• 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

提高药品共付额:对哮喘药物使用和结果的影响。

Increasing pharmaceutical copayments: impact on asthma medication utilization and outcomes.

机构信息

Universit of Colorado, School of Pharmacy, Aurora, CO 80045, USA.

出版信息

Am J Manag Care. 2011 Oct;17(10):703-10.

PMID:22106463
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Unintended consequences may result from changes in pharmacy benefit design. The objective was to determine the impact of increasing patient prescription copayments for guideline recommended, long-term asthma controller (LTC) medications on asthma-related medication use and healthcare services.

STUDY DESIGN

We used 2005 MarketScan healthcare and pharmacy claims data to identify asthma (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] diagnosis code 493.xx) patients aged 12 to 64 years who were continuously enrolled through 2006 with ≥ 1 claim for an asthma medication in 2005. LTCs included: inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) (n = 10,251), ICS plus long-acting beta agonist (COMBO) (n =27,407), and leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA) (n = 20,664).

METHODS

Using multivariable models, we estimated the associations between changes in LTC copayments and LTC consumption and asthma-related outpatient and emergency department (ED) visits.

RESULTS

Patients were dichotomized into ≥ $5 average increase in patient copayments per month of medication supplied (yes/no). The mean annual change (2005-2006) in copayments per month was $13.23 versus -$3.88 (ICS), $11.76 versus -$3.06 (COMBO), and $9.78 versus -$2.06 (LTRA). The ≥ $5 group experienced a significant decline in average annual days of medication supplied of -47.1 days of ICS (95% CI -43.5 to -50.8), -35.3 days of COMBO (-32.4 to -38.2), and -47.5 days of LTRA (-43.2 to -51.7). Among COMBO and LTRA medication users, the ≥ $5 copayment increase was associated with more asthma-related outpatient visits and ED visits compared with the < $5 group.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that even small changes in average copayment for asthma medications can result in significant reductions in medication use and unintended increases in healthcare services.

摘要

目的

药物福利方案的改变可能会产生意想不到的后果。本研究旨在确定增加指南推荐的长期哮喘控制药物(LTC)患者处方共付额对哮喘相关药物使用和医疗服务的影响。

研究设计

我们使用了 2005 年 MarketScan 医疗保健和药房理赔数据,以确定年龄在 12 至 64 岁之间的哮喘(国际疾病分类第 9 版临床修订版[ICD-9-CM]诊断代码 493.xx)患者,这些患者在 2006 年期间持续入组,并且在 2005 年至少有一次哮喘药物理赔。LTC 包括:吸入皮质类固醇(ICS)(n=10251)、ICS 加长效β激动剂(COMBO)(n=27407)和白三烯受体拮抗剂(LTRA)(n=20664)。

方法

使用多变量模型,我们估计了 LTC 共付额变化与 LTC 消费以及哮喘相关门诊和急诊(ED)就诊之间的关联。

结果

患者被分为每月用药供应的患者共付额增加≥$5(是/否)。每月共付额的年平均变化(2005-2006 年)为 ICS 为$13.23 对-$3.88、COMBO 为$11.76 对-$3.06,以及 LTRA 为$9.78 对-$2.06。≥$5 组的平均每年用药供应天数显著减少了 47.1 天 ICS(95%CI 为 43.5 至 50.8)、35.3 天 COMBO(32.4 至 38.2)和 47.5 天 LTRA(43.2 至 51.7)。在 COMBO 和 LTRA 药物使用者中,与<$5 组相比,共付额增加≥$5 与更多的哮喘相关门诊就诊和 ED 就诊相关。

