Racial and ethnic disparities related to the Medicare Part D Medication Therapy Management Program.

Medicare's Part D Medication Therapy Management (MTM) programs serve approximately 4.5 million eligible beneficiaries. Prior research suggested that the thresholds to enter Part D MTM programs would disproportionately favor White beneficiaries compared with Black or Hispanic beneficiaries. This article summarizes those initial studies and compares the results with more recent analyses of racial and ethnic differences in MTM program enrollment, which, in general, show higher odds of MTM enrollment for minority beneficiaries compared with White beneficiaries. Disparities in the utilization of comprehensive medication review (CMR), a core MTM service, are also discussed. Although trends vary, disparities exist for various minority groups. For example, Black beneficiaries and Hispanic beneficiaries are less likely to be offered a CMR compared with White beneficiaries. Additionally, minority (Asian, Hispanic, and North American Native) beneficiaries are less likely to receive a CMR after being offered the service compared with White beneficiaries. Black, Hispanic, and Asian beneficiaries are more likely than White beneficiaries to have a longer duration between MTM enrollment and CMR offer. There is also a distinct difference in the type of pharmacist (ie, plan pharmacist, MTM vendor pharmacist, or community pharmacist) completing the CMR for certain racial and ethnic groups. For example, compared with White beneficiaries, Black beneficiaries were less likely to receive a CMR from a community pharmacist, whereas Asian beneficiaries were more likely.

Benefit Design And Biosimilar Coverage In Medicare Part D: Evidence And Implications From Recent Reforms.

There is substantial disparity between Medicare Part D and employer-sponsored health insurance plans in the coverage of biosimilars and their reference biologics. These disparities may be due to design elements of Part D plans that encourage the adoption of more expensive biologic drugs. We undertook several analyses to illustrate the dynamics of benefit design incentives over time, compare formulary coverage in Part D plans with that of employer-sponsored plans, and study how the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 affected Part D formulary coverage. Using these analyses of Part D reforms enacted through the Bipartisan Budget Act, we discuss the implications of elements of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 that will be implemented in 2025. Biosimilar coverage increased by 23 percentage points five quarters after the Bipartisan Budget Act was implemented. We predict that the Inflation Reduction Act will also have a positive effect on biosimilar coverage. Given ample evidence of a relationship between drug coverage and utilization, our results suggest that Medicare patients and the federal government could realize substantial savings if Part D formularies resembled those of employer-sponsored plans.

Role of Specialty Drugs in Rising Drug Prices for Medicare Part D.

Importance: Prices for brand-name drugs affect both federal spending and out-of-pocket liability for Medicare Part D enrollees. Objective: To examine how prices for brand-name drugs, net of rebates and discounts, have changed from 2010 to 2019 and to examine the role of specialty drugs in those changes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study involved a descriptive analysis of prescription drug spending and prices between 2010 and 2019. The universe of prescription drug event data from those years were combined with confidential data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services on rebates and discounts that manufacturers and pharmacies pay to Medicare Part D plans to calculate rebate percentages, net spending, and net prices at the drug level. Specialty drugs were identified using information from IQVIA, allowing for a stratified analysis by specialty status. Data were analyzed from March 2019 to March 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Average prices (net of rebates and discounts in 2019 US dollars) and average annual price growth for brand-name prescription drugs, overall and separately for specialty and nonspecialty drugs. Results: Average net prices for brand-name drugs doubled from 2010 to 2019 (from $167 to $370). Growth in specialty drug prices was an underlying factor in those increases: average annual price growth was 13.2% for specialty drugs compared with 2.6% for nonspecialty drugs. Price growth for specialty drugs over the decade was smaller than what the Congressional Budget Office reported for the 2010 to 2015 period (increase of 22.3% per year vs 4.5% per year for nonspecialty drug prices), suggesting that price growth slowed after 2015. Drugs that treat hepatitis C contributed to that difference because prices for those drugs were initially high and then subsequently fell. Absent those drugs, price growth for specialty drugs averaged 18.1% in the first half of the decade and 6.9% in the second half. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study show that prices for specialty drugs have continued to increase over time in the Medicare Part D program, which contributes to high out-of-pocket liability for users of those drugs in addition to US federal budgetary expenditures.

