Effects of a consumer driven health plan on pharmaceutical spending and utilization.

Department of Finance, Director, Medical Industry Leadership Institute, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, 321 19th Avenue South, Room 3-122, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Health Services Research (Impact Factor: 2.29). 06/2008; 43(5 Pt 1):1542-56. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2008.00857.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To compare pharmaceutical spending and utilization in a consumer driven health plan (CDHP) with a three-tier pharmacy benefit design, and to examine whether the CDHP creates incentives to reduce pharmaceutical spending and utilization for chronically ill patients, generic or brand name drugs, and mail-order drugs.
Retrospective insurance claims analysis from a large employer that introduced a CDHP in 2001 in addition to a point of service (POS) plan and a preferred provider organization (PPO), both of which used a three-tier pharmacy benefit.
Difference-in-differences regression models were estimated for drug spending and utilization. Control variables included the employee's income, age, and gender, number of covered lives per contract, election of flexible spending account, health status, concurrent health shock, cohort, and time trend. Results. CDHP pharmaceutical expenditures were lower than those in the POS cohort in 1 year without differences in the use of brand name drugs. We find limited evidence of less drug consumption by CDHP enrollees with chronic illnesses, and some evidence of less generic drug use and more mail-order drug use among CDHP members.
The CDHP is cost-neutral or cost-saving to both the employer and the employee compared with three-tier benefits with no differences in brand name drug use.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The employment-based health benefits system established its roots many years ago. It was during World War II that many more employers began to offer health benefits. Recently, however, both the percentage of workers with employment-based health benefits and the comprehensiveness of such coverage have been declining. This paper examines recent trends in employment-based health benefits. It also considers the likely future of this important workplace benefit in light of shifts from defined benefit to defined contribution models of employee benefits and with regard to the implementation of health reform.
    Inquiry: a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing 01/2012; 49(2):101-15. · 0.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To examine whether high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) that exempt prescription drugs from full cost sharing preserve medication use for major chronic illness, compared with traditional HMOs with similar drug cost sharing. We examined 2001-2008 pharmacy claims data of 3,348 continuously enrolled adults in a Massachusetts health plan for 9 months before and 24 months after an employer-mandated switch from a traditional HMO plan to a HDHP, compared with 20,534 contemporaneous matched HMO members. Both study groups faced similar three-tiered drug copayments. We calculated daily medication availability for all prescription drugs and four chronic medication classes: hypoglycemics, lipid-lowering agents, antihypertensives, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)/asthma controllers. Interrupted time-series with comparison group study design examining monthly level and trend changes in prescription drug utilization. The HDHP and control groups had comparable changes in the level and trend of all drugs after the index date; we detected similar patterns in the use of lipid-lowering agents, antihypertensives, and COPD/asthma controllers. Some evidence suggested a small relative decline in hypoglycemic use among diabetic patients in HDHPs. Switching to an HDHP that included modest drug copayments did not change medication availability or reduce use of essential medications for three common chronic illnesses.
    Health Services Research 03/2011; 46(5):1382-401. · 2.29 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT:  Overall, 25–27 percent of Baby Boomers and Gen Xers who would have had adequate retirement income under return assumptions based on historical averages are simulated to end up running short of money in retirement if today’s historically low interest rates are assumed to be a permanent condition, assuming retirement income/wealth covers 100 percent of simulated retirement expense.  A low-yield-rate environment may have an extremely large impact on retirement-income failure rates when viewed in isolation. However, the impact is muted somewhat when included as part of the entire retirement portfolio (e.g., Social Security benefits, possible defined benefit accruals, and net housing equity).  There appears to be a very limited impact of a low-yield-rate environment on retirement income adequacy for those in the lowest- (pre-retirement) income quartile, given the relatively small level of defined contribution and IRA assets and the relatively large contribution of Social Security benefits for this group. However, there is a very significant impact for the top three income quartiles.
    EBRI issue brief / Employee Benefit Research Institute 06/2013;

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 22, 2014