Article

Patient, physician, pharmacy, and pharmacy benefit design factors related to generic medication use.

Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 1620 Tremont St, Suite 3030, Boston, MA 02120, USA.
Journal of General Internal Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.42). 10/2007; 22(9):1298-304. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-007-0284-3
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Increased use of generic medications conserves insurer and patient financial resources and may increase patient adherence.
The objective of the study is to evaluate whether physician, patient, pharmacy benefit design, or pharmacy characteristics influence the likelihood that patients will use generic drugs
Observational analysis of 2001-2003 pharmacy claims from a large health plan in the Western United States. We evaluated claims for 5,399 patients who filled a new prescription in at least 1 of 5 classes of chronic medications with generic alternatives. We identified patients initiated on generic drugs and those started on branded medications who switched to generic drugs in the subsequent year. We used generalized estimating equations to perform separate analyses assessing the relationship between independent variables and the probability that patients were initiated on or switched to generic drugs.
Of the 5,399 new prescriptions filled, 1,262 (23.4%) were generics. Of those initiated on branded medications, 606 (14.9%) switched to a generic drug in the same class in the subsequent year. After regression adjustment, patients residing in high-income zip codes were more likely to initiate treatment with a generic than patients in low-income regions (RR = 1.29; 95% C.I. 1.04-1.60); medical subspecialists (RR = 0.82; 0.69-0.95) and obstetrician/gynecologists (RR = 0.81; 0.69-0.98) were less likely than generalist physicians to initiate generics. Pharmacy benefit design and pharmacy type were not associated with initiation of generic medications. However, patients were over 2.5 times more likely to switch from branded to generic medications if they were enrolled in 3-tier pharmacy plans (95% C.I. 1.12-6.09), and patients who used mail-order pharmacies were 60% more likely to switch to a generic (95% C.I. 1.18-2.30) after initiating treatment with a branded drug.
Physician and patient factors have an important influence on generic drug initiation, with the patients who live in the poorest zip codes paradoxically receiving generic drugs least often. While tiered pharmacy benefit designs and mail-order pharmacies helped steer patients towards generic medications once the first prescription has been filled, they had little effect on initial prescriptions. Providing patients and physicians with information about generic alternatives may reduce costs and lead to more equitable care.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
95 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of the study was to map and analyze general practitioners` opinions of, attitudes towards and experiences with generic drugs and generic substitution (GS) in the Czech Republic. General practitioners (GPs) who took part in the annual and regional professional conferences of the Society of General Practice in the period from November 2008 until March 2009 were asked to complete the 28-item questionnaire concerning the issue of generic drugs and GS. Questions were organized in 5 sections aimed at assessing the attitude towards GS, understanding the legislation and opinions on statements related to GS. All data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and correlations were tested by selected parametric and non-parametric tests. Total of 263 completed questionnaires were returned (mean age of 52.2 years (SD=13.7), 177 (67.3%) females and 248 (94.3%) GPs having a practice specialization). 99 (37.6%) respondents have considered generic drugs to be bioequivalent to the respective brand name drugs. 121 (46.0%) respondents believed that generic drugs are of lower quality than brand name drugs. None of respondent showed acquaintance with all the legal rules for GS. Awareness of the legislation and attitude towards GS correlated with the age (p
    Central European Journal of Medicine 12/2014; 9(6). DOI:10.2478/s11536-013-0344-5 · 0.21 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Statins are effective in preventing cardiovascular events, but patients do not fully adhere to them. Objective: To determine whether patients are more adherent to generic statins versus brand-name statins (lovastatin, pravastatin, or simvastatin) and whether greater adherence improves health outcomes. Design: Observational, propensity score-matched, new-user cohort study. Setting: Linked electronic data from medical and pharmacy claims. Participants: Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older with prescription drug coverage between 2006 and 2008. Intervention: Initiation of a generic or brand-name statin. Measurements: Adherence to statin therapy (measured as the proportion of days covered [PDC] up to 1 year) and a composite outcome comprising hospitalization for an acute coronary syndrome or stroke and all-cause mortality. Hazard ratios (HRs) and absolute rate differences were estimated. Results: A total of 90 111 patients who initiated a statin during the study was identified; 83 731 (93%) initiated a generic drug, and 6380 (7%) initiated a brand-name drug. The mean age of patients was 75.6 years, and most (61%) were female. The average PDC was 77% for patients in the generic group and 71% for those in the brand-name group (P < 0.001). An 8% reduction in the rate of the clinical outcome was observed among patients in the generic group versus those in the brand-name group (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.86 to 0.99]). The absolute difference was -1.53 events per 100 person-years (CI, -2.69 to -0.19 events per 100 person-years). Limitation: Results may not be generalizable to other populations with different incomes or drug benefit structures. Conclusion: Compared with those initiating brand-name statins, patients initiating generic statins were more likely to adhere and had a lower rate of a composite clinical outcome.
    Annals of internal medicine 09/2014; 161(6):400-407. DOI:10.7326/M13-2942 · 16.10 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Brand-name drug costs have been escalating in the United States, and the reasons for this are not immediately clear. A lack of adequate and accurate information about drug effectiveness, safety, and cost has implications for drug utilization and cost.
    American Health and Drug Benefits 09/2010; 3(5):321-30.

Preview

Download
0 Downloads
Available from