Comprehensive Medication Review Completion Rates and Disparities After Medicare Star Rating Measure.

Importance: Comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) are offered to qualifying US Medicare beneficiaries annually to optimize medication regimens and therapeutic outcomes. In 2016, Medicare adopted CMR completion as a Star Rating quality measure to encourage the use of CMRs. Objective: To examine trends in CMR completion rates before and after 2016 and whether racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in CMR completion changed. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational study using interrupted time-series analysis examined 2013 to 2020 annual cohorts of community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries aged 66 years and older eligible for a CMR as determined by Part D plans and by objective minimum eligibility criteria. Data analysis was conducted from September 2022 to February 2024. Exposure: Adoption of CMR completion as a Star Rating quality measure in 2016. Main Outcome and Measures: CMR completion modeled via generalized estimating equations. Results: The study included a total of 561 950 eligible beneficiaries, with 253 561 in the 2013 to 2015 cohort (median [IQR] age, 75.8 [70.7-82.1] years; 90 778 male [35.8%]; 6795 Asian [2.7%]; 24 425 Black [9.6%]; 7674 Hispanic [3.0%]; 208 621 White [82.3%]) and 308 389 in the 2016 to 2020 cohort (median [IQR] age, 75.1 [70.4-80.9] years; 126 730 male [41.1%]; 8922 Asian [2.9%]; 27 915 Black [9.1%]; 7635 Hispanic [2.5%]; 252 781 White [82.0%]). The unadjusted CMR completion rate increased from 10.2% (7379 of 72 225 individuals) in 2013 to 15.6% (14 185 of 90 847 individuals) in 2015 and increased further to 35.8% (18 376 of 51 386 individuals) in 2020, in part because the population deemed by Part D plans to be MTM-eligible decreased by nearly half after 2015 (90 487 individuals in 2015 to 51 386 individuals in 2020). Among a simulated cohort based on Medicare minimum eligibility thresholds, the unadjusted CMR completion rate increased but to a lesser extent, from 4.4% in 2013 to 12.6% in 2020. Compared with White beneficiaries, Asian and Hispanic beneficiaries experienced greater increases in likelihood of CMR completion after 2016 but remained less likely to complete a CMR. Dual-Medicaid enrollees also experienced greater increases in likelihood of CMR completion as compared with those without either designation, but still remained less likely to complete CMR. Conclusion and Relevance: This study found that adoption of CMR completion as a Star Rating quality measure was associated with higher CMR completion rates. The increase in CMR completion rates was achieved partly because Part D plans used stricter eligibility criteria to define eligible patients. Reductions in disparities for eligible Asian, Hispanic, and dual-Medicaid enrollees were seen, but not eliminated. These findings suggest that quality measures can inform plan behavior and could be used to help address disparities.

Medicaid Eligibility Loss Among Dual-Eligible Beneficiaries Before and During COVID-19 Public Health Emergency.

