Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 1.691
Filter
1.
Neurology ; 102(12): e209479, 2024 Jun 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38838229

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Current benefits of invasive intracranial aneurysm treatment to prevent aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) rarely outweigh treatment risks. Most intracranial aneurysms thus remain untreated. Commonly prescribed drugs reducing aSAH incidence may provide leads for drug repurposing. We performed a drug-wide association study (DWAS) to systematically investigate the association between commonly prescribed drugs and aSAH incidence. METHODS: We defined all aSAH cases between 2000 and 2020 using International Classification of Diseases codes from the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage databank. Each case was matched with 9 controls based on age, sex, and year of database entry. We investigated commonly prescribed drugs (>2% in study population) and defined 3 exposure windows relative to the most recent prescription before index date (i.e., occurrence of aSAH): current (within 3 months), recent (3-12 months), and past (>12 months). A logistic regression model was fitted to compare drug use across these exposure windows vs never use, controlling for age, sex, known aSAH risk factors, and health care utilization. The family-wise error rate was kept at p < 0.05 through Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: We investigated exposure to 205 commonly prescribed drugs between 4,879 aSAH cases (mean age 61.4, 61.2% women) and 43,911 matched controls. We found similar trends for lisinopril and amlodipine, with a decreased aSAH risk for current use (lisinopril odds ratio [OR] 0.63, 95% CI 0.44-0.90, amlodipine OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65-1.04) and an increased aSAH risk for recent use (lisinopril OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.61-2.78, amlodipine OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.04-2.48). A decreased aSAH risk in current use was also found for simvastatin (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.96), metformin (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43-0.78), and tamsulosin (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.93). By contrast, an increased aSAH risk was found for current use of warfarin (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.02-1.79), venlafaxine (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.01-2.75), prochlorperazine (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.45-3.18), and co-codamol (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.10-1.56). DISCUSSION: We identified several drugs associated with aSAH, of which 5 drugs (lisinopril and possibly amlodipine, simvastatin, metformin, and tamsulosin) showed a decreased aSAH risk. Future research should build on these signals to further assess the effectiveness of these drugs in reducing aSAH incidence. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that some commonly prescribed drugs are associated with subsequent development of aSAH.


Subject(s)
Subarachnoid Hemorrhage , Humans , Subarachnoid Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Incidence , Adult , Aged , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Prescription Drugs/adverse effects , Case-Control Studies , Intracranial Aneurysm/epidemiology , Risk Factors
2.
BMJ Paediatr Open ; 8(1)2024 May 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38823800

ABSTRACT

The impact of schools closing for in-person instruction in the USA during the COVID-19 pandemic on the use of prescription medications is not known. In this study, we examined changes in the total prescriptions filled, specifically for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications, among school-aged children and adolescents aged 10-19 years during periods before and after complete school closures between October 2019 and September 2022. Our findings indicate that complete school closures were associated with declines in the use of ADHD medications among younger populations in the USA. These findings suggest that the underuse of ADHD medications may be an overlooked contributor to declines in academic performance observed during periods of school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity , COVID-19 , Schools , Humans , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , United States/epidemiology , Male , Female , Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity/drug therapy , Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult , Pandemics , Prescription Drugs/supply & distribution , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data
3.
Diabetes Obes Metab ; 26(7): 2933-2944, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38695210

