Article

Medicare Part D's Effect on the Under- and Overuse of Medications: A Systematic Review

Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02120, USA.
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (Impact Factor: 4.22). 08/2011; 59(10):1922-33. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03537.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To evaluate the literature regarding the effect of Medicare Part D on the under- and overuse of specific medications and corresponding health outcomes.
Systematic review.
Medline search of the peer-reviewed literature from January 1, 2006, to October 8, 2010.
Medicare beneficiaries who obtained drug insurance from the Part D program.
The review evaluated changes in the use of specific drugs or drug classes after implementation of Part D, as described in original, peer-reviewed articles.
Nineteen articles met inclusion criteria. Part D's implementation was associated with greater use of essential medications such as clopidogrel and statins, especially in beneficiaries who had been previously uninsured, but increases in inappropriate antibiotic use for the treatment of acute respiratory tract infections and increases in claims for the often overused proton pump inhibitor drug class were also observed. In the Part D transition period, dually eligible beneficiaries' drug use remained largely unchanged. When beneficiary cost sharing increased in the coverage gap, use of essential and overused medications declined.
Increasing drug coverage led to greater use of underused essential medications and inappropriate, or overused, medications under Medicare Part D. Despite efforts to have it do so, the Part D benefit did not sufficiently discriminate between essential and nonessential medication use.

0 Followers
 · 
103 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To examine the relationship between receiving the Medicare Part D low-income subsidy (LIS) and cost-related medication nonadherence (CRN). Cross-sectional. Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey collected in spring 2007. Part D-enrolled Medicare beneficiaries who responded to the CAHPS survey. Respondents were categorized into three LIS groups: deemed LIS (Medicare and Medicaid dual-eligible and individuals receiving Supplemental Security Income), LIS applicants (other low-income individuals who applied for and received LIS), and non-LIS. Adjusted logistic models were used to assess the likelihood of CRN according to LIS status. Sample weights were applied in all analyses to account for complex sampling design. Of 171,573 Part D-enrolled respondents (weighted N = 14,572,827; response rate 48%), 17.2% reported CRN. Specifically, 14.7% of non-LIS respondents, 22.2% of deemed-LIS respondents, and 24.0% of LIS applicants reported CRN. LIS groups had higher unadjusted odds of CRN than the non-LIS respondents, but fully adjusted odds of CRN were lower in the deemed-LIS (adjusted odds ratio = 0.66, 95% confidence interval = 0.59, 0.74) than the LIS applicants or the non-LIS respondents. Subgroup analyses revealed that sociodemographic and health-related characteristics were associated with higher CRN in all three groups. The lower adjusted odds of CRN in deemed-LIS is reassuring, suggesting that autoenrollment provides meaningful assistance in removing cost-related barriers to medication use, but certain sociodemographic characteristics were associated with higher odds of CRN. Efforts to improving outreach to these subgroups and tracking of CRN are warranted.
    Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 07/2013; 61(8). DOI:10.1111/jgs.12364 · 4.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives To examine whether older adults taking nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) decreased the underuse of gastroprotective agents over time.DesignBefore-and-after study.SettingHealth, Aging and Body Composition Study.ParticipantsDaily users of a NSAID (prescription and over the counter (OTC)) at visits in 2002–03 (preperiod; n = 404) and 2006–07 (postperiod; n = 172). The sample had a mean ± standard deviation age of 78.2 ± 2.7 at the preperiod visit and 81.9 ± 2.7 at the postperiod visit. The majority were white and female and had 12 or more years of education.MeasurementsUnderusers were defined as persons taking nonselective NSAIDs who were at risk of peptic ulcer disease (PUD; because of current warfarin or glucocorticoid use or history of PUD) and not using a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or persons taking cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) selective NSAIDs and aspirin who were at risk of PUD (having at least one risk factor) and not using a PPI.ResultsDaily NSAID use decreased from 17.6% to 11.3% (P < .001), and gastroprotective agent underuse decreased from 23.5% to 15.1% (P = .008). Controlling for important covariates, having prescription insurance was somewhat protective against underuse in the preperiod (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.46–1.34; P = .37), but more so and significantly in the postperiod (AOR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.18–0.93; P = .03). Having prescription insurance was more protective in the post- than in the preperiod (less gastroprotective agent underuse; adjusted ratio of OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.22–1.29; P = .16), but this increased protection was not statistically significant.Conclusion In older daily NSAID users at high risk of PUD, having prescription insurance and adequate gastroprotective use was more common in the post- than in the preperiod.
    Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 10/2014; 62(10). DOI:10.1111/jgs.13066 · 4.22 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Medicare Part D and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) use different approaches to manage prescription drug benefits, with implications for spending. Medicare relies on private plans with distinct formularies, whereas the VA administers its own benefit using a national formulary. OBJECTIVE: To compare overall and regional rates of brand-name drug use among older adults with diabetes in Medicare and the VA. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Medicare and the VA, 2008. PATIENTS: 1 061 095 Medicare Part D beneficiaries and 510 485 veterans aged 65 years or older with diabetes. MEASUREMENTS: Percentage of patients taking oral hypoglycemics, statins, and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) who filled brand-name drug prescriptions and percentage of patients taking long-acting insulins who filled analogue prescriptions. Sociodemographic- and health status-adjusted hospital referral region (HRR) brand-name drug use was compared, and changes in spending were calculated if brand-name drug use in 1 system mirrored the other. RESULTS: Brand-name drug use in Medicare was 2 to 3 times that in the VA: 35.3% versus 12.7% for oral hypoglycemics, 50.7% versus 18.2% for statins, 42.5% versus 20.8% for ACE inhibitors or ARBs, and 75.1% versus 27.0% for insulin analogues. Adjusted HRR-level brand-name statin use ranged (from the 5th to 95th percentiles) from 41.0% to 58.3% in Medicare and 6.2% to 38.2% in the VA. For each drug group, the 95th-percentile HRR in the VA had lower brand-name drug use than the 5th-percentile HRR in Medicare. Medicare spending in this population would have been $1.4 billion less if brand-name drug use matched that of the VA. LIMITATION: This analysis cannot fully describe the factors underlying differences in brand-name drug use. CONCLUSION: Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes use 2 to 3 times more brand-name drugs than a comparable group within the VA, at substantial excess cost. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, National Institutes of Health, and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
    Annals of internal medicine 06/2013; DOI:10.7326/0003-4819-159-2-201307160-00664 · 16.10 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
0 Downloads
Available from