Defining Value in Cancer Care: AVBCC 2013 Steering Committee Report.

The AVBCC Annual Meeting experiences exponential growth in attendance and participation as oncologists, payers, employers, managed care executives, patient advocates, and drug manufacturers convened in Hollywood, FL, on May 2-5, 2013, for the Third Annual Conference of the Association for Value-Based Cancer Care (AVBCC). The conference presented an all-inclusive open forum for stakeholder dialogue and integration across the cancer care continuum, facilitating an open dialogue among the various healthcare stakeholders to align their perspectives around the urgent need to address value in cancer care, costs, patient education, safety, outcomes, and quality. The AVBCC 2013 Steering Committee was held on the first day of the conference to define value in cancer care. The committee was divided into 7 groups, each representing a key stakeholder in oncology. The goal of the Steering Committee was to define value from the particular point of view of each of the stakeholder groups and to suggest how that particular perspective can contribute to the value proposition in oncology, by balancing cost, quality, and access to care to improve overall patient outcomes. The following summary highlights the major points addressed by each group.

The association of consumer expectations, experiences and satisfaction with newly prescribed medications.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between medication expectations and subsequent experience on treatment satisfaction and intention to continue using the medication. METHODS: A longitudinal study with two surveys administered to each patient. Patients prescribed a new medication were recruited in pharmacies within Michigan. Medication-related expectations were evaluated at baseline. Experiences, satisfaction and intent to continue were evaluated a month later. Analyses used included factorial ANOVA models, multiple linear regressions and structural equation modeling (SEM). Impact of satisfaction on intention to continue was evaluated using correlation analysis and SEM. RESULTS: A total of 344 usable responses were obtained. SEM showed that expectation scores were not associated with both experience (path coefficient = 0.10) and satisfaction (path coefficient = 0.02, NS). On the other hand, experience was strongly associated with satisfaction (path coefficient = 0.89) and satisfaction was strongly associated with intent to continue using the new medication (path coefficient = 0.81). CONCLUSIONS: This study empirically supports the value of the patient's experience and its contribution to satisfaction, which in turn is associated with intended continued use mainly due to greater effectiveness of the newly prescribed medication. Satisfied consumers should be more adherent, thus enhancing the probability of positive therapeutic outcomes.

Patient-reported underuse of prescription medications: a comparison of nine surveys.

Nine national surveys documenting patient underuse of prescription medications were examined to describe the variation and trends in that underuse and identify possible reasons for the substantially different rates that were reported. Underuse includes unfilled prescriptions, delayed therapy, reduced frequency, and lowered dosage. Rates of cost-related patient underuse in the studies ranged from 1.6 to 22 percent. Insurance coverage, level of wealth, age, and health status were the sociodemographic variables most strongly related to underuse. Seven additional factors in the design and administration of the surveys were identified as providing plausible explanations for the variance across surveys. The most conspicuous variation was between three government-sponsored periodic surveys and six generally one-time assessments, with the latter yielding higher rates and greater variance in underuse. Understanding the factors contributing to the variation in reported rates of underuse of medications is an important prerequisite for the design of effective prescription-drug benefit programs.

Importation of prescription medications: experiences, opinions, and intended behaviors of U.S. community pharmacists.

OBJECTIVE: To describe community pharmacists' experiences with consumer demand for imported pharmaceuticals and their opinions about economic, policy, and patient care issues surrounding importation of medications and their willingness to procure these products from international sources, if legally permitted. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Four states in the United States (Michigan, Minnesota, Illinois, and Florida). PARTICIPANTS: Community/outpatient pharmacists. INTERVENTIONS: Telephone-based survey conducted in March 2004. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported opinions of pharmacists on importation of prescription drugs. RESULTS: Of 401 respondents, approximately 90% agreed that the Medicare prescription drug benefit would not diminish consumer interest in importation of medications, and a similar proportion agreed that interest was not limited to the elderly. A majority of pharmacists (69%) agreed that their primary concern about importation was the quality (i.e., purity) of the drugs. However, 57% of pharmacists agreed that drugs purchased through Canada would not pose a greater risk of medication-related problems if U.S. pharmacists oversaw the process and were available to provide patient monitoring and education. Pharmacists strongly favored regulatory actions that might decrease counterfeiting. Nearly one third (32%) of pharmacists believed that consumers should be allowed to purchase medications from Canada legally, while 44% of pharmacists believed that pharmacies should be able to procure prescription drugs from Canada legally. Almost 70% of pharmacists said that they would consider ordering medications from Canada, if legally permitted. Approximately one half of the pharmacists surveyed were concerned about job security as a result of the trend toward importation. This concern was significantly higher among pharmacy owners (chi-square [df= 1] = 9.82; P < .01). CONCLUSION: Pharmacists expressed concern about safety, liability, and the economic ramifications of prescription drug importation. More favorable opinions were expressed for situations in which imported drugs would be channeled through U.S. pharmacies.