Importance: Medicaid coverage loss can substantially compromise access to and affordability of health care for dual-eligible beneficiaries. The extent to which this population lost Medicaid coverage before and during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) and the characteristics of beneficiaries more at risk for coverage loss are currently not well known. Objective: To assess the loss of Medicaid coverage among dual-eligible beneficiaries before and during the first year of the PHE, and to examine beneficiary-level and plan-level factors associated with heightened likelihood of losing Medicaid. Design, Setting, and Participants: This repeated cross-sectional study used national Medicare data to estimate annual rates of Medicaid loss among dual-eligible beneficiaries before (2015 to 2019) and during the PHE (2020). Individuals who were dual eligible for Medicare and Medicaid at the beginning of a given year and who continuously received low-income subsidies for Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage were included in the sample. Multivariable regression models were used to examine beneficiary-level and plan-level factors associated with Medicaid loss. Data analyses were conducted between March 2023 and October 2023. Exposure: Onset of PHE. Main Outcomes and Measures: Loss of Medicaid for at least 1 month within a year. Results: Sample included 56 172 736 dual-eligible beneficiary-years between 2015 and 2020. In 2020, most dual-eligible beneficiaries were aged over 65 years (5 984 420 [61.1%]), female (5 868 866 [59.9%]), non-Hispanic White (4 928 035 [50.3%]), full-benefit eligible (6 837 815 [69.8%]), and enrolled in traditional Medicare (5 343 537 [54.6%]). The adjusted proportion of dual-eligible beneficiaries losing Medicaid for at least 1 month increased from 6.6% in 2015 to 7.3% in 2019 and then dropped to 2.3% in 2020. Between 2015 and 2019, dual-eligible beneficiaries who were older (ages 55-64 years: -1.4%; 95% CI, -1.8% to -1.0%; ages 65-74 years: -2.0%; 95% CI, -2.5% to -1.5%; ages 75 and older: -4.5%; 95% CI, -5.0% to -4.0%), disabled (-0.8%; 95% CI, -1.1% to -0.6%), and in integrated care programs were less likely to lose Medicaid. In 2020, the disparities within each of these demographic groups narrowed significantly. Notably, while Black (0.6%; 95% CI, 0.2% to 0.9%) and Hispanic (0.7%; 95% CI, 0.3% to 1.2%) dual-eligible beneficiaries were more likely to lose Medicaid than their non-Hispanic White counterparts between 2015 and 2019, such gap was eliminated for Black beneficiaries and narrowed for Hispanic beneficiaries in 2020. Conclusions and Relevance: During the PHE, Medicaid coverage loss declined significantly among dual-eligible beneficiaries, and disparities were mitigated across subgroups. As the PHE unwinds, it is crucial for policymakers to implement strategies to minimize Medicaid coverage disruptions and racial and ethnic disparities, especially given that loss of Medicaid was slightly increasing over time before the PHE.

Online Tools to Decrease Out-of-Pocket Prescription Costs for Patients: A Practical Guide for Urologists.

INTRODUCTION: Patients who seek urologic care have recently reported a high degree of financial toxicity from prescription medications, including management for nephrolithiasis, urinary incontinence, and urological oncology. Estimating out-of-pocket costs can be challenging for urologists in the US because of variable insurance coverage, local pharmacy distributions, and complicated prescription pricing schemes. This article discusses resources that urologists can adopt into their practice and share with patients to help lower out-of-pocket spending for prescription medications. METHODS: We identify 4 online tools that are designed to direct patients toward more affordable prescription medication options: the Medicare Part D Plan Finder, GoodRx, Amazon, and the Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company. A brief historical overview and summary for patients and clinicians are provided for each online resource. A patient-centered framework is provided to help navigate these 4 available tools in clinic. RESULTS: Among the 4 tools we identify, there are multiples tradeoffs to consider as financial savings and features can vary. First, patients insured by Medicare should explore the Part D Plan Finder each year to compare drug plans. Second, patients who need to urgently refill a prescription at a local pharmacy should visit GoodRx. Third, patients who are prescribed recurrent generic prescriptions for chronic conditions can utilize the Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company. Finally, patients who are prescribed 3 or more chronic medications can benefit from subscribing to Amazon RxPass. CONCLUSIONS: Prescription medications for urologic conditions can be expensive. This article includes 4 online resources that can help patients access medications at their most affordable costs. Urologists can provide this framework to their patients to help support lowering out-of-pocket drug costs.

Assessing the Trends of Tramadol Utilization in the Medicare Part D Population in Rhode Island.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the trends in tramadol dispensing among Medicare Part D patients in Rhode Island. METHODS: An analysis was conducted of the Medicare Part D Provider Utilization and Payment Data Public Use File for the years 2013-2021. Chi squared tests were conducted to assess statistical significance of annual changes in proportions. RESULTS: Following tramadol becoming a controlled substance in 2014, the number of dispensed tramadol prescriptions and patients with a tramadol prescription decreased every subsequent year through 2021 (prescriptions: 42,157 to 33,026; patients: 12,654 to 9,653). The percentage of opioid prescriptions that were tramadol increased from 16.32% in 2013 to 21.19% in 2020. CONCLUSION: Tramadol utilization has been decreasing among the Medicare Part D population in Rhode Island while the percentage of opioid dispensings that were tramadol have been increasing. Future studies are needed to assess whether patients utilizing tramadol are at a higher risk for adverse outcomes.

