Effects of a Prior-Authorization Policy for Celecoxib on Medical Service and Prescription Drug Use in a Managed Care Medicaid Population
Oregon State University College of Pharmacy, Portland, USA. Clinical Therapeutics
(Impact Factor: 2.73).
09/2004; 26(9):1518-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2004.09.013
Prior authorization (PA) is a poorly studied but commonly employed policy used by health care payers to manage the rising costs of pharmacy benefits. The aim of this study was to evaluate the intended and unintended effects of a PA policy for celecoxib on pharmacy and medical-service utilization in a Medicaid managed-care organization. This was a retrospective, interrupted time-series analysis of 22 monthly health-related utilization rates from January 1, 1999, to October 31, 2000. All Medicaid claims for CareOregon (a managed-care organization) and a fee-for-service program were reviewed. A model was constructed to evaluate changes in utilization of therapeutically related drug classes (eg, conventional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], gastrointestinal agents), office and emergency-department encounters, and hospitalizations before and after the PA policy was implemented on November 16, 1999. A secondary analysis evaluated these changes among a sample of prior NSAID users. After the PA policy was implemented, use of celecoxib was immediately reduced from 1.07 to 0.53 days' supply per person-year (58.9%; 95% CI, 50.0%-67.9%). The monthly rate of increase was also reduced (P < 0.001). Utilization changes were not observed in other drug classes. Similar changes were observed in the secondary analysis. An 18% (95% CI, 2.2%-33.9%) nonsignificant increase in emergency-department visits was observed in the entire sample after the PA policy was implemented. However, a similar change was not observed in the secondary analysis of prior NSAID users. No other changes in medical service encounters were noted after the PA policy was activated. This observational study found that celecoxib use was substantially reduced after the implementation of a PA policy. No important changes in use of other drug classes were detected. The overall increase in emergency-department visits-although not observed among previous NSAID users-should be explored on the individual level.
Available from: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- "However, more recent studies have found that COX-2 inhibitors do not reduce the risk of GI bleeding compared with NSAIDs as often as was originally believed (Stockl, Cyprien, and Chang 2005; Curtiss 2006). The effect of a PAR program for Celebrex s (a COX-2 inhibitor) on pharmacy and medical service utilization was studied in a Medicaid-managed care organization in Oregon (Hartung et al. 2004). Implementation of the PAR program resulted in a decline in the use of Celebrex s by 59 percent. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Determine the impact of a Prior Authorization Requirement (PAR) program on Medicaid pharmacy expenditures and utilization.
Prescription claims for Nebraska Medicaid recipients who received a cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor, a nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory (NSAID) drug, or other pain relievers between July 2001 and June 2003. STUDY DESIGN AND DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study with a 12-month pre-PAR implementation period and a 12-month post-PAR implementation period. Pharmacy transactions for COX-2 inhibitors, NSAIDs, other pain relievers, and gastroprotectants were identified by their National Drug Code (NDC) in a Microsoft SQL query. The PAR was designed to approve COX-2 inhibitor use only for recipients at high risk of GI side effects while restricting access to those patients at low to moderate risk of GI side effects.
One year following implementation of the PAR, overall expenditures on COX-2 inhibitors for Nebraska Medicaid dropped 50 percent. The overall impact on pharmacy expenditures, including NSAIDs, pain relief medications, and gastroprotectants when necessary to relieve gastrointestinal (GI) side effects, for those recipients who switched from a COX-2 inhibitor to an NSAID or other pain relievers was a decline of approximately 35 percent. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR STATE POLICY: PAR for COX-2 inhibitors successfully reduced Medicaid prescription expenditures. Recipients at high risk for GI side effects appropriately received COX-2 inhibitors. Recipients at low to moderate risk for GI side effects who were switched to NSAIDs or other pain relievers had lower overall prescription expenditures. Further research is needed to determine the impact of PAR on overall health outcomes and costs. In this study, rather than take a "one size fits all" approach to prescription drug cost-saving strategies, Medicaid policy makers understood that patient variation required accurate identification of disease severity to determine when equally efficacious low-cost alternatives were appropriate.
