• 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

三层药品目录对抗抑郁药使用及费用的影响。

The effect of a three-tier formulary on antidepressant utilization and expenditures.

作者信息

Hodgkin Dominic, Parks Thomas Cindy, Simoni-Wastila Linda, Ritter Grant A, Lee Sue

机构信息

Heller School, Brandeis University, Waltham MA 02454-9110, USA.

出版信息

J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2008 Jun;11(2):67-77.

PMID:18509214
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Health plans in the United States are struggling to contain rapid growth in their spending on medications. They have responded by implementing multi-tiered formularies, which label certain brand medications 'non-preferred' and require higher patient copayments for those medications. This multi-tier policy relies on patients' willingness to switch medications in response to copayment differentials. The antidepressant class has certain characteristics that may pose problems for implementation of three-tier formularies, such as differences in which medication works for which patient, and high rates of medication discontinuation.

AIMS OF THE STUDY

To measure the effect of a three-tier formulary on antidepressant utilization and spending, including decomposing spending allocations between patient and plan.

METHODS

We use claims and eligibility files for a large, mature nonprofit managed care organization that started introducing its three-tier formulary on January 1, 2000, with a staggered implementation across employer groups. The sample includes 109,686 individuals who were continuously enrolled members during the study period. We use a pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design that includes a comparison group, comprising members whose employer had not adopted three-tier as of March 1, 2000. This permits some control for potentially confounding changes that could have coincided with three-tier implementation.

RESULTS

For the antidepressants that became nonpreferred, prescriptions per enrollee decreased 11% in the three-tier group and increased 5% in the comparison group. The own-copay elasticity of demand for nonpreferred drugs can be approximated as -0.11. Difference-in-differences regression finds that the three-tier formulary slowed the growth in the probability of using antidepressants in the post-period, which was 0.3 percentage points lower than it would have been without three-tier. The three-tier formulary also increased out-of-pocket payments while reducing plan payments and total spending.

DISCUSSION

The results indicate that the plan enrollees were somewhat responsive to the changed incentives, shifting away from the drugs that became nonpreferred. However, the intervention also resulted in cost-shifting from plan to enrollees, indicating some price-inelasticity. The reduction in the proportion of enrollees filling any prescriptions contrasts with results of prior studies for non-psychotropic drug classes. Limitations include the possibility of confounding changes coinciding with three-tier implementation (if they affected the two groups differentially); restriction to continuous enrollees; and lack of data on rebates the plan paid to drug manufacturers.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE

The results of this study suggest that the impact of the three-tier formulary approach may be somewhat different for antidepressants than for some other classes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY

Policymakers should monitor the effects of three-tier programs on utilization in psychotropic medication classes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

Future studies should seek to understand the reasons for patients' limited response to the change in incentives, perhaps using physician and/or patient surveys. Studies should also examine the effects of three-tier programs on patient adherence, quality of care, and clinical and economic outcomes.

摘要

背景

美国的医疗保健计划正努力控制药品支出的快速增长。为此,他们实施了多层级药品目录,将某些品牌药物列为“非首选”,并要求患者为这些药物支付更高的自付费用。这种多层级政策依赖于患者根据自付费用差异更换药物的意愿。抗抑郁药物类别具有某些可能给三层级药品目录的实施带来问题的特征,例如不同药物对不同患者的疗效差异以及高停药率。

研究目的

衡量三层级药品目录对抗抑郁药物使用和支出的影响,包括分解患者和计划之间的支出分配。

方法

我们使用了一家大型、成熟的非营利性管理式医疗组织的理赔和资格档案,该组织于2000年1月1日开始引入其三层级药品目录,并在雇主群体中交错实施。样本包括在研究期间持续参保的109,686名个体。我们采用了前后测准实验设计,其中包括一个对照组,该对照组由其雇主截至2000年3月1日尚未采用三层级药品目录的成员组成。这有助于对可能与三层级实施同时发生的潜在混杂变化进行一定程度的控制。

结果

对于那些变为非首选的抗抑郁药物,三层级组中每位参保人的处方量下降了11%,而对照组则增加了5%。非首选药物的自付费用需求弹性约为-0.11。差异-in-差异回归发现,三层级药品目录减缓了后期使用抗抑郁药物概率的增长,比没有三层级目录时低0.3个百分点。三层级药品目录还增加了自付费用,同时减少了计划支付和总支出。

