Price elasticity and medication use: cost sharing across multiple clinical conditions

Comparing Gold-standard Copayment and Coinsurance Values From Claims Processing Engines to Values Derived From Behavioral Health Claims Databases

BACKGROUND

While researchers use patient expenditures in claims data to estimate insurance benefit features, little evidence exists to indicate whether the resulting measures are accurate.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and test an algorithm for deriving copayment and coinsurance values from behavioral health claims data.

SUBJECTS

Employer-sponsored insurance plans from 2011 to 2013 for a national managed behavioral health organization (MBHO).

MEASURES

Twelve benefit features, distinguishing between carve-in and carve-out, in-network and out-of-network, inpatient and outpatient, and copayment and coinsurance, were created. Measures drew from claims (claims-derived measures), and benefit feature data from a claims processing engine database (true measures).

STUDY DESIGN

We calculate sensitivity and specificity of the claims-derived measures' ability to accurately determine if a benefit feature was required and for plan-years requiring the benefit feature, the accuracy of the claims-derived measures. Accuracy rates using the minimum, 25th, 50th, 75th, and maximum claims value for a plan-year were compared.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Sensitivity (82% or higher for all but 3 benefit features) and specificity (95% or higher for all but 2 benefit features) were relatively high. Accuracy rates were highest using the 75th or maximum claims value, depending on the benefit feature, and ranged from 69% to 99% for all benefit features except for out-of-network inpatient coinsurance.

CONCLUSIONS

For most plan-years, claims-derived measures correctly identify required specialty mental health copayments and coinsurance, although the claims-derived measures' accuracy varies across benefit design features. This information should be considered when creating claims-derived benefit features to use for policy analysis.

Do out-of-pocket costs influence retention and adherence to medications for opioid use disorder?

BACKGROUND

Availability of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) has increased during the past two decades but treatment retention and adherence remain low. This study aimed to measure the impact of out-of-pocket buprenorphine cost on treatment retention and adherence among US commercially insured patients.

METHODS

Medical payment records from IBM MarketScan were analyzed for 6,439 adults age 18-64 years with commercial insurance who initiated buprenorphine treatment during January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017. Regression models analyzed the relationship between patients' average daily out-of-pocket buprenorphine cost and buprenorphine retention (at least 80 % days covered by buprenorphine) at three different thresholds (180, 360, and 540 days) and adherence (the number of days of buprenorphine coverage) within each retention threshold. Models controlled for patient demographic and clinical characteristics including age, sex, presence of other substance use disorders, psychiatric and pain diagnoses, and receipt of prescription medications.

RESULTS

A one dollar increase in daily out-of-pocket buprenorphine cost was associated with a 12-14 % decrease in the odds of retention and a 5-8 % increase in the number of days without buprenorphine coverage during each analyzed retention threshold.

CONCLUSION

Recent policies have attempted to address supply-side barriers to MOUD treatment. This study highlights patient cost-sharing as a demand-side barrier to MOUD. While the average out-of-pocket buprenorphine cost is lower than two decades ago, this study suggests even at current levels such costs decrease retention and adherence among commercially insured patients. Efforts to address demand-side barriers could help maximize the health and social benefits of buprenorphine-based MOUD.

Association between insurance cost-sharing subsidy and postoperative opioid prescription refills among Medicare patients

BACKGROUND

Models of health care coverage with varying degrees of patient cost-sharing have been shown to influence health care behaviors for chronic conditions including medication adherence. The effect of insurance cost-sharing subsidies on the probability of postoperative opioid refill, however, is unclear.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study examined 100% Medicare claims data among patients (N = 21,781) ages 65 and older undergoing orthopedic procedures in Michigan between January 2013 and September 2016. Patients were classified based on the presence of low-income subsidy and on prior opioid exposure using Medicare Part D prescription files of drug events. We investigated the association of these factors with the probability of both initial and second postoperative opioid fill within 90 days from the date of discharge.

RESULTS

In this cohort, 84.6% of patients filled an initial opioid prescription, and 66.4% refilled an opioid prescription. Patients with a full low-income subsidy had greater odds of refill within the postoperative 90 days compared with those patients without a low-income subsidy (odds ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.18-1.60). Among opioid naïve patients with a full low-income subsidy, the adjusted refill rate was 61.3% (95% confidence interval 58.0-64.7%) compared with 57.6% (95% confidence interval 51.4-63.7%) among those with partial low-income subsidy and 54.2% (95% confidence interval 52.8-55.6%) among patients without low-income subsidy.

CONCLUSION

Among Medicare patients undergoing orthopedic procedures, a full medication subsidy is associated with an increased probability of opioid refill when compared with no subsidy. Going forward, it is critical to lessen financial barriers to ensure all patients have equitable access to postoperative analgesia, including both opioid and nonopioid analgesics by decreasing the patient burden of cost-sharing.

Price elasticity of demand for buprenorphine/naloxone prescriptions

Although there have been supply-side efforts in response to the opioid crisis (e.g., prescription drug monitoring programs), little information exists on demand-side approaches related to patient cost sharing that may affect utilization of and adherence to pharmacotherapy by individuals with opioid use disorder. Among individuals who had initiated pharmacotherapy, we estimated the price elasticity of demand of prescription fills of buprenorphine/naloxone, a common pharmacotherapy drug, overall and by patient characteristics. Using the IBM MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters Database for individuals with employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage, we examined the relationship between cost sharing and the number of buprenorphine/naloxone prescription fills using enrollee-level longitudinal fixed effects models. Cost sharing was expressed as a price index for each employer-plan. By including enrollee-level fixed effects, the identification of the effect of interest comes from longitudinal variation in prices across multiple time points for each enrollee. Overall, the demand for buprenorphine/naloxone was price inelastic (p = 0.191). However, some subgroups were responsive to price. A doubling of price was associated with a decrease in fills by 3.0% for enrollees aged 45-64 years (p = 0.029); 5.7% for those in rural areas (p = 0.033); 5.8% for residents of the South (p ≤0.001); and 3.0% for those enrolled in an HMO (p = 0.004). Insurers should consider the effects on these groups before increasing beneficiary out-of-pocket costs for pharmacotherapy and efforts to increase adherence should consider that price may be a barrier for some subgroups with OUD.