The association between polypharmacy and health-related quality of life among older adults with prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults with prostate cancer (PC) are at risk of polypharmacy, which further complicates disease management and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study evaluated the association between polypharmacy and HRQoL among Medicare beneficiaries with PC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This observational, retrospective study analyzed data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Medicare Health Outcomes Survey (MHOS) data resource. Beneficiaries aged ≥65 and enrolled in Medicare Advantage Organizations were included if they had a PC diagnosis and continuously enrolled in Part D for 12 months prior to the completion of MHOS. Polypharmacy was determined based on the unique number of concurrent Part D prescriptions during 12 months before survey: no polypharmacy (NP, n = 0-4), polypharmacy (PP, n = 5-9), and excessive polypharmacy (EPP, n ≥ 10). HRQoL was assessed using the Physical and Mental Component Summary T-scores (PCS and MCS, respectively) in MHOS. ANOVA and Pearson's Chi-Square tests were performed to assess variances between polypharmacy and continuous/categorical variables. Multivariate linear regression models with generalized estimating equations were used to assess the association between polypharmacy and HRQoL. The severely impaired HRQoL cohort was identified based on normalized z-scores of PCS and MCS. Odds ratios were calculated to prioritize drug-drug and class-class pairs associated with patients with severely impaired HRQoL. RESULTS: Data from 16,573 beneficiaries (24,126 records) showed that 44.4% had PP and 10.1% had EPP. Beneficiaries with PP and EPP had significantly lower mean PCS and MCS scores compared to those without polypharmacy (p < 0.001). After adjusting for covariates, beneficiaries with EPP had clinically significantly lower PCS (adjusted marginal difference: -8.47 [-9.00, -7.94]) and MCS (adjusted marginal difference: -4.32 [-4.89, -3.75]) compared to the NP group. Top-ranked drug-drug pairs like tiotropium bromide and oxycodone/acetaminophen exhibited significant associations with HRQoL decline. Analysis of class-class pairs highlighted (1) corticosteroid hormone receptor agonists and opioid agonists and (2) benzodiazepines and adrenergic beta2-agonists as having significant associations with HRQoL decline. DISCUSSION: Polypharmacy exhibits a significant association with HRQoL declines among older adults with PC.

Medicare Part D Plans Greatly Increased Utilization Restrictions On Prescription Drugs, 2011-20.

Drug utilization management tools can be employed to ensure that medicines are prescribed cost-effectively, but they can also be implemented in ways that reduce adherence and harm patient health. We examined trends in the prevalence of utilization restrictions on non-protected-class compounds in Medicare Part D plans during the period 2011-20, including prior authorization and step therapy requirements as well as formulary exclusions. Part D plans became significantly more restrictive over time, rising from an average of 31.9 percent of compounds restricted in 2011 to 44.4 percent restricted in 2020. The prevalence of formulary exclusions grew particularly fast: By 2020, plan formularies excluded an average of 44.7 percent of brand-name-only compounds. Formulary restrictions were more common among brand-name-only compared with generic-available compounds, among more expensive compounds, and in stand-alone compared with Medicare Advantage prescription drug plans.

Evaluation of Potential Urologic Prescription Drug Savings With Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company.

INTRODUCTION: Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company (MCCPDC) launched in 2022 with a goal to decrease prescription drug costs. Thus far, research has focused on possible savings if Medicare purchased its annual volume of drugs at MCCPDC prices. The aim of this study is to analyze if MCCPDC can offer savings directly to urologic patients compared with other mail-order pharmacies, local pharmacies, and with patients using health insurance. METHODS: Twelve drugs used to treat urological diseases available on MCCPDC were analyzed. Pricing data of 30-tab and 90-tab prescriptions from MCCPDC, other mail-order pharmacies, and local in-person pharmacies near our zip code 40508 (Lexington, Kentucky) were compiled. To compare if MCCPDC could offer savings to patients using health insurance to fill their prescriptions, out-of-pocket drug costs for patients from the 2020 and 2021 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and the 2021 Medicare Part D spending data were extracted. RESULTS: Greater savings at MCCPDC were found at 90-tab prescriptions, but overall variability in prices existed. When comparing without health insurance, 9 of 12 drugs at MCCPDC were cheaper at 90 tabs with solifenacin and tadalafil saving $20 and $12 per prescription. When considering patients using insurance, abiraterone, sildenafil, and tadalafil offered savings on out-of-pocket costs at 30- and 90-tab prescriptions. CONCLUSIONS: MCCPDC may offer cheaper prices for patients filling urologic medications, especially at 90-tab prescriptions. This study is the first to show patients could save money using MCCPDC and has implications for physician counseling when prescribing common urologic drugs.

