Employer drug benefit plans and spending on prescription drugs

被引:183
作者
Joyce, GF [1 ]
Escarce, JJ [1 ]
Solomon, MD [1 ]
Goldman, DP [1 ]
机构
[1] RAND Hlth, Santa Monica, CA 90407 USA
来源
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION | 2002年 / 288卷 / 14期
关键词
D O I
10.1001/jama.288.14.1733
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Context With drug spending rising rapidly for working-aged adults, many employers and health insurance providers have changed benefits packages to encourage use of fewer or less expensive drugs. It is unknown how these initiatives affect drug costs. Objective To examine how innovations in benefits packages, such as those that include multitier formularies and mandatory generic substitution, affect total cost to insurance providers for generic and brand drugs and out-of-pocket payments to beneficiaries. Design and Participants Retrospective study from 1997 to 1999 linking claims data of 420786 primary beneficiaries aged 18 through 64 years who worked at large firms (n = 25) with health insurance benefits that included outpatient drugs. Main Outcome Measures Overall drug costs; generic, single-source brand, and multisource brand costs; and drug expenditures by health insurance providers and out-of-pocket costs for beneficiaries. Results For a 1-tier plan with a $5 co-payment for all drugs,,the average annual spending was $725 per member. Doubling co-payments to $10 for all drugs reduced the annual average drug cost from $725 to $563 per member (22.3%, P<.001). Doubling co-payments in a 2-tier plan from $5 for generics and $10 for brand drugs to $10 for generics and $20 for brand drugs reduced costs from $678 to $455 (32.9%, P<.001). Adding an additional co-payment of $30 for nonpreferred brand drugs to a 2-tier plan ($10 generics; $20 brand) lowered overall drug spending by 4% (P<.001). Requiring mandatory generic substitution in a 2-tier plan reduced drug spending by 8% (P<.001). Doubling co-payments in a 2-tier plan increased the fraction beneficiaries' paid out-of-pocket from 17.6% to 25.6%. Conclusions Adding an additional level of co-payment, increasing existing co-, payments or coinsurance rates, and requiring mandatory generic substitution all reduced plan payments and overall drug spending among working-age enrollees with employer-provided drug coverage. The reduction in drug spending largely benefited health insurance plans because the percentage of drug expenses beneficiaries paid out-of-pocket rose significantly.
引用
收藏
页码:1733 / 1739
页数:7
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]   The US pharmaceutical industry: Why major growth in times of cost containment? [J].
Berndt, ER .
HEALTH AFFAIRS, 2001, 20 (02) :100-114
[2]  
BYMARK L, 2002, PRESCRIPTION DRUG US
[3]  
*CA HEALTHC FDN FO, 2002, PRESCR DRUG COV FORM
[4]  
Duan N., 1983, J EC BUSINESS STATIS, V1, P115, DOI [DOI 10.2307/1391852, DOI 10.1080/07350015.1983.10509330]
[5]   Explaining drug spending trends: Does perception match reality? [J].
Dubois, RW ;
Chawla, AJ ;
Neslusan, CA ;
Smith, MW ;
Wade, S .
HEALTH AFFAIRS, 2000, 19 (02) :231-239
[6]   Prescription medication costs -: A study of physician familiarity [J].
Ernst, ME ;
Kelly, MW ;
Hoehns, JD ;
Swegle, JM ;
Buys, LM ;
Logemann, CD ;
Ford, JK ;
Kautzman, HA ;
Sorofman, BA ;
Pretorius, RW .
ARCHIVES OF FAMILY MEDICINE, 2000, 9 (10) :1002-1007
[7]   Cost-containment and adverse selection in Medicaid HMOs [J].
Goldman, DP ;
Leibowitz, A ;
Buchanan, JL .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1998, 93 (441) :54-62
[8]   THE EFFECT OF DRUG CO-PAYMENTS ON UTILIZATION AND COST OF PHARMACEUTICALS IN A HEALTH MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATION [J].
HARRIS, BL ;
STERGACHIS, A ;
RIED, LD .
MEDICAL CARE, 1990, 28 (10) :907-917
[9]  
HILLMAN AL, 1999, HLTH AFF MILLWOOD, V18, P188
[10]  
Horn SD, 1998, AM J MANAG CARE, V4, P1105