• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

降低患者药品采购成本可降低糖尿病健康索赔。

Reducing patient drug acquisition costs can lower diabetes health claims.

作者信息

Mahoney John J

机构信息

Pitney Bowes, Stamford, CT, USA.

出版信息

Am J Manag Care. 2005 Aug;11(5 Suppl):S170-6.

PMID:16111439
Abstract

Concerned about rising prevalence and costs of diabetes among its employees, Pitney Bowes Inc recently revamped its drug benefit design to synergize with ongoing efforts in its disease management and patient education programs. Specifically, based on a predictive model showing that low medication adherence was linked to subsequent increases in healthcare costs in patients with diabetes, the company shifted all diabetes drugs and devices from tier 2 or 3 formulary status to tier 1. The rationale was that reducing patient out-of-pocket costs would eliminate financial barriers to preventive care, and thereby increase adherence, reduce costly complications, and slow the overall rate of rising healthcare costs. This single change in pharmaceutical benefit design immediately made critical brand-name drugs available to most Pitney Bowes employees and their covered dependents for 10% coinsurance, the same coinsurance level as for generic drugs, versus the previous cost share of 25% to 50%. After 2 to 3 years, preliminary results in plan participants with diabetes indicate that medication possession rates have increased significantly, use of fixed-combination drugs has increased (possibly related to easier adherence), average total pharmacy costs have decreased by 7%, and emergency department visits have decreased by 26%. Hospital admission rates, although increasing slightly, remain below the demographically adjusted Medstat benchmark. Overall direct healthcare costs per plan participant with diabetes decreased by 6%. In addition, the rate of increase in overall per-plan-participant health costs at Pitney Bowes has slowed markedly, with net per-plan-participant costs in 2003 at about 4000 dollars per year versus 6500 dollars for the industry benchmark. This recent moderation in overall corporate health costs may be related to these strategic changes in drug benefit design for diabetes, asthma, and hypertension and also to ongoing enhancements in the company's disease management and wellness programs.

摘要

由于担心员工中糖尿病患病率上升和成本增加,必能宝公司(Pitney Bowes Inc)最近对其药品福利设计进行了改进,以配合其疾病管理和患者教育计划的持续推进。具体而言,基于一个预测模型显示糖尿病患者用药依从性低与后续医疗成本增加有关,该公司将所有糖尿病药物和器械从二级或三级处方状态调整为一级。理由是降低患者自付费用将消除预防保健的经济障碍,从而提高依从性,减少昂贵的并发症,并减缓医疗成本总体上升速度。药品福利设计的这一单一变化立即使大多数必能宝员工及其受保家属能够以10%的共付保险费率获得关键的名牌药物,与非专利药物的共付保险费率相同,而之前的成本分摊为25%至50%。两到三年后,糖尿病计划参与者的初步结果表明,药物持有率显著提高,固定复方药物的使用增加(可能与更容易依从有关),平均药房总成本下降了7%,急诊就诊次数下降了26%。住院率虽然略有上升,但仍低于经人口统计学调整的Medstat基准。每位糖尿病计划参与者的总体直接医疗成本下降了6%。此外,必能宝每位计划参与者的总体健康成本增长速度明显放缓,2003年每位计划参与者的净成本约为每年4000美元,而行业基准为6500美元。近期公司总体健康成本的这种缓和可能与糖尿病、哮喘和高血压药品福利设计的这些战略变化有关,也与公司疾病管理和健康计划的持续改进有关。