Medicare Part D low-income subsidies expanded in January 2024, but more needs to be done to ensure that eligible beneficiaries enroll.

BACKGROUND: The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 extended full low-income subsidies (LIS) to a small group of Medicare Part D recipients with limited assets and incomes between 135% and 150% of the Federal Poverty Level beginning in January 2024. This policy may result in small enrollment gains among beneficiaries eligible for the new benefits, but the biggest problem with the current LIS program is underenrollment across all eligibility groups. Prior research has shown that underenrollment has been a persistent problem since the LIS program began in 2006, yet little has been done to correct the situation. OBJECTIVE: To identify individual-level factors associated with failure to enroll among low-income beneficiaries eligible for both full subsidies and partial subsidies under the LIS program. METHODS: We used 2019 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey data for the study. The Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey is uniquely suited for this work because it contains administrative data on LIS enrollment plus extensive survey information on financial resources necessary to establish program eligibility. We conducted descriptive and multivariate analyses to identify factors associated with failure to enroll when eligible for either full or partial subsidies. Explanatory variables included sociodemographic characteristics, economic resources, work status, health variables, and source of prescription coverage (for nonsubsidized beneficiaries). RESULTS: In 2019, 73% of beneficiaries eligible for full subsidies under pre-Inflation Reduction Act LIS provisions were enrolled, compared with only 25% eligible for partial subsidies. The number of those estimated to be eligible for full subsidies but not enrolled (N = 3.9 million) was more than double that of those eligible but not enrolled for partial subsidies (N = 1.5 million). Factors associated with failure to enroll (older age, male sex, White race, married, higher education, higher income and assets, and excellent/very good health status) were similar for both groups. In multivariate analyses, the single strongest predictor of failure to enroll was receipt of income from work (odds ratio = 5.50; P < 0.001). Among the nonenrolled, 64% eligible for full subsidies and 75% eligible for partial subsidies maintained unsubsidized Part D coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Significant numbers of low-income Medicare beneficiaries are eligible for Part D subsidies but fail to enroll. Common characteristics distinguishing nonenrollees from enrollees include older age with higher proportions of White individuals, married individuals, higher income and assets, and better overall health. Two promising targets for increasing LIS enrollment are evidence of work income and unsubsidized Part D coverage.

Nationwide, County-Level Analysis of the Patterns, Trends, and System-Level Predictors of Opioid Prescribing in Surgery in the US: Social Determinants and Access to Mental Health Services Matter.

BACKGROUND: The diversion of unused opioid prescription pills to the community at large contributes to the opioid epidemic in the US. In this county-level population-based study, we aimed to examine the US surgeons' opioid prescription patterns, trends, and system-level predictors in the peak years of the opioid epidemic. STUDY DESIGN: Using the Medicare Part D database (2013 to 2017), the mean number of opioid prescriptions per beneficiary (OPBs) was determined for each US county. Opioid-prescribing patterns were compared across counties. Multivariable linear regression was performed to determine relationships between county-level social determinants of health (demographic, eg median age and education level; socioeconomic, eg median income; population health status, eg percentage of current smokers; healthcare quality, eg rate of preventable hospital stays; and healthcare access, eg healthcare costs) and OPBs. RESULTS: Opioid prescription data were available for 1,969 of 3,006 (65.5%) US counties, and opioid-related deaths were recorded in 1,384 of 3,006 counties (46%). Nationwide, the mean OPBs decreased from 1.08 ± 0.61 in 2013 to 0.87 ± 0.55 in 2017; 81.6% of the counties showed the decreasing trend. County-level multivariable analyses showed that lower median population age, higher percentages of bachelor's degree holders, higher percentages of adults reporting insufficient sleep, higher healthcare costs, fewer mental health providers, and higher percentages of uninsured adults are associated with higher OPBs. CONCLUSIONS: Opioid prescribing by surgeons decreased between 2013 and 2017. A county's suboptimal access to healthcare in general and mental health services in specific may be associated with more opioid prescribing after surgery.