ABSTRACT

AIMS: We aimed to examine trends in overall prescription medication use among patients with type 2 diabetes in the United States to provide insights for patient care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used nationally representative data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 1999 to 2020 and included adult patients with type 2 diabetes. We examined the use of prescription drugs, overall and by drug class, polypharmacy (use of ≥5 medications), and number of medications attributed to specific classes. RESULTS: In the period 2015-2020, the mean patient age was 59.6 (51.0-70.0) years, with 46.8% (43.6-49.9) being female and 57.8% (52.8-62.8) being non-Hispanic White. Among 9489 adults with type 2 diabetes, the prevalence of polypharmacy was high and increased from 35.1% (31.6-38.6) in 1999-2002 to 47.2% (43.7-50.7) in 2003-2006, and further to 51.1% (48.3-53.9) in 2015-2020 (p for trend <0.001). Increasing trends of polypharmacy were found across all population subgroups and across the majority of therapeutic classes. Use of non-cardiometabolic medications was common. Among them, the most common were antidepressants (19.8%), proton pump inhibitors (19.0%) and analgesics (16.2%). Among patients with polypharmacy, approximately 40% of medication use was attributed to non-cardiometabolic medications. CONCLUSIONS: Prescription medication burden and complexity increased substantially among patients with type 2 diabetes, with more than 50% of patients with polypharmacy. Attention should be paid to this escalating medication use and regimen complexity, which requires multidisciplinary and coordinated care.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Nutrition Surveys , Polypharmacy , Prescription Drugs , Humans , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Female , Male , United States/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Aged , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Drug Utilization/trends , Drug Utilization/statistics & numerical data , Prevalence , Adult
4.
Urol Pract ; 11(3): 454-460, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38640418

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Medicare Part D , Prescription Drugs , Aged , Humans , United States , Urologists , Costs and Cost Analysis , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Prescriptions
5.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38673338

ABSTRACT

This study is the first to examine factors in the utilization of physician services, dentist services, hospital care, and prescribed medications focusing exclusively on insured children in the United States. Data describing 48,660 insured children were extracted from the 2021 National Survey of Children's Health. Children in the present sample were covered by private health insurance, public health insurance, or other health insurance. Logistic regression results showed self-reported health to be negatively associated with physician visits, hospital-care use, and prescription use, but teeth condition to be positively associated with dentist visits. Physician visits were associated negatively with age, Hispanic ethnicity, Asian ethnicity, family income at or below 200% of the federal poverty level, and other health insurance, but positively with parental education and metropolitan residency. Dentist visits were associated positively with girls, age, and parental education, but negatively with Asian ethnicity and public health insurance. Use of hospital care was associated negatively with age and Asian ethnicity, but positively with parental education and public health insurance. Use of prescriptions was associated positively with age, Black ethnicity, parental education, and public health insurance, but negatively with Hispanic ethnicity, Asian ethnicity, and family income at or below 200% of the federal poverty level. Implications included the expansion of public health insurance, promotion of awareness of medicine discount programs, and understanding of racial/ethnic minorities' cultural beliefs in health and treatment.


Subject(s)
Insurance, Health , Humans , Child , Female , United States , Male , Child, Preschool , Infant , Adolescent , Insurance, Health/statistics & numerical data , Infant, Newborn , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use
6.
JAMA Health Forum ; 5(3): e240198, 2024 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38517423

ABSTRACT

Importance: On January 1, 2022, New Mexico implemented a No Behavioral Cost-Sharing (NCS) law that eliminated cost-sharing for mental health and substance use disorder (MH/SUD) treatments in plans regulated by the state, potentially reducing a barrier to treatment for MH/SUDs among the commercially insured; however, the outcomes of the law are unknown. Objective: To assess the association of implementation of the NCS with out-of-pocket spending for prescription for drugs primarily used to treat MH/SUDs and monthly volume of dispensed drugs. Design, Settings, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used a difference-in-differences research design to examine trends in outcomes for New Mexico state employees, a population affected by the NCS, compared with federal employees in New Mexico who were unaffected by NCS. Data were collected on prescription drugs for MH/SUDs dispensed per month between January 2021 and June 2022 for New Mexico patients with a New Mexico state employee health plan and New Mexico patients with a federal employee health plan. Data analysis occurred from December 2022 to January 2024. Exposure: Enrollment in a state employee health plan or federal health plan. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were mean patient out-of-pocket spending per dispensed MH/SUD prescription and the monthly volume of dispensed MH/SUD prescriptions per 1000 employees. A difference-in-differences estimation approach was used. Results: The implementation of the NCS law was associated with a mean (SE) $6.37 ($0.30) reduction (corresponding to an 85.6% decrease) in mean out-of-pocket spending per dispensed MH/SUD medication (95% CI, -$7.00 to -$5.75). The association of implementation of NCS with the volume of prescriptions dispensed was not statistically significant. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that the implementation of the New Mexico NCS law was successful in lowering out-of-pocket spending on prescription medications for MH/SUDs, but that there was no association of NCS with the volume of medications dispensed in the first 6 months after implementation. A key challenge is to identify policies that protect from high out-of-pocket spending while also promoting access to needed care.