结论

这些发现表明,即使哮喘药物的平均共付额略有增加,也可能导致药物使用量显著减少和医疗服务的意外增加。

相似文献

1
Increasing pharmaceutical copayments: impact on asthma medication utilization and outcomes.提高药品共付额:对哮喘药物使用和结果的影响。
Am J Manag Care. 2011 Oct;17(10):703-10.
2
Association between previous health care use and initiation of inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonist combination therapy among US patients with asthma.美国哮喘患者中既往医疗保健使用与吸入皮质类固醇和长效β2-肾上腺素能激动剂联合治疗起始的相关性。
Clin Ther. 2009 Nov;31(11):2574-83. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.11.007.
3
Appropriate use of inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta(2)-adrenergic agonist combination therapy among asthma patients in a US commercially insured population.美国商业保险人群中哮喘患者吸入性糖皮质激素与长效β2肾上腺素能激动剂联合疗法的合理使用情况
Curr Med Res Opin. 2009 Sep;25(9):2251-8. doi: 10.1185/03007990903155915.
4
Patient characteristics and prescription fill patterns for allergic rhinitis medications, with a focus on montelukast, in a commercially insured population.在商业保险人群中,关注孟鲁司特,观察变应性鼻炎药物的患者特征和处方配药模式。
Clin Ther. 2010 Jun;32(6):1093-102. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2010.06.003.
5
Effects of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination on asthma-related health care resource utilization and costs and adherence in children and adults with asthma.丙酸氟替卡松/沙美特罗联合用药对哮喘儿童和成人哮喘相关医疗资源利用、成本及依从性的影响。
Clin Ther. 2008 Mar;30(3):560-71. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2008.03.011.
6
Ratio of controller to total asthma medications: determinants of the measure.控制器与总哮喘药物的比例:该措施的决定因素。
Am J Manag Care. 2010 Mar;16(3):170-8.
7
Evaluation of risk factors and health outcomes among persons with asthma.哮喘患者的风险因素及健康结局评估
J Asthma. 2009 Apr;46(3):234-7. doi: 10.1080/02770900802627294.
8
Resource utilization in asthma: combined fluticasone propionate/salmeterol compared with inhaled corticosteroids.哮喘中的资源利用:丙酸氟替卡松/沙美特罗联合用药与吸入性糖皮质激素的比较
Curr Med Res Opin. 2007 Feb;23(2):427-34. doi: 10.1185/030079906X167417.
9
Inhaled corticosteroid use and outcomes in pregnancy.孕期吸入性糖皮质激素的使用及其结果
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2005 Sep;95(3):234-8. doi: 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)61219-7.
10
Impact of omalizumab on emergency-department visits, hospitalizations, and corticosteroid use among patients with uncontrolled asthma.奥马珠单抗对未控制哮喘患者急诊就诊、住院和皮质类固醇使用的影响。
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2012 Jul;109(1):59-64. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2012.04.015. Epub 2012 May 12.

引用本文的文献

1
"You Have to Rob Peter to Pay Paul So Your Kid Can Breathe": Using Qualitative Methods to Characterize Trade-Offs and Economic Impact of Asthma Care Costs.“你得抢了彼得的钱来给保罗,这样你的孩子才能呼吸”:使用定性方法描述哮喘护理成本的权衡和经济影响。
Med Care. 2023 Dec 1;61(12 Suppl 2):S95-S103. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001914. Epub 2023 Nov 9.
2
Utilization and Spending With Preventive Drug Lists for Asthma Medications in High-Deductible Health Plans.高自付额健康计划中哮喘药物预防用药清单的使用和支出。
JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Aug 1;6(8):e2331259. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.31259.
3
Impact of removing prescription co-payments on the use of costly health services: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.
取消处方药共付额对昂贵医疗服务使用的影响:一项实用随机对照试验。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Jan 14;23(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-09011-0.
4
Quality standards in respiratory real-life effectiveness research: the REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool (RELEVANT): report from the Respiratory Effectiveness Group-European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Task Force.呼吸领域真实世界有效性研究的质量标准:真实生活证据评估工具(RELEVANT):来自呼吸有效性研究组-欧洲变态反应与临床免疫学会特别工作组的报告
Clin Transl Allergy. 2019 Mar 27;9:20. doi: 10.1186/s13601-019-0255-x. eCollection 2019.
5
Impact of abolishing prescription fees in Scotland on hospital admissions and prescribed medicines: an interrupted time series evaluation.苏格兰取消处方费对住院人数和处方药的影响:一项中断时间序列评估。
BMJ Open. 2018 Dec 18;8(12):e021318. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021318.
6
Novel Type 2 Diabetes Medication Access and Effect of Patient Cost Sharing.新型2型糖尿病药物的可及性及患者费用分担的影响
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2018 Sep;24(9):847-855. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2018.24.9.847.
7
Impact of a Patient Support Program on Patient Adherence to Adalimumab and Direct Medical Costs in Crohn's Disease, Ulcerative Colitis, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psoriasis, Psoriatic Arthritis, and Ankylosing Spondylitis.患者支持计划对克罗恩病、溃疡性结肠炎、类风湿性关节炎、银屑病、银屑病关节炎和强直性脊柱炎患者阿达木单抗依从性和直接医疗费用的影响。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2017 Aug;23(8):859-867. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2017.16272. Epub 2017 Mar 15.
8
Impact of Copayment Changes on Children's Albuterol Inhaler Use and Costs after the Clean Air Act Chlorofluorocarbon Ban.《清洁空气法案含氯氟烃禁令后,自付额变化对儿童沙丁胺醇吸入器使用和费用的影响》。
Health Serv Res. 2018 Feb;53(1):156-174. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12615. Epub 2016 Nov 20.
9
Design, implementation, and first-year outcomes of a value-based drug formulary.基于价值的药品处方集的设计、实施和第一年结果。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015 Apr;21(4):269-75. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.4.269.
10
The use of facemasks to prevent respiratory infection: a literature review in the context of the Health Belief Model.使用口罩预防呼吸道感染:基于健康信念模型的文献综述
Singapore Med J. 2014 Mar;55(3):160-7. doi: 10.11622/smedj.2014037.