B or Part D; however, the Medicare Part B and Part D medication coverage divide is confusing to most clinicians, including pharmacists. Many ESRD patients fall into the dual-eligible category -- they are covered by both Medicare and Medicaid. These patients now receive their medications through Part D and must enroll in a prescription drug plan (PDP). However, many PDP plans may not have the drugs that were covered in state-sponsored Medicaid programs. Dialysis-specific issues also abound because of the high-cost, high-use medications needed to treat the numerous comorbid conditions (diabetes, hypertension, anemia, bone and mineral metabolism disorders, and cardiovascular disorders) that flourish in the ESRD population. CONCLUSION: Managed care demonstration projects are underway to better understand if enrolling these patients into managed care plans with disease management models (i.e., special needs plans) can provide quality care in an effective and efficient manner. Screening patients at high risk for kidney disease, identifying patients with early kidney disease, preventing progression to ESRD, and effectively managing comorbid conditions may reduce long-term medical costs and maintain work productivity. Health care providers need to make an active effort to help CKD patients select kidney-friendly formularies. Medicare requires medication therapy management (MTM) services for certain beneficiaries (called "targeted beneficiaries") enrolled in PDP plans to improve medication optimization. Approximately 80% of the typical ESRD population has more than 2 targeted comorbidities. Thus, many ESRD patients should be targeted for MTM services, a task that represents an opportunity for pharmacists. (+info)