Subject(s)
Prescription Drugs , Substance-Related Disorders , Humans , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , Cost Sharing , Health Expenditures , Substance-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Health Care Costs
7.
Harm Reduct J ; 21(1): 72, 2024 Mar 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38549113

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: People who use drugs experience pain at two to three times the rate of the general population and yet continue to face substantial barriers to accessing appropriate and adequate treatment for pain. In light of the overdose crisis and revised opioid prescribing guidelines, we sought to identify factors associated with being denied pain medication and longitudinally investigate denial rates among people who use drugs. METHODS: We used multivariable generalized estimating equations analyses to investigate factors associated with being denied pain medication among people who use drugs reporting pain in three prospective cohort studies in Vancouver, Canada. Analyses were restricted to study periods in which participants requested a prescription for pain from a healthcare provider. Descriptive statistics detail denial rates and actions taken by participants after being denied. RESULTS: Among 1168 participants who requested a prescription for pain between December 2012 and March 2020, the median age was 47 years and 63.0% were male. Among 4,179 six-month observation periods, 907 (21.7%) included a report of being denied requested pain medication. In multivariable analyses, age was negatively associated with prescription denial (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.97-0.99), while self-managing pain (AOR = 2.48, 95%CI:2.04-3.00), experiencing a non-fatal overdose (AOR = 1.51, 95%CI:1.22-1.88), engagement in opioid agonist therapy (AOR = 1.32, 95%CI:1.09-1.61), and daily use of heroin or other unregulated opioids (AOR = 1.32, 95%CI:1.05-1.66) were positively associated with being denied. Common actions taken (n = 895) after denial were accessing the unregulated drug supply (53.5%), doing nothing (30.6%), and going to a different doctor/emergency room (6.1%). The period following the introduction of new prescribing guidelines was not associated with a change in denial rates. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of people who use drugs continue to be denied prescriptions for pain, with such denial associated with important substance use-related harms, including non-fatal overdose. Guidelines specific to the pharmaceutical management of pain among people who use drugs are needed.


Subject(s)
Drug Overdose , Prescription Drugs , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Female , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Prospective Studies , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Canada/epidemiology , Drug Overdose/drug therapy , Pain , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Prescriptions
8.
Vet Rec ; 194(6): 219, 2024 03 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38488595
9.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand ; 103(6): 1210-1223, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38491733

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Maternal demographics have evolved, and more women than ever enter pregnancy with preexisting comorbidity and with potentially complex medication exposure, including polypharmacy (concomitant intake of multiple medications). This study aims to describe the evolution of medication use in pregnancy in Denmark from 1998 to 2018 with special focus on polypharmacy, patterns of use, and underlying demographics. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A Danish nationwide historical registry study based on all clinically recognized pregnancies with a gestation ≥10 weeks between 1998 and 2018. Medication use was estimated by redemption of prescriptions during pregnancy. RESULTS: Among a total of 1 402 327 clinically recognized pregnancies, redemption of at least one prescription medication during pregnancy increased from 56.9% in 1998 to 63.3% in 2018, coinciding with an increased use of polypharmacy (from 24.8% in 1998 to 35.2% in 2018). The prevalence of pregnant women who used medications for chronic conditions increased more than the prevalence of women treated for occasional or short-time conditions. Redemption of one or multiple prescription medications during pregnancy was mostly seen among pregnant women ≥35 years of age. However, pregnant women <25 years old exhibited the largest increase in medication use during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Medication use in general, and polypharmacy in particular, increased from 1998 to 2008, possibly as the result of an increased prevalence of pregnant women with chronic conditions requiring pharmacological treatment. Notably, a marked maternal age-based discrepancy in usage pattern was observed, highlighting the need for further research in this area. The rise in the prevalence of polypharmacy during pregnancy underscores the need for pharmacovigilance to monitor adverse effects. Future studies should investigate the patterns of polypharmacy and the accompanying maternal and fetal risks.


