The experience of rural independent pharmacies with medicare part D: reports from the field.

CONTEXT: The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) created prescription drug coverage for Medicare beneficiaries through a new Part D program, the single largest addition to Medicare since its creation in 1965. Prior to program implementation in January 2006, concerns had been voiced as to how independent pharmacies, which represent a higher proportion of all retail pharmacies in rural areas, would fare under the new program. PURPOSE: This article describes first-hand reports from rural pharmacist-owners about their experiences with Medicare Part D plans in the first 7 months of 2006 in order to gain a more thorough understanding of the challenges faced by rural independent pharmacies as a result of program implementation. METHODS: A semi-structured interview protocol was utilized in telephone interviews with 22 pharmacist-owners of rural independent pharmacies in 10 states. FINDINGS: The rural independent pharmacists interviewed are experiencing major changes in payment, administrative burden, and interaction with patients as a result of the shift of patients into Medicare Part D plans. While administrative burden has greatly increased, payment and clinical interaction have decreased. CONCLUSION: Actions should be considered that would help rural independent pharmacists adjust to the new circumstances of having Medicare patients mirror, for administrative and payment purposes, commercially insured patients. Long-term modification of existing policies and regulations may be necessary to assure reasonable access to pharmaceuticals for rural populations. Further study is needed to determine how best to target these modifications to essential pharmacies.

The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program: a model for competition in rural America?

CONTEXT: The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) created the Medicare Advantage (MA) program, which promotes the entry of private Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) plans into regions that have not previously had Medicare managed care plans. The assumption that a competitive environment will develop is based on experiences in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). PURPOSE: The authors test the hypothesis that the FEHBP has fostered an environment of competing health plans, especially preferred provider organizations (PPOs), in rural areas. METHODS: Data from the US Office of Personnel Management are used to quantify the number of FEHBP-certified plans in each US county and the number of enrollees in each plan. Data from the Area Resource File are used to measure independent variables in multivariate analysis to account for the number of FEHBP-certified health plans competing in each US county. FINDINGS: While 98% of all counties have at least 3 plans with enrollment, in many sparsely populated rural areas, only 1 of the plans is an open-enrollment plan (excludes plans for letter carriers). There is a strong relationship between the number of FEHBP plans and areas with high population counts and high population density. In many counties with low population counts (under 3,000), most PPOs are not contracting with the nearest primary care provider. CONCLUSIONS: The FEHBP is not a perfect predictor of MA plan activity because the MA program does not use the FEHBP approach of certifying regional plans that must offer local access. However, the FEHBP experience indicates that plans are attracted to areas with high population counts and high population density.

Enrollment in FEHBP plans in rural America: what are the implications for Medicare reform?

In places where the competing health plans are unlikely to ever emerge, any policy predicated on assumptions that competing plans will deliver health insurance benefits needs to have a "fallback" option that is guaranteed to work.