Associations Between Annual Medicare Part D Low-Income Subsidy Loss and Prescription Drug Spending and Use.

Importance: The Medicare Part D Low Income Subsidy (LIS) program provides millions of beneficiaries with drug plan premium and cost-sharing assistance. The extent to which LIS recipients experience subsidy losses with annual redetermination cycles and the resulting associations with prescription drug affordability and use are unknown. Objective: To examine how frequently annual LIS benefits are lost among Medicare Part D beneficiaries and how this is associated with prescription drug use and out-of-pocket costs. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study of Medicare Part D beneficiaries from 2007 to 2018, annual changes in LIS recipients among those automatically deemed eligible (eg, due to dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid) and nondeemed beneficiaries who must apply for LIS benefits were analyzed using Medicare enrollment and Part D event data. Subsidy losses were classified in 4 groups: temporary losses (<1 year); extended losses (≥1 year); subsidy reductions (change to partial LIS); and disenrollment from Medicare Part D after subsidy loss. Temporary losses could more likely represent subsidy losses among eligible beneficiaries. Multinomial logit models were used to examine associations between beneficiary characteristics and subsidy loss; linear regression models were used to compare changes in prescription drug cost and use in the months after subsidy losses vs before. Analyses were conducted between November 2022 and November 2023. Exposure: Subsidy loss at the beginning of each year among subsidy recipients in December of the prior year. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were out-of-pocket costs and prescription drug fills overall and for 4 classes: antidiabetes, antilipid, antidepressant, and antipsychotic drugs. Results: In 2008, 731 070 full LIS beneficiaries (17%) were not deemed automatically eligible (39% were aged <65 years; 59% were female). Nearly all beneficiaries deemed automatically eligible (≥99%) retained the subsidy annually from 2007 to 2018, compared with 78% to 84% of nondeemed beneficiaries. Among nondeemed beneficiaries, disabled individuals younger than 65 years and racial and ethnic minority groups were more likely to have temporary subsidy losses vs none. Temporary losses were associated with an average 700% increase in out-of-pocket drug costs (+$52.72/mo [95% CI, 52.52-52.92]) and 15% reductions in prescription fills (-0.58 fills/mo [95% CI, -0.59 to -0.57]) overall. Similar changes were found for antidiabetes, antilipid, antidepressant, and antipsychotic prescription drug classes. Beneficiaries who retained their subsidy had few changes. Conclusions and Relevance: The conclusions of this cohort study suggest that efforts to help eligible beneficiaries retain Medicare Part D subsidies could improve drug affordability, treatment adherence, and reduce disparities in medication access.

Medicare Part D Coverage of Drugs Selected for the Drug Price Negotiation Program.

This cross-sectional study describes and historically benchmarks Medicare Part D coverage in 2019 and 2023 for the first 10 drugs selected for negotiation.