Subject(s)
Polypharmacy , Registries , Humans , Female , Pregnancy , Denmark/epidemiology , Adult , Pregnancy Complications/drug therapy , Pregnancy Complications/epidemiology , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Young Adult
10.
Clin Pharmacol Ther ; 115(6): 1293-1303, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38375585

ABSTRACT

The US Food and Drug Administration can require risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) programs for prescription drugs to ensure the benefits of use outweigh the risks. We conducted a national survey of physicians' experiences prescribing eight REMS-covered drugs: (1) ambrisentan; (2) bosentan; (3) clozapine; (4) isotretinoin; (5-7) the multiple myeloma (MM) drugs lenalidomide, pomalidomide, thalidomide; and (8) sodium oxybate. Between May 2022 and January 2023, we surveyed 5,331 physician prescribers of these drugs, and 1,295 (24%) returned surveys (range: 149 for bosentan to 226 for MM drugs). Although 765 (68%) respondents thought the certification process provided useful drug information, 757 (67%) wanted materials to include benefit data and 944 (84%) non-REMS-related risk data. A majority (704, 63%) thought the safe use requirements facilitated discussion with patients, but a similar number (637, 57%) attributed delayed medication access to these requirements. In multivariable modeling, MM drug and isotretinoin respondents were less likely than sodium oxybate respondents to agree that the certification process provided useful drug information (MM drug: odds ratio (OR) = 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.25-0.55; isotretinoin: OR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.25-0.61), and isotretinoin, clozapine, and bosetan respondents were more likely than sodium oxybate respondents to agree that the safe use requirements often delayed medication access (isotretinoin: OR = 5.83, 95% CI = 3.70-9.19; clozapine: OR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.08-2.54; bosentan: OR = 1.78, 95% CI = 1.12-2.85). Most physicians believe REMS programs convey useful drug safety information and facilitate discussion with patients but also seek information on benefits and non-REMS-related risks and better integration of REMS processes into clinical workflows.


Subject(s)
Physicians , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Risk Evaluation and Mitigation , Humans , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/standards , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , United States , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States Food and Drug Administration , Prescription Drugs/adverse effects , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Male , Female , Risk Assessment
11.
Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol ; 134(4): 531-542, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38308569

ABSTRACT

AIM: The objective of this registry study is to assess the utilization of pharmacogenomic (PGx) drugs among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: This study was a retrospective study of patients affiliated with the Department of Nephrology, Aalborg University Hospital, Denmark in 2021. Patients diagnosed with CKD were divided into CKD without dialysis and CKD with dialysis. PGx prescription drugs were retrieved from the Patient Administration System. Actionable dosing guidelines (AG) for specific drug-gene pairs for CYP2D6, CYP2C9, CYP2C19 and SLCO1B1 were retrieved from the PharmGKB homepage. RESULTS: Out of 1241 individuals, 25.5% were on dialysis. The median number of medications for each patient was 9 within the non-dialysis group and 16 within the dialysis group. Thirty-one distinct PGx drugs were prescribed. Altogether, 76.0% (943 individuals) were prescribed at least one PGx drug and the prevalence of prescriptions of PGx drugs was higher in the dialysis group compared to the non-dialysis group. The most frequently prescribed drugs with AG were metoprolol, pantoprazole, atorvastatin, simvastatin and warfarin. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that a substantial proportion of patients with CKD are exposed to drugs or drug combinations for which there exists AG related to PGx of CYP2D6, CYP2C19, CYP2C9 and SLCO1B1.


