RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Asthma in older adults is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality; similarly, asthma can be severe enough among younger adults to warrant disability benefits. Reasons for poor outcomes in both groups of patients may include discontinuation and lack of adherence to controller therapies. OBJECTIVE: To examine characteristics and treatment patterns of US Medicare patients initiating omalizumab for asthma, and factors associated with its discontinuation and adherence. METHODS: A retrospective claims database analysis of Medicare beneficiaries with asthma initiating omalizumab treatment was carried out. The primary outcomes were omalizumab discontinuation (gap in use ≥90 days) and adherence (proportion of days covered ≥0.8) over a 12-month follow-up. Multivariable regressions were used to examine factors associated with omalizumab discontinuation and adherence. RESULTS: Of the 3058 Medicare patients initiating omalizumab for asthma (mean age, 62.7 years), 36.9% discontinued omalizumab and 60.6% were adherent. Discontinuation rates were 32.7% and 42.8%, and adherence rates were 65.4% and 53.9%, for disabled and older Medicare patients, respectively. Patients aged 65 to 69 years and 70 to 74 years had significantly lower odds of discontinuation (odds ratios [95% CI], 0.66 [0.46-0.93] and 0.62 [0.43-0.89], respectively) and higher odds of adherence than did patients aged 80 years or older. Compared with patients receiving low-income subsidy, patients not receiving low-income subsidy had lower odds of discontinuation (0.66 [0.52-0.83]) and higher odds of adherence (1.52 [1.20-1.93]). Greater numbers of preindex evaluation and management physician visits and comorbid rhinitis were associated with lower odds of discontinuation and higher odds of adherence. CONCLUSIONS: More than 60% of Medicare patients with asthma continued and were adherent to omalizumab over a 12-month follow-up. Patient age, low-income subsidy status, and the numbers of evaluation and management physician visits were among factors associated with treatment adherence and discontinuation.
Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Omalizumab , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Asma/epidemiología , Humanos , Medicare , Cumplimiento de la Medicación , Persona de Mediana Edad , Omalizumab/uso terapéutico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of cost-sharing increases on continuity of specialty drug use in Medicare beneficiaries with multiple sclerosis (MS) or rheumatoid arthritis (RA). DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Five percent Medicare claims data (2007-2010). STUDY DESIGN: Quasi-experimental study examining changes in specialty drug use among a group of Medicare Part D beneficiaries without low-income subsidies (non-LIS) as they transitioned from a 5 percent cost-sharing preperiod to a ≥25 percent cost-sharing postperiod, as compared to changes among a disease-matched contemporaneous control group of patients eligible for full low-income subsidies (LIS), who faced minor cost sharing (≤$6.30 copayment) in both the pre- and postperiods. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Key variables were extracted from Medicare data. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Relative to the LIS group, the non-LIS group had a greater increase in incidence of 30-day continuous gaps in any Part D treatment from the lower cost-sharing period to the higher cost-sharing period (MS, absolute increase = 10.1 percent, OR = 1.61, 95% CI 1.19-2.17; RA, absolute increase = 21.9 percent, OR = 2.75, 95% CI 2.15-3.51). The increase in Part D treatment gaps was not offset by increased Part B specialty drug use. CONCLUSIONS: Cost-sharing increases due to specialty tier-level cost sharing were associated with interruptions in MS and RA specialty drug treatments.
Asunto(s)
Antirreumáticos/economía , Artritis Reumatoide/tratamiento farmacológico , Seguro de Costos Compartidos/estadística & datos numéricos , Honorarios Farmacéuticos/estadística & datos numéricos , Inmunosupresores/economía , Esclerosis Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antirreumáticos/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Inmunosupresores/uso terapéutico , Revisión de Utilización de Seguros , Masculino , Medicare Part D/estadística & datos numéricos , Cumplimiento de la Medicación/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos Estadísticos , Pobreza/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Cost sharing is widely used to encourage therapeutic substitution. This study aimed to examine the impact of increases in patient cost-sharing differentials for brand name and generic drugs on statin utilization on entry into the Medicare Part D coverage gap. METHOD AND RESULTS: Using 5% Medicare Chronic Condition Warehouse files from 2006, this quasi-experimental study examined patients with hyperlipidemia who filled prescriptions for atorvastatin or rosuvastatin between January and March 2006. Propensity score matching and difference-in-difference regressions were used to compare changes in statin utilization for the study group (patients who were not eligible for low-income subsidies [non-LIS] and had generic-only gap coverage) to those of a control group (LIS patients who faced the same cost sharing before and during the Part D coverage gap). In the final sample, 801 patients in the study group were matched to 801 patients in the control group. We found that, compared to the control group, the study group had a larger decline in any monthly brand-name statin use (-0.24 30-day fills, P<0.001). This was only partially offset by increased monthly generic statin use (+0.06 30-day fill, P<0.001), with an overall drop in any monthly statin use (-0.18 30-day fills, P<0.001). Overall adherence with statins declined (OR 0.81, P<0.001), and statin discontinuation increased (OR 1.62, P<0.001) in the study group as compared to the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Increases in cost-sharing differentials for brand name and generic drugs on coverage gap entry were associated with discontinuation of statins in Medicare Part D patients with hyperlipidemia.