Health Services Research 03/2008; 43(1 Pt 2):435-50. DOI:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2007.00766.x · 2.78 Impact Factor
Available from: Sallie-Anne Pearson
- "Prior authorization (PA) policies are commonly used to control drug utilization and cost . In a health plan that instituted a PA policy for COX-2 inhibitors, Hartung et al  showed a significant reduction in COX-2 inhibitor use as well as a small decrease in use of gastrointestinal protectants (e.g. proton pump inhibitors and histamine-2 blockers) at one year post-intervention. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Managed care organizations use a variety of strategies to reduce the cost and improve the quality of medication use. The effectiveness of such policies is not well understood. The objective of this research was to update a previous systematic review of interventions, published between 1966 and 2001, to improve the quality and efficiency of medication use in the US managed care setting.
We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for publications from July 2001 to January 2007 describing interventions targeting drug use conducted in the US managed care setting. We categorized studies by intervention type and adequacy of research design using commonly accepted criteria. We summarized the outcomes of well-controlled strategies and documented the significance and magnitude of effects for key study outcomes.
We identified 164 papers published during the six-year period. Predominant strategies were: educational interventions (n = 20, including dissemination of educational materials, and group or one-to-one educational outreach); monitoring and feedback (n = 22, including audit/feedback and computerized monitoring); formulary interventions (n = 66, including tiered formulary and patient copayment); collaborative care involving pharmacists (n = 15); and disease management with pharmacotherapy as a primary focus (n = 41, including care for depression, asthma, and peptic ulcer disease). Overall, 51 studies met minimum criteria for methodological adequacy. Effective interventions included one-to-one academic detailing, computerized alerts and reminders, pharmacist-led collaborative care, and multifaceted disease management. Further, changes in formulary tier-design and related increases in copayments were associated with reductions in medication use and increased out-of-pocket spending by patients. The dissemination of educational materials alone had little or no impact, while the impact of group education was inconclusive.
There is good evidence for the effectiveness of several strategies in changing drug use in the managed care environment. However, little is known about the cost-effectiveness of these interventions. Computerized alerts showed promise in improving short-term outcomes but little is known about longer-term outcomes. Few well-designed, published studies have assessed the potential negative clinical effects of formulary-related interventions despite their widespread use. However, some evidence suggests increases in cost sharing reduce access to essential medicines for chronic illness.
BMC Health Services Research 02/2008; 8(1):75. DOI:10.1186/1472-6963-8-75 · 1.71 Impact Factor
Available from: sciencedirect.com
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of an automated prior authorization (PA) system (SmartPA) in reducing use of and expen- ditures for cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors. Study Design: Before and after with control group. Methods: After implementation of SmartPA in Missouri, changes in use of and expenditures for COX-2 inhibitors, COX-2 substitutes (traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and other products for pain), and gastrointestinal (GI) protective agents were compared between the Medicaid program of Missouri and that of a state with no PA program for COX-2 inhibitors. Subjects were continuously enrolled for the 24-month study period and had a claim for a COX-2 inhibitor in the 12- month baseline period. Analyses included comparison of means and linear regression. Regressions controlled for age, sex, risk for GI complications, severity of illness, and the interaction between state and risk. Results: Changes in expenditures for COX-2 inhibitors, NSAIDs, other pain drugs, and GI-protective drugs were $256 higher, $56 lower, $21 higher, and $198 higher, respectively, in the control state among low-risk patients. Changes in expenditures were $102 higher, $12 lower, $21 lower, and $185 higher, respectively, in the control state among high-risk patients. Results were similar for drug utilization. Conclusion: Implementation of SmartPA resulted in reduced use of and expenditures for COX-2 inhibitors and reduced net expen- ditures for all pain and GI-protective medications. These effects were greatest for patients at low risk for GI complications. (Am J Manag Care. 2006;12:501-508)
Value in Health 06/2005; 8(3):405-405. DOI:10.1016/S1098-3015(10)63102-6 · 3.28 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.