与填充 3 个月的处方药供应相关的成本节约。

Cost savings associated with filling a 3-month supply of prescription medicines.

机构信息

Center for Health and Social Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

出版信息

Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2009;7(4):255-64. doi: 10.1007/BF03256159.

DOI:10.1007/BF03256159

PMID:19905039

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Many patients are burdened by prescription costs, and patients, providers and policy makers may attempt to reduce these costs by substituting 3-month for 1-month supplies of medicines.

OBJECTIVES

To measure the difference in out-of-pocket and total costs among patients receiving different quantities of the same prescription drug used to treat a chronic condition, and to examine patient and health system characteristics associated with the use of a 3-month supply.

METHODS

Data were pooled from the 2000-5 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a nationally representative survey of the US non-institutionalized civilian population, to compare prescription drug expenditures for medicines dispensed as both 3-month and 1-month supplies. Logistic regression was used to model correlates associated with 3-month use. The main outcome measures were the mean monthly out-of-pocket and total costs expressed in year 2005 values.

RESULTS

Forty-four percent of prescriptions examined were dispensed as 3-month supplies. The average (95% CI) monthly total and out-of-pocket costs for a 1-month supply were $US42.72 (42.01, 43.42) and $US20.44 (19.99, 20.89), respectively, while the corresponding monthly costs for a 3-month supply were $US37.95 (37.26, 38.64) and $US15.10 (14.68, 15.53). After adjustment for potential confounders, this represented a 29% decrease in out-of-pocket costs and an 18% decrease in total prescription costs through the use of a 3-month rather than a 1-month supply. Eighty percent of patients achieved some cost savings from a 3-month supply and there was considerable variation in the amount saved. There were no marked differences in the characteristics of individuals using 3-month versus 1-month supplies.

CONCLUSIONS

Although such opportunities are not universally available, these findings quantify the cost savings that patients in the US can achieve through filling larger quantities of a prescription for a chronic condition.

摘要

背景

许多患者都受到处方费用的困扰，患者、医疗服务提供者和决策者可能会试图通过将药品的供应从一个月改为三个月来降低这些费用。

目的

测量接受相同慢性病处方药的不同剂量的患者的自付费用和总费用的差异，并考察与使用三个月供应量相关的患者和医疗系统特征。

方法

数据来自 2000-2005 年医疗支出面板调查，这是一项针对美国非机构化平民人口的全国代表性调查，用于比较以三个月和一个月供应量配药的药品的药物支出。使用逻辑回归模型来对与三个月使用相关的关联因素进行建模。主要结果指标是用 2005 年的价值表示的每月自付和总费用的平均值。

结果

44%的处方以三个月的供应量开出。一个月供应量的平均（95%置信区间）每月总费用和自付费用分别为$42.72（42.01，43.42）和$20.44（19.99，20.89），而三个月供应量的相应每月费用分别为$37.95（37.26，38.64）和$15.10（14.68，15.53）。在调整了潜在混杂因素后，通过使用三个月而非一个月的供应量，自付费用降低了 29%，总处方费用降低了 18%。80%的患者通过使用三个月的供应量节省了一些费用，而且节省的金额差异很大。使用三个月和一个月供应量的患者在特征上没有明显差异。