Asunto(s)
Atorvastatina/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Reductasas/uso terapéutico , Hiperlipidemias/tratamiento farmacológico , Rosuvastatina Cálcica/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Atorvastatina/economía , Seguro de Costos Compartidos , Costos de los Medicamentos , Sustitución de Medicamentos , Medicamentos Genéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Inhibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Reductasas/economía , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Medicare Part D/economía , Cumplimiento de la Medicación , Oportunidad Relativa , Puntaje de Propensión , Rosuvastatina Cálcica/economía , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Efforts to improve adherence by reducing co-payments through value-based insurance design are become more prevalent despite limited evidence of improved health outcomes. The objective of this study was to determine whether eliminating patient co-payments for blood pressure medications improves blood pressure control. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. METHODS: The Collaboration to Reduce Disparities in Hypertension (CHORD) was a randomized controlled trial with 12 months' follow-up conducted among patients from the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh Veterans Administration Medical Centers. We enrolled 479 patients with poorly controlled systolic blood pressure. Participants were randomly assigned to: a) receive reductions in co-payments from $8 to $0 per medication per month for each antihypertensive prescription filled, b) a computerized behavioral intervention (CBI), c) both co-pay reduction and CBI, or d) usual care. Our main outcome measure was change in systolic blood pressure from enrollment to 12 months post enrollment. We also measured adherence using the medication possession ratio in a subset of participants. RESULTS: There were no significant interactions between the co-payment interventions and the CBI interventions. There was no relative difference in the change in medication possession ratio between baseline and 12 months (0.05% and -.90% in control and incentive groups, respectively; P = .74) or in continuous medication gaps of 30, 60, or 90 days. Blood pressure decreased among all participants, but to a similar degree between the financial incentive and control groups. Systolic pressure within the incentive group dropped 13.2 mm Hg versus 15.2 mm Hg for the control group (difference = 2.0; 95% CI, -2.3 to 6.3; P = .36). The proportion of patients with blood pressure under control at 12 months was 29.5% in the incentive group versus 33.9 in the control group (odds ratio, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.5-1.3; P = .36). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with poorly controlled blood pressure, financial incentives--as implemented in this trial--that reduced patient cost sharing for blood pressure medications did not improve medication adherence or blood pressure control.
Asunto(s)
Antihipertensivos/economía , Deducibles y Coseguros , Hipertensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Cumplimiento de la Medicación , Anciano , Antihipertensivos/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos , United States Department of Veterans AffairsRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Value-based insurance designs are being widely used. We undertook this study to examine whether a financial incentive that lowered co-payments for blood pressure medications below $0 improved blood pressure control among patients with poorly controlled hypertension. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Participants from 3 Pennsylvania hospitals (n = 337) were randomly assigned to: a) be paid $8 per medication per month for filling blood pressure prescriptions, b) a computerized behavioral intervention (CBI), c) both payment and CBI, or d) usual care. The primary outcome was change in blood pressure between baseline and 12 months post enrollment. We also measured adherence using the medication possession ratio in a subset of participants. RESULTS: There were no significant interactions between the incentive and the CBI interventions. There were no significant changes in medication possession ratio in the treatment group. Blood pressure decreased among all participants, but to a similar degree between the financial incentive and control groups. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) dropped 13.7 mm Hg for the incentive group versus 10.0 mm Hg for the control group (difference = 3.7; 95% CI, 9.0 to 1.6; P = .17). The proportion of patients with blood pressure under control 12 months post enrollment was 35.6% of the incentive group versus 27.7% of the control group (odds ratio, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.8-2.5; P = .19). Diabetics in the incentive group had an average drop in SBP of 12.7 mm Hg between baseline and 12 months compared with 4.0 mm Hg in the control group (P = .02). Patients in the incentive group without diabetes experienced average SBP reductions of 15.0 mm Hg, compared with 16.3 mm Hg for control group nondiabetics (P = .71). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with poorly controlled blood pressure, financial incentivesas implemented in this trialdid not improve blood pressure control or adherence except among patients with diabetes.