Prescription drug use among elderly and nonelderly families.

OBJECTIVE: This study augments existing literature by examining characteristics associated with prescription drug utilization and makes an in-depth assessment of family prescription drug economic burden within the United States. The objective of this study was to examine differences in prescription drug use and prescription drug characteristics among elderly and nonelderly families. METHODS: A measure of out-of-pocket prescription drug burden associated with family prescription drug utilization was constructed using data from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Families were designated as the unit of analysis and further divided by age (<65 and e 65 years) of the reference person. The 1996 MEPS database provides medical expenditure data on a national sample of 8,917 families (22,601 individuals) and 147,308 drug episodes, i.e., prescription procurement. The ratio of family prescription out-of-pocket expenditures to family income was used to assign families to economic burden rank-ordered quintiles, each representing 20% of U.S. families in 1996. RESULTS: Prescription size, price, and drug use were higher among elderly families. Their proportion of generic use was higher compared to nonelderly families. Additionally, out-of-pocket prescription expenditures represented 23.7% and 45.6% of the total out-of-pocket medical care burden for nonelderly and elderly families, respectively. The average prescription drug burden (total prescription out-of-pocket costs/family income) was 0.4% for nonelderly and 1.9% for elderly households. CONCLUSION: The study results demonstrate an ability to identify populations with high economic burden for prescription medications. The presumption is that persons age 65 or older, lacking purchasing leverage, are more likely to pay full retail price and, consequently, higher prices. Our findings suggest that high prescription drug burden was a function of prescription size and cost per prescription, with prescription size showing more drastic differences between the high and low prescription drug burden subgroups. Future studies should continue to assess factors influencing families. prescription drug economic burden, and the information derived from these studies should be used by benefit planners in designing drug benefits within health insurance plans.

Statistical comparison of consumer drug expenditures and discretionary purchases to assess drug affordability.

BACKGROUND: Affordability may be defined as the absence of economic barriers to a good or service. There are 2 frequently observed measures of affordability: a consumer's ability to pay and his or her physical access to a good or service. Thus, most programs designed to subsidize consumers' health care costs, especially state programs that address prescription drug expenditures for people aged > or =65 years, base eligibility on measures of income as a proxy for a consumer's ability to pay. These measures do not explicitly include a consumer's willingness to pay for medications. For example, it is possible that some Medicare beneficiaries may be resistant to paying for medication because other major health care expenditures are typically covered by insurance. This resistance could be exacerbated by the keen awareness among the general population of the rising costs of medications. Because medications are considered a necessity, expenditure levels are usually compared with expenditures for other necessities, such as housing and medical services. OBJECTIVE: In an attempt to assess consumers' potential willingness to pay for medications, this article draws on data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics' Consumer Expenditure Surveys to compare pharmaceutical expenditures with out-of-pocket expenditures for discretionary purchases, such as dining outside the home. RESULTS: Personal out-of-pocket expenditures for medications have ranged from 0.8% to 1.0% of consumer unit income since 1985. These expenditures are relatively small compared with those for necessities, such as housing (33%) and food (13.5%). They are also less than the share of income dedicated to many nonessentials. CONCLUSION: Assessing inability versus unwillingness to pay for medication remains a problem for both researchers and health care policy makers attempting to determine the affordability of medications.