Suppr超能文献

支付治疗费用:我们如何负担得起? 探讨解决处方药可负担性问题的政策选择对管理式医疗保健药房利益相关者的影响

Paying for Cures: How Can We Afford It? Managed Care Pharmacy Stakeholder Perceptions of Policy Options to Address Affordability of Prescription Drugs.

机构信息

1 Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, and Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, University of Washington, Seattle.

2 Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, University of Washington, Seattle.

出版信息

J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2017 Oct;23(10):1084-1090. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2017.23.10.1084.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

High-priced medications with curative potential, such as the newer hepatitis C therapies, have contributed to the recent growth in pharmaceutical expenditure. Despite the obvious benefits, health care decision makers are just beginning to grapple with questions of how to value and pay for curative therapies that may feature large upfront cost, followed by health benefits that are reaped over a patient's lifespan. Alternative policy options have been proposed to promote high value and financially sustainable use of these therapies. It is unclear which policy options would be most acceptable to health care payer and biomedical manufacturer stakeholders.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) briefly review pharmaceutical policy options to address health system affordability and (b) assess the acceptability of alternative policy options to health care payers and biomedical manufacturers before and after an Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) continuing pharmacy education (CPE) session.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and Cochran databases for pharmaceutical policy options addressing affordability. With input from a focus group of managed care professionals, we developed CPE session content and an 8-question survey focusing on the most promising policy options. We fielded the survey before and after the CPE session, which occurred as part of the 2016 AMCP Annual Meeting. We first conducted a chi-squared goodness-of-fit test to assess response distributions. Next, we tested how responses differed before and after by using an ordered logit and a multinomial logit to model Likert scale and unordered responses, respectively.

RESULTS

Although risk-sharing payments over time remained the most favorable choice before (37%) and after (35%) the CPE session, this choice was closely followed by HealthCoin after the session, which increased in favorability from 4% to 33% of responses (P = 0.001). About half of the respondents (54%) indicated that legislative change is the most significant barrier to the implementation of any policy.

CONCLUSIONS

As high-cost curative drugs reach the market, managed care stakeholders need information from a balanced education source regarding alternative policies to address affordability. We found that after the AMCP CPE session, risk-sharing payments over time and HealthCoin were the most favorable options.

DISCLOSURES

No funding was provided for this research. Carlson reports consulting fees from Genentech, Pfizer, and Seattle Genetics. The other authors have nothing to disclose. Study concept and design were contributed by Yeung, Garrison, and Carlson. Yeung collected the data, which were interpreted by Yeung and Basu. The manuscript was written by Yeung, Suh, and Bansal and revised by Yeung. A portion of this research was presented at the Academy of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting as a continuing education session entitled "Paying for Cures: How Can We Afford It?" on April 20, 2016, in San Francisco, California.

摘要

背景

具有治疗潜力的高价药物,如新型丙型肝炎治疗药物,导致了药品支出的最近增长。尽管有明显的益处,但医疗保健决策者才刚刚开始着手解决如何为可能具有前期高额成本,随后在患者的生命周期内带来健康效益的治疗方法进行估值和支付的问题。已经提出了替代政策选择,以促进这些治疗方法的高价值和经济上可持续的使用。尚不清楚哪种政策选择最能被医疗保健支付方和生物医学制造商利益相关者接受。

目的

(a)简要回顾解决医疗系统负担能力的药品政策选择,以及(b)在接受管理式医疗药剂师协会(AMCP)继续教育(CPE)课程前后评估替代政策选择对医疗保健支付方和生物医学制造商的可接受性。

方法

我们在 MEDLINE 和 Cochrane 数据库中搜索解决负担能力的药品政策选择。在管理式医疗专业人员焦点小组的帮助下,我们开发了 CPE 课程内容和 8 个问题调查,重点关注最有前途的政策选择。我们在 CPE 课程前后进行了调查,该课程是 2016 年 AMCP 年会的一部分。我们首先进行了卡方拟合优度检验,以评估响应分布。接下来,我们使用有序逻辑回归和多项逻辑回归分别对 Likert 量表和无序响应进行建模,以测试响应在 CPE 课程前后的差异。

结果

尽管风险分担支付随着时间的推移仍然是 CPE 课程前后(分别为 37%和 35%)最受欢迎的选择,但在此之后,HealthCoin 的选择更为有利,从 4%增加到 33%(P=0.001)。大约一半的受访者(54%)表示,立法变更对任何政策的实施都是最大的障碍。

结论

随着高成本的治疗性药物进入市场,管理式医疗利益相关者需要从平衡的教育资源中获得有关解决负担能力的替代政策的信息。我们发现,在 AMCP CPE 课程之后,随着时间的推移进行风险分担支付和 HealthCoin 是最受欢迎的选择。

披露

本研究没有资金支持。Carlson 报告了与 Genentech、Pfizer 和 Seattle Genetics 的咨询费。其他作者没有任何披露。Yeung、Garrison 和 Carlson 为研究提供了概念和设计。Yeung 收集了数据,由 Yeung 和 Basu 进行了解释。手稿由 Yeung、Suh 和 Bansal 撰写,并由 Yeung 进行了修订。该研究的一部分作为题为“为治疗买单:我们如何负担得起?”的继续教育课程,于 2016 年 4 月 20 日在加利福尼亚州旧金山举行的管理式医疗和专科药房年度会议上提出。

相似文献

9
Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements: U.S. Payer Experience.基于绩效的风险分担安排:美国支付方的经验。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2017 Oct;23(10):1042-1052. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2017.23.10.1042.

本文引用的文献

1
Financing a Cure for Diabetes in a Multipayer Environment.在多支付方环境下为糖尿病治疗筹集资金。
Value Health. 2016 Sep-Oct;19(6):861-868. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.03.1859. Epub 2016 May 11.
6
Improving Price Transparency in Cancer Care.提高癌症治疗的价格透明度。
J Oncol Pract. 2016 Jan;12(1):44-7. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2015.006171.
7
Measuring the Value of Prescription Drugs.衡量处方药的价值。
N Engl J Med. 2015 Dec 31;373(27):2595-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1512009. Epub 2015 Nov 18.
9
Payment reform is about to become a reality.支付改革即将成为现实。
JAMA. 2015 Apr 28;313(16):1606-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.1926.

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