Subject(s)
Prescription Drugs , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic , Humans , Pharmacogenetics , Cytochrome P-450 CYP2C19 , Retrospective Studies , Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6 , Cytochrome P-450 CYP2C9/genetics , Renal Dialysis , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/drug therapy , Denmark , Liver-Specific Organic Anion Transporter 1/genetics
12.
PLoS One ; 19(2): e0297807, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38346084

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Access to medicines is a serious problem globally and in Chile. Despite the creation of coverage policies, part of the population with chronic conditions of high prevalence, still does not have access to the medicines it requires and disease control continues to be low. The objective of the study was to estimate the medication use and effective coverage for diabetes, dyslipidemia and hypertension in Chile, analyzing them according to sociodemographic variables and social determinants of health. METHODS: Cross-sectional analytical study with information from the 2016-2017 National Health Survey (sample = 6,233 people aged 15 years or older, expanded = 14,518,969). Descriptive analyses of medication use and effective coverage for hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidemia were carried out, and multivariate logistic regression models were developed to analyze possible associations with variables of interest. RESULTS: 60% of people with hypertension or diabetes use medications and only 27.7% in dyslipidemia. While 54.2% of those with diabetes have their glycemia controlled, in hypertension and dyslipidemia the effective coverage drops to 33.3% and 6.6%, respectively. There are no differences in use by health system, but there are differences in the control of hypertension and diabetes, favoring beneficiaries of the private subsystem. Effective coverage of dyslipidemia and hypertension also increases in those using medications. The drugs coincide with the established protocols, although beneficiaries of the private sector report greater use of innovative drugs. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of Chileans with hypertension, diabetes or dyslipidemia still do not use the required medications and do not control their conditions.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Dyslipidemias , Hypertension , Insurance Coverage , Insurance, Health , Prescription Drugs , Humans , Chile/epidemiology , Chronic Disease , Cross-Sectional Studies , Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus/economics , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Dyslipidemias/drug therapy , Dyslipidemias/economics , Dyslipidemias/epidemiology , Hypertension/drug therapy , Hypertension/economics , Hypertension/epidemiology , Prescription Drugs/economics , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Prevalence , South American People , Insurance Coverage/economics , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Insurance, Health/economics
13.
JAMA Health Forum ; 5(2): e235152, 2024 Feb 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38306091

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Medicare Part D , Prescription Drugs , Humans , Aged , Female , United States , Male , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Cohort Studies , Ethnicity , Minority Groups , Antidepressive Agents
14.
Res Social Adm Pharm ; 20(4): 432-442, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38302297

ABSTRACT

The objective of this cross-sectional analysis was to identify determinants of increasing medicine expenditures in the US between 2011 and 2020. Prescription medication expenditures from the 2011-2020 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey (MEPS) were used to calculate total annual medication expenditures by payer categories (Out-of-pocket, Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE/Veterans Administration/CHAMPVA (TVAC), Other Government Sources, Private Insurance, and Other Sources). From here, expenditures were stratified by therapeutic category using Multum Lexicon Drug Class to examine trends in expenditures by therapeutic area. Linear regression was used to identify temporal trends in medication expenditures. From 2011 to 2020, total annual prescription medication expenditures rose from $341.49 to $473.12 billion per year with metabolic agents being the most costly category. Among the metabolic agents, antidiabetic agents were the most costly therapeutic area, with an increasing trend observed from $27.15 to $89.17 billion over the same period. Medicare, Medicaid, Private Insurance, TVAC, and Other Sources also saw an increasing trend in antidiabetic agent expenditure, while no trend was observed for Out-of-pocket and Other Government Sources. Insulin had the highest expenditure among antidiabetic agents. Further studies are warranted to explore specific factors contributing to the increasing trend.