讨论

结果表明,计划参保人对激励措施的变化有一定反应,转向了那些变为非首选的药物。然而,该干预措施也导致了成本从计划向参保人的转移,表明存在一定的价格无弹性。参保人开具任何处方的比例下降与先前针对非精神药物类别的研究结果形成对比。局限性包括可能与三层级实施同时发生的混杂变化(如果它们对两组产生不同影响);仅限于持续参保人;以及缺乏计划向药品制造商支付回扣的数据。

对医疗保健提供和使用的启示

本研究结果表明,三层级药品目录方法对抗抑郁药物的影响可能与其他一些类别有所不同。

对卫生政策的启示

政策制定者应监测三层级计划对精神药物类使用的影响。

对进一步研究的启示

未来的研究应试图了解患者对激励措施变化反应有限的原因,或许可以通过医生和/或患者调查。研究还应考察三层级计划对患者依从性、护理质量以及临床和经济结果的影响。

相似文献

1
The effect of a three-tier formulary on antidepressant utilization and expenditures.三层药品目录对抗抑郁药使用及费用的影响。
J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2008 Jun;11(2):67-77.
2
Impact of 3-tier formularies on drug treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children.三层药品目录对儿童注意力缺陷多动障碍药物治疗的影响。
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005 Apr;62(4):435-41. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.62.4.435.
3
Effect on drug utilization and expenditures of a cost-share change from copayment to coinsurance.从共付额改为 coinsurance 对药物使用和支出的影响
J Manag Care Pharm. 2007 Nov-Dec;13(9):765-77. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2007.13.9.765.
4
The effect of three-tier formulary adoption on medication continuation and spending among elderly retirees.采用三层药品处方集对老年退休人员药物持续使用情况和费用的影响。
Health Serv Res. 2007 Oct;42(5):1926-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2007.00722.x.
5
Employer drug benefit plans and spending on prescription drugs.雇主药物福利计划与处方药支出
JAMA. 2002 Oct 9;288(14):1733-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.288.14.1733.
6
The effect of incentive-based formularies on prescription-drug utilization and spending.基于激励措施的药品处方集对处方药使用及支出的影响。
N Engl J Med. 2003 Dec 4;349(23):2224-32. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa030954.
7
Proton-pump inhibitor utilization associated with the change to nonpreferred formulary status for esomeprazole in the TRICARE formulary.在TRICARE处方集里,质子泵抑制剂的使用与埃索美拉唑变更为非首选处方集状态相关。
J Manag Care Pharm. 2009 Jan-Feb;15(1):42-54. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2009.15.1.42.
8
Management of Newer Antidepressant Medications in U.S. Commercial Health Plans.美国商业健康保险计划中新型抗抑郁药物的管理
J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2015 Dec;18(4):165-73.
9
Web-based survey to assess the perceptions of managed care organization representatives on use of copay subsidy coupons for prescription drugs.基于网络的调查,以评估管理式医疗组织代表对使用处方药共付补贴优惠券的看法。
J Manag Care Pharm. 2013 Oct;19(8):602-8. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2013.19.8.602.
10
Effect of a three-tier prescription copay on pharmaceutical and other medical utilization.三层处方自付费用对药品及其他医疗使用的影响。
Med Care. 2001 Dec;39(12):1293-304. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200112000-00005.

引用本文的文献

1
Written Communication From Pharmacy Benefit Managers: Is It Helpful?来自药品福利管理机构的书面沟通:它有帮助吗?
Cureus. 2023 Dec 11;15(12):e50342. doi: 10.7759/cureus.50342. eCollection 2023 Dec.
2
The pharmaceutical regulation of chronic disease among the U.S. urban poor: an ethnographic study of accountability.美国城市贫困人口慢性病的药物监管:一项关于问责制的人种志研究
Crit Public Health. 2018;28(2):165-176. doi: 10.1080/09581596.2017.1332338. Epub 2017 May 29.
3
Patterns of Antipsychotic Prescribing by Physicians to Young Children.
医生给幼儿开具抗精神病药物的模式。
Psychiatr Serv. 2016 Dec 1;67(12):1307-1314. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201500224. Epub 2016 Jul 15.
4
The introduction of generic risperidone in Medicare Part D.医保处方药计划D部分中通用型利培酮的引入。
Am J Manag Care. 2016 Jan;22(1):41-8.
5
Management of Newer Antidepressant Medications in U.S. Commercial Health Plans.美国商业健康保险计划中新型抗抑郁药物的管理
J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2015 Dec;18(4):165-73.
6
Systematic review on quality control for drug management programs: is quality reported in the literature?药物管理项目质量控制的系统评价:文献中是否报道了质量情况?
BMC Health Serv Res. 2009 Feb 25;9:38. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-9-38.