OBJECTIVE: Assess impact of Medicare Part D benefit phases on adherence with evidence-based medications after hospitalization for an acute myocardial infarction. DATA SOURCE: Random 5 percent sample of Medicare beneficiaries. STUDY DESIGN: Difference-in-difference analysis of drug adherence by AMI patients stratified by low-income subsidy (LIS) status and benefit phase. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Subjects were identified with an AMI diagnosis in Medicare Part A files between April 2006 and December 2007 and followed until December 2008 or death (N = 8,900). Adherence was measured as percent of days covered (PDC) per month with four drug classes used in AMI treatment: angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), beta-blockers, statins, and clopidogrel. Monthly exposure to Part D benefit phases was calculated from flags on each Part D claim. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: For non-LIS enrollees, transitioning from the initial coverage phase into the Part D coverage gap was associated with statistically significant reductions in mean PDC for all four drug classes: statins (-7.8 percent), clopidogrel (-7.0 percent), beta-blockers (-5.9 percent), and ACE inhibitor/ARBs (-5.1 percent). There were no significant changes in adherence associated with transitioning from the gap to the catastrophic coverage phase. CONCLUSIONS: As the Part D doughnut hole is gradually filled in by 2020, Medicare Part D enrollees with critical diseases such as AMI who rely heavily on brand name drugs are likely to exhibit modest increases in adherence. Those reliant on generic drugs are less likely to be affected.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background:
Nonadherence to hormonal therapy is common and is associated with increased copayment amount. We investigated the change in adherence after the introduction of generic aromatase inhibitors (AIs) in 2010.
Using deidentified pharmacy and claims data from OptumInsight, we identified women older than 50 years on brand-name AIs (BAIs) and/or generic AIs (GAIs) for early breast cancer between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2012. Clinical, demographic, and financial variables were evaluated. Adherence was defined as a medication possession ratio (MPR) 80% or greater.
We identified 5511 women, 2815 (51.1%) on BAI, 1411 (25.6%) on GAI, and 1285 (23.3%) who switched from BAI to GAI. The median 30-day copayment was higher for BAI ($33.3) than for GAI ($9.04). In a multivariable Cox-proportional hazard analysis, women who took GAI were less likely to discontinue therapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.57 to 0.84) compared with BAI. Discontinuation was positively associated with a higher monthly copayment of $15 to $30 (HR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.44) and more than $30 (HR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.23 to 1.80) compared with less than $15. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, adherence (medication possession ratio ≥ 80%) was positively associated with GAI use (odds ratio = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.22 to 1.91) compared with BAI and inversely associated with increased monthly copayment. In addition, adherence was associated with a high annual income of more than $100k/year (odds ratio = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.17 to 2.11).
Higher prescription copayment amount was associated with nonadherence and discontinuation of AIs. After controlling for copayment, discontinuation was higher and adherence was lower with Brand AIs. Because nonadherence is associated with worse survival, efforts should be directed towards reducing out-of-pocket costs for these life-saving medications.
Cancer Research 11/2014; 106(11). DOI:10.1093/jnci/dju319 · 9.33 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Study Objective
To determine the association between enrollment in the Medicare Part D low-income subsidy (LIS) program, which reduces out-of-pocket medication costs, and fill adherence to the antiplatelet drug clopidogrel after coronary stent placement.DesignRetrospective cohort study.Data SourcePharmacy claims database of a large national Medicare Part D insurer.PatientsWe selected a total of 2967 beneficiaries of a national Medicare Part D plan who had a coronary stent placed between April and December 2006 and were prescribed clopidogrel but were not preexisting users of clopidogrel. Of these patients, 504 were enrolled in the LIS program and 2463 were not.Measurements and Main ResultsWe defined LIS status as enrollment in the LIS program at any point during the 12 months after the procedure. We examined the association between LIS status and good medication fill adherence to clopidogrel, defined as proportion of days covered of 80% or more, or discontinuation of clopidogrel over the 12-month window starting from the date of their stent placement. We also identified patients with claims-based diagnoses of major bleeding events while taking clopidogrel. For those patients, we calculated fill adherence only for the period between medication initiation and the onset of major bleeding and/or did not classify them as having inappropriately discontinued the medication. We created a propensity score predicting the propensity of being eligible for the LIS benefit and used inverse propensity score weighting with regression adjustment to generate estimates of the effect parameters. LIS enrollment was associated with a higher predicted likelihood of good clopidogrel fill adherence after stent placement (54.8% for LIS enrollees vs 47.6% for nonenrollees; p=0.008). No significant difference was noted between the two groups in predicted risk of discontinuing clopidogrel after stent placement (18.3% for LIS enrollees vs 21.0% for nonenrollees; p=0.21).Conclusion
The LIS benefit was associated with better clopidogrel fill adherence after stent placement. Although clopidogrel is now available in generic form, our work underscores the need for efforts to identify and enroll patients in the LIS benefit who require costly antiplatelet medications for coronary heart disease.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND In October 2008, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) stopped reimbursing hospitals for the marginal cost of treating certain preventable hospital-acquired conditions. OBJECTIVE This study evaluates whether CMS’s refusal to pay for hospital-acquired pulmonary embolism (PE) or deep vein thrombosis (DVT) resulted in a lower incidence of these conditions. DESIGN We employ difference-in-differences modeling using 2007–2009 data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, an all-payer database of inpatient discharges in the U.S. Discharges between 1 January 2007 and 30 September 2008 were considered “before payment reform;” discharges between 1 October 2008 and 31 December 2009 were considered “after payment reform.” Hierarchical regression models were fit to account for clustering of observations within hospitals. PARTICIPANTS The “before payment reform” and “after payment reform” incidences of PE or DVT among 65–69-year-old Medicare recipients were compared with three different control groups of: a) 60–64-year-old non-Medicare patients; b) 65–69-year-old non-Medicare patients; and c) 65–69-year-old privately insured patients. Hospital reimbursements for the control groups were not affected by payment reform. INTERVENTION CMS payment reform for hospital-based reimbursement of patients with hip and knee replacement surgeries. MAIN MEASURES The outcome was the incidence proportion of hip and knee replacement surgery admissions that developed pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis. KEY RESULTS At baseline, pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis were present in 0.81 % of all hip or knee replacement surgeries for Medicare patients aged 65–69 years old. CMS payment reform resulted in a 35 % lower incidence of hospital-acquired pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis in these patients (p = 0.015). Results were robust to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION CMS’s refusal to pay for hospital-acquired conditions resulted in a lower incidence of hospital-acquired pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis after hip or knee replacement surgery. Payment reform had the desired direction of effect.
Journal of General Internal Medicine 12/2014; 30(5). DOI:10.1007/s11606-014-3087-3 · 3.45 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.