Subject(s)
Health Expenditures , Prescription Drugs , Aged , Humans , United States , Medicare , Cross-Sectional Studies , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Prescriptions
16.
BMJ Open ; 14(1): e070031, 2024 01 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38176877

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on prescription drug use and costs. DESIGN: Interrupted time series analysis of comprehensive administrative health data linkages in British Columbia, Canada, from 1 January 2018 to 28 March 2021. SETTING: Retrospective population-based analysis of all prescription drugs dispensed in community pharmacies and outpatient hospital pharmacies and irrespective of the drug insurance payer. PARTICIPANTS: Between 4.30 and 4.37 million individuals (52% women) actively registered with the publicly funded medical services plan. INTERVENTION: COVID-19 pandemic and associated mitigation measures. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Weekly dispensing rates and costs, both overall and stratified by therapeutic groups and pharmacological subgroups, before and after the declaration of the public health emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Relative changes in post-COVID-19 outcomes were expressed as ratios of observed to expected rates. RESULTS: After the onset of the pandemic and subsequent COVID-19 mitigation measures, overall medication dispensing rates dropped by 2.4% (p<0.01), followed by a sustained weekly increase to return to predicted levels by the end of January 2021. We observed abrupt level decreases in antibacterials (30.3%, p<0.01) and antivirals (22.4%, p<0.01) that remained below counterfactuals over the first year of the pandemic. In contrast, there was a week-to-week trend increase in nervous system drugs, yielding an overall increase of 7.3% (p<0.01). No trend changes in the dispensing of respiratory system agents, ACE inhibitors, antidiabetic drugs and antidepressants were detected. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic impact on prescription drug dispensing was heterogeneous across medication subgroups. As data become available, dispensing trends in nervous system agents, antibiotics and antivirals warrant further monitoring and investigation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Prescription Drugs , Humans , Female , Male , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , British Columbia/epidemiology , Interrupted Time Series Analysis , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , Drug Prescriptions , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use
17.
Med Care Res Rev ; 81(2): 87-95, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38174355

ABSTRACT

Prescription drug cost-sharing is a barrier to medication adherence, particularly for low-income and minority populations. In this systematic review, we examined the impact of prescription drug cost-sharing and policies to reduce cost-sharing on racial/ethnic and income disparities in medication utilization. We screened 2,145 titles and abstracts and identified 19 peer-reviewed papers that examined the interaction between cost-sharing and racial/ethnic and income disparities in medication adherence or utilization. We found weak but inconsistent evidence that lower cost-sharing is associated with reduced disparities in adherence and utilization, but studies consistently found that significant disparities remained even after adjusting for differences in cost-sharing across individuals. Study designs varied in their ability to measure the causal effect of policy or cost-sharing changes on disparities, and a wide range of policies were examined across studies. Further research is needed to identify the types of policies that are best suited to reduce disparities in medication adherence.


Subject(s)
Prescription Drugs , Humans , United States , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Cost Sharing , Income , Racial Groups
18.
Value Health ; 27(1): 35-42, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37879400