Asunto(s)
Antihipertensivos/economía , Deducibles y Coseguros , Hipertensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Cumplimiento de la Medicación , Antihipertensivos/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , PennsylvaniaRESUMEN
Pharmacological treatment is central to effective management of schizophrenia. Prescribing clinicians have an increasing array of options from which to choose, and oral antipsychotic polypharmacy is common in routine clinical practice. Practice guidelines recommend long-acting injectable (LAI) formulations, typically viewed as monotherapeutic alternatives, for patients with established nonadherence. Yet there are limited data on the prevalence and nature of concurrent oral antipsychotic prescriptions in patients receiving LAIs. Our observational, claims-based study examined the frequency and duration of concurrent oral prescriptions in 340 Medicaid patients receiving LAI therapy. Specifically, we examined patients with a recent history of nonadherence and hospitalization for schizophrenia and included both first-generation antipsychotic depot medications (fluphenazine decanoate, haloperidol decanoate) and more recently available second-generation injectables (LAI risperidone, paliperidone palmitate). Of all patients initiated on LAIs, 75.9% had a concurrent oral antipsychotic prescription in the 6 months post-hospital discharge. Patients receiving concurrent prescriptions were frequently prescribed an oral formulation of their LAI agent, but many first-generation LAI users received a concurrent second-generation oral medication. The lowest rate of concurrent prescribing (58.8%) was found with paliperidone palmitate, whereas the highest rate was with LAI risperidone (88.9%). Overlap in oral and LAI prescriptions typically occurred for a substantial period of time (ie, >30 days) and for a notable percentage of the days covered by LAIs (often 50% or more). Our findings highlight the need to further examine such prescribing patterns, to probe the reasons for them, and to clarify the optimal roles of different antipsychotic treatments in clinical practice.
Asunto(s)
Antipsicóticos/administración & dosificación , Alta del Paciente/tendencias , Esquizofrenia/diagnóstico , Esquizofrenia/tratamiento farmacológico , Administración Oral , Adulto , Estudios de Cohortes , Preparaciones de Acción Retardada/administración & dosificación , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Humanos , Inyecciones Intramusculares , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Surveillance imaging of asymptomatic patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in first remission remains controversial. A decision-analytic Markov model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of follow-up strategies following first-line immunochemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three strategies were compared in 55-year-old patient cohorts: routine clinical follow-up without serial imaging, routine follow-up with biannual computed tomography (CT) scans for 2 years, or routine follow-up with biannual [(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) for 2 years. The baseline model favored imaging-based strategies by associating asymptomatic imaging-detected relapses with improved clinical outcomes. Lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for each surveillance strategy. RESULTS: Surveillance strategies utilizing 2 years of routine CT or PET/CT scans were associated with minimal survival benefit when compared with clinical follow-up without routine imaging (life-years gained: CT, 0.03 years; PET/CT, 0.04 years). The benefit of imaging-based follow-up remained small after quality-of-life adjustments (CT, 0.020 QALYs; PET/CT, 0.025 QALYs). Costs associated with imaging-based surveillance strategies are considerable; ICERs for imaging strategies compared with clinical follow-up were $164,960/QALY (95% CI, $116,510 to $766,930/QALY) and $168,750/QALY (95% CI, $117,440 to 853,550/QALY) for CT and PET/CT, respectively. Model conclusions were robust and remained stable on one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Our cost-effectiveness analysis suggests surveillance imaging of asymptomatic DLBCL patients in remission offers little clinical benefit at substantial economic costs.
Asunto(s)
Costos de la Atención en Salud , Linfoma de Células B Grandes Difuso/diagnóstico , Linfoma de Células B Grandes Difuso/economía , Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones/economía , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Fluorodesoxiglucosa F18/economía , Humanos , Inmunoterapia/métodos , Linfoma de Células B Grandes Difuso/diagnóstico por imagen , Linfoma de Células B Grandes Difuso/terapia , Cadenas de Markov , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos Económicos , Imagen Multimodal/economía , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Radiofármacos/economía , Inducción de Remisión , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Rising obesity represents one of the most disturbing health trends in the U.S. and elsewhere. Obese people are at greater risk for diabetes, cardiovascular disease, disability, and mortality. However, recent studies also suggest that the obese population has grown "healthier" since the 1960s, probably due to improved medical care for cardiovascular disease. It is unclear whether these improvements have resulted in more or less disability in obese people as they age. This issue Brief summarizes two studies that examine the prevalence of obesity over time in the elderly and disabled, and the changing relationship of obesity and disability.