相似文献

1
Reducing patient drug acquisition costs can lower diabetes health claims.降低患者药品采购成本可降低糖尿病健康索赔。
Am J Manag Care. 2005 Aug;11(5 Suppl):S170-6.
2
Economic and clinical impact of innovative pharmacy benefit designs in the management of diabetes pharmacotherapy.创新药学福利设计在糖尿病药物治疗管理中的经济和临床影响。
Am J Manag Care. 2007 Apr;13 Suppl 2:S55-8.
3
Costs and utilization associated with pharmaceutical adherence in a diabetic population.糖尿病患者群体中与药物依从性相关的成本和利用率。
Am J Manag Care. 2004 Feb;10(2 Pt 2):144-51.
4
Medication adherence and the associated health-economic impact among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus converting to insulin pen therapy: an analysis of third-party managed care claims data.2型糖尿病患者转换为胰岛素笔治疗后的药物依从性及相关健康经济影响:基于第三方管理式医疗理赔数据的分析
Clin Ther. 2006 Oct;28(10):1712-25; discussion 1710-1. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2006.10.004.
5
Plan designs that encourage the use of generic drugs over brand-name drugs: an analysis of a free generic benefit.鼓励使用通用药物而非品牌药物的计划设计:对免费通用药物福利的分析。
Am J Manag Care. 2009 Dec;15(12):881-8.
6
Effects of benefit design change across 5 disease states.福利设计变更对5种疾病状态的影响。
Am J Manag Care. 2007 Jun;13(6 Pt 2):370-6.
7
Healthcare utilization and costs of patients with rosacea in an insured population.参保人群中酒渣鼻患者的医疗服务利用情况及费用
J Drugs Dermatol. 2008 Jan;7(1):41-9.
8
Formulary: what it is and how it works.
J Healthc Resour Manag. 1996 Sep;14(7):11-3.
9
Economic costs of diabetes in the U.S. In 2007.2007年美国糖尿病的经济成本。
Diabetes Care. 2008 Mar;31(3):596-615. doi: 10.2337/dc08-9017.
10
Prevalence and cost of nonadherence with antiepileptic drugs in an adult managed care population.成人管理式医疗人群中抗癫痫药物治疗不依从的患病率及成本
Epilepsia. 2008 Mar;49(3):446-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2007.01414.x. Epub 2007 Nov 21.

引用本文的文献

1
Barriers and Facilitators in Access to Diabetes, Hypertension, and Dyslipidemia Medicines: A Scoping Review.糖尿病、高血压和血脂异常药物获取的障碍与促进因素:一项范围综述
Public Health Rev. 2022 Sep 2;43:1604796. doi: 10.3389/phrs.2022.1604796. eCollection 2022.
2
Strategic Choice and Implementation of Workplace Wellness Programs in the United States.美国职场健康计划的战略选择与实施
Healthcare (Basel). 2022 Jun 29;10(7):1216. doi: 10.3390/healthcare10071216.
3
Trajectories of prices in generic drug markets: what can we infer from looking at trajectories rather than average prices?
仿制药市场的价格轨迹:从观察价格轨迹而非平均价格中我们能推断出什么?
Health Econ Rev. 2022 Jul 11;12(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s13561-022-00384-w.
4
A cardiovascular disease risk prediction algorithm for use with the Medicare current beneficiary survey.一种用于医疗保险当前受益人大调查的心血管疾病风险预测算法。
Health Serv Res. 2020 Aug;55(4):568-577. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.13290. Epub 2020 Apr 14.
5
Should national pharmacare apply a value-based insurance design?国家药物保险计划是否应采用基于价值的保险设计?
CMAJ. 2019 Jul 22;191(29):E811-E815. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.181721.
6
Time to Filling of New Prescriptions for Chronic Disease Medications Among a Cohort of Elderly Patients in the USA.美国老年患者队列中新开慢性病药物处方的时间。
J Gen Intern Med. 2018 Nov;33(11):1877-1884. doi: 10.1007/s11606-018-4592-6. Epub 2018 Jul 27.
7
The Effects of a Sitagliptin Formulary Restriction Program on Diabetes Medication Use.西他列汀处方限制计划对糖尿病药物使用的影响。
Am Health Drug Benefits. 2017 Dec;10(9):456-462.
8
A randomized controlled trial of negative co-payments: the CHORD trial.负自付费用的随机对照试验:CHORD试验。
Am J Manag Care. 2015 Aug;21(8):e465-73.
9
A randomized controlled trial of co-payment elimination: the CHORD trial.共付额消除的随机对照试验:CHORD试验。
Am J Manag Care. 2015 Aug;21(8):e455-64.
10
The Impact of a Tiered Network on Hospital Choice.分层网络对医院选择的影响。
Health Serv Res. 2015 Oct;50(5):1628-48. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12291. Epub 2015 Mar 9.