Association of Economic Policies With Hypertension Management and Control: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Economic policies have the potential to impact management and control of hypertension. Objectives: To review the evidence on the association between economic policies and hypertension management and control among adults with hypertension in the US. Evidence Review: A search was carried out of PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EconLit, Sociological Abstracts, and Scopus from January 1, 2000, through November 1, 2023. Included were randomized clinical trials, difference-in-differences, and interrupted time series studies that evaluated the association of economic policies with hypertension management. Economic policies were grouped into 3 categories: insurance coverage expansion such as Medicaid expansion, cost sharing in health care such as increased drug copayments, and financial incentives for quality such as pay-for-performance. Antihypertensive treatment was measured as taking antihypertensive medications or medication adherence among those who have a hypertension diagnosis; and hypertension control, measured as blood pressure (BP) lower than  140/90 mm Hg or a reduction in BP. Evidence was extracted and synthesized through dual review of titles, abstracts, full-text articles, study quality, and policy effects. Findings: In total, 31 articles were included. None of the studies examined economic policies outside of the health care system. Of these, 16 (52%) assessed policies for insurance coverage expansion, 8 (26%) evaluated policies related to patient cost sharing for prescription drugs, and 7 (22%) evaluated financial incentive programs for improving health care quality. Of the 16 studies that evaluated coverage expansion policies, all but 1 found that policies such as Medicare Part D and Medicaid expansion were associated with significant improvement in antihypertensive treatment and BP control. Among the 8 studies that examined patient cost sharing, 4 found that measures such as prior authorization and increased copayments were associated with decreased adherence to antihypertensive medication. Finally, all 7 studies evaluating financial incentives aimed at improving quality found that they were associated with improved antihypertensive treatment and BP control. Overall, most studies had a moderate or low risk of bias in their policy evaluation. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this systematic review suggest that economic policies aimed at expanding insurance coverage or improving health care quality successfully improved medication use and BP control among US adults with hypertension. Future research is needed to investigate the potential effects of non-health care economic policies on hypertension control.

Opioid Prescribing by Emergency Physicians: Trends Study of Medicare Part D Prescriber Data 2013-2019.

BACKGROUND: Emergency physicians play a critical role in mitigating the opioid epidemic in public health. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the prescribing of emergency physicians for opioids among Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in the Part D program from 2013 to 2019. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional, descriptive analysis of Medicare Part D prescriber data, focusing on opioid claims between 2013 and 2019. The primary outcome variables evaluated included proportion of opioid claims, trends of the most prescribed opioids, cost of opioid claims, and days' supply per claim. RESULTS: A total of 63,586 emergency physicians were identified over the study period. Opioid prescription by emergency physicians decreased from 14.45% to 11.55%, and the cost spent on opioid drugs declined by 50%. The use of drugs such as hydrocodone-acetaminophen and oxycodone-acetaminophen declined substantially, whereas tramadol and acetaminophen-codeine prescription increased. The opioid prescribing rate and days' supply also decreased. CONCLUSIONS: The decline in traditional opioid agents such as hydrocodone-acetaminophen was partly offset by an increase in opioids like tramadol, which carry additional potential adverse events. Opioid prescribing rate, average days' supply, and cost of opioid drugs significantly decreased from 2015 to 2019, after a spike in 2015. All regions observed a decrease in emergency physicians, but opioid prescribing rates varied across regions. These trends highlight successful opioid stewardship practices in some areas and the need for further development in others. This information can aid in designing tailored guidelines and policies for emergency physicians to promote effective opioid stewardship practices.

A summit on amplifying voices of patients, caregivers, and people with disabilities in Inflation Reduction Act drug price negotiations.

On September 18, 2023, Cancer Support Community convened patient and caregiver advocates, health care providers, policy experts, and health care innovators and thought leaders for a roundtable discussion on the need to ensure that patients, people with disabilities, and caregivers have a voice in defining "clinical benefit" for the purpose of Medicare Part D drug price negotiations and future health care policies that impact patients. The meeting featured presentations from Lara Strawbridge, Deputy Director for Policy at the Medicare Drug Rebate and Negotiations Group in the Center for Medicare, regulatory expert, Dr Monique Nolan, Counsel at Arnold and Porter, LLP, and 3 panel discussions: IRA Implementation-What Matters to Patients, a discussion of policies expected to impact patients and caregivers who are likely to rely heavily on high-cost drugs or biologics to treat cancer or other chronic illnesses, as well as the future development of novel therapies; The Science of Measuring Patient Experience, a discussion of current science of measuring patient experience and how it should be incorporated into the definition of clinical benefit; and Developing an Infrastructure for External Feedback, a discussion of actions and goals for patient engagement, advocacy opportunities, and how to best coordinate such efforts. This article represents an analysis of relevant resources as well as highlights from these sessions and subsequent discussions. It also outlines principles for engaging patient and provider advocacy organizations, whether in policy, media, or online discussions, surrounding the implementation of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program.