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to characterize products using pharmacy-pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) discounts and to estimate the association among such discounts, prescription utilization, and out-of-pocket costs. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study using IQVIA's Formulary Impact Analyzer, which contains anonymized, individual-level pharmacy claims representing US retail pharmacy transactions. We focused on 20 products with the greatest number of transactions using a pharmacy-PBM discount. Our unit of analysis was a treatment episode, defined as the length of time from an incident fill to no continuous use for 60 consecutive days after allowing for indefinite stockpiling. Outcome measures included products with greatest pharmacy-PBM discount use, characteristics of treatment episodes, and out-of-pocket costs with and without pharmacy-PBM discount. RESULTS: Across all products, 3.82% of transactions and 7.69% of treatment episodes were accompanied by a pharmacy-PBM discount. Commonly discounted products included generic treatments for chronic disease (lisinopril, levothyroxine, metformin) and neuropsychiatric conditions (alprazolam, amphetamine, buprenorphine, hydrocodone). The median postdiscount out-of-pocket cost was >2.5-fold higher during treatment episodes with a discount than those without ($15.15, interquartile range [IQR] $8.53-32.00, vs $5.88, IQR $1.40-15.00). Median treatment episode duration was 249 days (IQR 132-418) with discount use compared with 236 days (IQR 121-396) without discount use, although treatment episodes that began with a discount had fewer transactions per treatment episode and were shorter (median 212 days, IQR 114-360) than those that did not (313 days, IQR 178-500). CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacy-PBM discounts may foster market competition and improve access for under- and uninsured individuals; however, these programs may not generate savings for many insured individuals.


Subject(s)
Pharmaceutical Services , Pharmacy , Prescription Drugs , Humans , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , Drug Costs
19.
Res Social Adm Pharm ; 20(2): 209-214, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37919218

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Nonmedical use (NMU) of prescription psychotherapeutic drugs (PPD) may increase risk for significant morbidity and mortality in the overdose crisis. OBJECTIVE: This study examines sources of PPD using real-world data from adolescents and adults reporting past 30-day NMU of PPDs. METHODS: A convenience sample of individuals aged ≥10 years assessed for substance use disorders (SUD) treatment was analyzed using the 2014-2022 National Addictions Vigilance Intervention and Prevention Program datasets. PPD include prescription opioids, prescription tranquilizers/sedatives, and prescription stimulants. RESULTS: Overall, among assessments of adolescents aged 10-18 years (N = 1991) and young adults aged 19-24 years (N = 15,166), "family/friend" (46.08-47.41 %) and "dealer" (33.82-42.71 %) were the most common sources. Among assessments of adults aged ≥25 years (N = 89,225), "own prescription" was the most common source and increased in frequency as age increased. Across all age groups, "family/friend" was the most frequent source for all drug classes (41.96-48.76 %) except for nonmedically used buprenorphine/methadone, for which "own prescription" was the most common source (51.85 %) among adults. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates heterogeneity in sources of nonmedically used PPD across age groups. Tailored prevention strategies for different age groups and improving timely access to medical care to ensure proper treatment of chronic medical conditions including SUD are needed.


Subject(s)
Prescription Drug Misuse , Prescription Drugs , Substance-Related Disorders , Young Adult , Humans , Adolescent , United States , Prescription Drug Misuse/prevention & control , Substance-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Hypnotics and Sedatives , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Prescriptions , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use
20.
J Health Econ ; 93: 102830, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38113754

ABSTRACT

Prescription drug insurance increasingly imposes prior authorization (requiring providers to request coverage before claim approval) to manage utilization. Prior authorization has been criticized because of its administrative burden on providers. The primary alternative to managing utilization is imposing out-of-pocket (OOP) payment to incentivize beneficiaries to seek lower-cost care, effectively providing beneficiaries with partial insurance. Would beneficiaries prefer indirectly paying for prior authorization through higher premiums; or would they prefer prior authorization was replaced by higher OOP costs? This tradeoff depends on how much OOP costs could be displaced by prior authorization, which depends on their relative impact on demand. I estimate the effect of prior authorization and OOP costs on pharmaceutical demand in Medicare Part D, addressing endogeneity caused by unobserved drug quality and selection into plans. Despite criticism of prior authorization, I find that Medicare beneficiaries would prefer higher premiums to pay for prior authorization, over higher OOP costs.


Subject(s)
Medicare Part D , Prescription Drugs , Aged , Humans , United States , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Health Expenditures
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...