Part D Coverage Gap and Adherence to Diabetes Medications

School of Policy, Planning, and Development, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
The American journal of managed care (Impact Factor: 2.26). 12/2010; 16(12):911-8.
Source: PubMed


To evaluate the impact of Medicare Part D coverage gap (donut hole) on adherence to diabetes medications.
Retrospective cohort analysis based on pharmacy claims data.
The sample included 12,881 Medicare Part D beneficiaries with diabetes who entered the coverage gap in 2008. Sample patients had 3 different levels of coverage in the donut hole: no coverage, generic drug coverage only, and both generic and brand-name drug coverage. Adherence was measured by the proportion of days covered. We used a difference-in-difference model to evaluate the effect of coverage gap on adherence.
In the donut hole, the average copayment for diabetes medications increased substantially for beneficiaries with no coverage and beneficiaries with generic drug coverage only, whereas the average copayment for beneficiaries with both generic and brand-name medication coverage declined slightly. Compared with beneficiaries with full coverage of both generic and brand-name drugs, beneficiaries with no coverage (odds ratio[OR] = 0.617, P <.0001, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.523, 0.728) and beneficiaries with generic drug coverage only (OR = 0.702, P <.0001, 95% CI = 0.604, 0.816) were significantly less likely to be adherent after entering the donut hole. The difference between having generic coverage and no coverage was not significant (P = .1586).
The coverage gap in the Medicare Part D program has a significant negative impact on medication adherence among beneficiaries with diabetes. Availability of brand-name drug coverage in the donut hole is critical to adherence to diabetes medications.

25 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Implementation of Medicare Part D was followed by increased use of prescription medications, reduced out-of-pocket costs, and improved medication adherence. Its effects on nondrug medical spending remain unclear. To assess differential changes in nondrug medical spending following the implementation of Part D for traditional Medicare beneficiaries with limited prior drug coverage. Nationally representative longitudinal survey data and linked Medicare claims from 2004-2007 were used to compare nondrug medical spending before and after the implementation of Part D by self-reported generosity of prescription drug coverage before 2006. Participants included 6001 elderly Medicare beneficiaries from the Health and Retirement Study, including 2538 with generous and 3463 with limited drug coverage before 2006. Comparisons were adjusted for sociodemographic and health characteristics and checked for residual confounding by conducting similar comparisons for a control cohort from 2002-2005. Nondrug medical spending assessed from claims, in total and by type of service (inpatient and skilled nursing facility vs physician services). Total nondrug medical spending was differentially reduced after January 1, 2006, for beneficiaries with limited prior drug coverage (-$306/quarter [95% confidence interval {CI}, -$586 to -$51]; P = .02), relative to beneficiaries with generous prior drug coverage. This differential reduction was explained mostly by differential changes in spending on inpatient and skilled nursing facility care (-$204/quarter [95% CI, -$447 to $2]; P = .05). Differential reductions in spending on physician services (-$67/quarter [95% CI, -$134 to -$5]; P = .03) were not associated with differential changes in outpatient visits (-0.06 visits/quarter [95% CI, -0.21 to 0.08]; P = .37), suggesting reduced spending on inpatient physician services for beneficiaries with limited prior drug coverage. In contrast, nondrug medical spending in the control cohort did not differentially change after January 1, 2004, for beneficiaries with limited prior drug coverage in 2002 ($14/quarter [95% CI, -$338 to $324]; P = .93), relative to beneficiaries with generous prior coverage. Implementation of Part D was associated with significant differential reductions in nondrug medical spending for Medicare beneficiaries with limited prior drug coverage.
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 07/2011; 306(4):402-9. DOI:10.1001/jama.2011.1026 · 35.29 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In 2006, the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services implemented Medicare Part D to provide outpatient prescription drug insurance to disabled and older adults. In creating Part D, a key provision to address quality included medication therapy management (MTM) programmes designed to increase proper and safe use of medications among targeted Part D beneficiaries. A preponderance of evidence shows that Part D has increased medication affordability and accessibility; however, what remains less clear is whether it has improved the quality of medication use and optimized health outcomes. Now in its sixth year, Part D is undergoing its first major revision, with the gradual elimination of the coverage gap by 2020. Therefore, now is a good time to review the accumulated evidence on the impact of Part D and MTM programmes on the quality of medication use to help inform future policy decisions and research directions. In this review, we found that Part D’s net effect on quality of medication use has mainly been positive. Cost-related medication nonadherence improved moderately and there were fewer than expected treatment interruptions. However, vulnerable subgroups, such as sicker and dual-eligible beneficiaries, experienced lags in improvement. Beneficiaries who entered the coverage gap consistently experienced interruptions and displayed worsening medication adherence after entering the gap, with generic-only gap drug coverage offering limited benefit. Such findings can serve as baseline information as the coverage gap phases out. Limited availability of data is the greatest barrier to research into Part D. Part D’s overall effect on health outcomes and adverse medical events, such as hospitalizations, is inconclusive because of inadequate evidence to date. Similarly, no evaluation of quality of medication use is available with respect to utilization management strategies and MTM programmes delivered under Part D. Future research will need to further examine the added value of Part D and address whether Part D optimizes health outcomes in the Medicare population. As the current economic recession increases the pressure to cut costs, the effect of future spending restrictions, such as restrictions on coverage subsidies, will also be of special concern.
    Drugs & Aging 10/2011; 28(10):797-807. DOI:10.2165/11595250-000000000-00000 · 2.84 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Current guidelines for acute coronary syndrome recommend clopidogrel for an optimal period of 12 months in order to reduce the risk of reinfarction and mortality. Premature clopidogrel discontinuation has been associated with higher rates of rehospitalization, coronary stent thrombosis, and mortality. No data exist regarding the effect of the Medicare Part D coverage gap on medical costs and outcomes in Medicare beneficiaries who discontinue their clopidogrel upon entering the coverage gap. Beneficiaries with a Medicare Advantage plan in 2009 who had a diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome were taking clopidogrel 75 mg daily, and reached the gap in the same year representing the study sample. From this cohort, those who filled at least two prescriptions for clopidogrel (continued) versus those that did not (discontinued) while in the gap were compared with regard to outcomes related to acute coronary syndrome and expenditure 30 days after the last prescription was filled and during any time while in the gap. Descriptive and multivariate analyses were used to compare these differences. A total of 1365 beneficiaries with acute coronary syndrome met the inclusion criteria, of which 705 beneficiaries entered into the coverage gap, wherein 103 (14.6%) and 602 (85.4%) of beneficiaries discontinued and continued clopidogrel, respectively. Compared with those who continued clopidogrel during the gap, beneficiaries who discontinued clopidogrel showed a higher trend in the number of hospitalizations related to acute coronary syndrome and emergency room visits, albeit not statistically significant. Those who discontinued clopidogrel showed a higher mean adjusted cost per member per month in hospitalizations ($3604) related to acute coronary syndrome and outpatient visits ($1144) related to acute coronary syndrome and total medical costs ($5614), albeit not statistically significant. Medicare beneficiaries who face large out-of-pocket costs for clopidogrel while in the coverage gap and discontinue therapy may experience adverse events related to acute coronary syndrome.
    Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety 07/2012; 4(1):67-74. DOI:10.2147/DHPS.S32473
Show more

Similar Publications