Will converting naloxone to over-the-counter status increase pharmacy sales?

Objective

To estimate the own‐price elasticity of demand for naloxone, a prescription medication that can counter the effects of an opioid overdose, and predict the change in pharmacy sales following a conversion to over‐the‐counter status.

Data Sources/Study Setting

The primary data source was a nationwide prescription claims dataset for 2010‐2017. The data cover 80 percent of US retail pharmacies and account for roughly 90 percent of prescriptions filled. Additional covariates were obtained from various secondary data sources.

Study Design

We estimated a longitudinal, simultaneous equation model of naloxone supply and demand. Our primary variables of interest were the quantity of naloxone sold, measured as total milligrams sold at pharmacies, and the out‐of‐pocket price paid per milligram, both measured per ZIP Code and quarter‐year.

Data Collection/Extraction Methods

Primary data came directly from payers and processors of prescription drug claims.

Principal Findings

We found that, on average, a 1 percent increase in the out‐of‐pocket price paid for naloxone would result in a 0.27 percent decrease in pharmacy sales. We predict that the total quantity of naloxone sold in pharmacies would increase 15 percent to 179 percent following conversion to over‐the‐counter status.

Conclusions

Naloxone is own‐price inelastic, and conversion to over‐the‐counter status is likely to lead to a substantial increase in total pharmacy sales.

Assessing out-of-pocket expenditures for primary health care: how responsive is the Democratic Republic of Congo health system to providing financial risk protection?

BACKGROUND

The goal of universal health coverage is challenging for chronically under-resourced health systems. Although household out-of-pocket payments are the most important source of health financing in low-income countries, relatively little is known about the drivers of primary health care expenditure and the predictability of the burden associated with high fee-for-service payments. This study describes out-of-pocket health expenditure and investigates demand- and supply-side drivers of excessive costs in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), a central African country in the midst of a process of reforming its health financing system towards universal health coverage.

METHODS

A population-based household survey was conducted in four provinces of the DRC in 2014. Data included type, level and utilization of health care services, accessibility to care, patient satisfaction and disaggregated health care expenditure. Multivariate logistic regressions of excessive expenditure for outpatient care using alternative thresholds were performed to explore the incidence and predictors of atypically high expenditure incurred by individuals.

RESULTS

Over 17% (17.5%) of individuals living in sample households reported an illness or injury without being hospitalized. Of 3341 individuals reporting an event in the four-week period prior to the survey, 65.6% sought outpatient care with an average of one visit (SD = 0.0). The overall mean expenditure per visit was US$ 6.7 (SD = 10.4) with 29.4% incurring excessive expenditure. The main predictors of a financial risk burden included utilizing public services offering the complementary benefit package, dissatisfaction with care received, being a member of a large household, expenditure composition, severity of illness, residence and wealth (p < .05). The insured status influenced the expenditure level, with no association with catastrophe. Those who did not seek care when needed reported financial constraints as the major reason for postponing or foregoing care. Wealth-related inequities were found in service and population coverage and in out-of-pocket payment for outpatient care.

CONCLUSION

Burdensome expenditure for primary care and its key drivers are of utmost importance. Forthcoming health financing reform agendas must incorporate a strategy for getting data used in the design of financial risk protection. Realizing equitable and efficient access to outpatient care is a vital ingredient for sustainable health systems.

Effect of Out-of-Pocket Cost on Medication Initiation, Adherence, and Persistence among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: The Diabetes Study of Northern California (DISTANCE)

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effect of out-of-pocket (OOP) cost on nonadherence to classes of cardiometabolic medications among patients with diabetes.

DATA SOURCES/SETTING

Electronic health records from a large, health care delivery system for 223,730 patients with diabetes prescribed 842,899 new cardiometabolic medications during 2006-2012.

STUDY DESIGN

Observational, new prescription cohort study of the effect of OOP cost on medication initiation and adherence.

DATA COLLECTION

Adherence and OOP costs were based on pharmacy dispensing records and benefits.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Primary nonadherence (never dispensed) increased monotonically with OOP cost after adjusting for demographics, neighborhood socioeconomic status, Medicare, medical financial assistance, OOP maximum, deductibles, mail order pharmacy incentive and use, drug type, generic or brand, day's supply, and comorbidity index; 7 percent were never dispensed the new medication when OOP cost ≥$11, 5 percent with OOP cost of $1-$10, and 3 percent when the medication was free of charge (p < .0001). Higher OOP cost was also strongly associated with inadequate secondary adherence (≥20 percent of time without adequate medication). There was no clinically significant or consistent relationship between OOP costs and early nonpersistence (dispensed once, never refilled) or later stage nonpersistence (discontinued within 24 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Cost-sharing may deter clinically vulnerable patients from initiating essential medications, undermining adherence and risk factor control.

Cost-Sharing Rates Increase During Deep Recession: Preliminary Data From Greece

Background: Measures taken over the past four years in Greece to reduce pharmaceutical expenditure have led to significant price reductions for medicines, but have also changed patient cost-sharing rates for prescription drugs. This study attempts to capture the resulting increase in patients’ out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses for prescription drugs during the 2011-2014 period.

Methods: The authors conducted a retrospective review of financial data derived from 39 883 prescriptions, dispensed at three randomly chosen pharmacies located in Lamia, central Greece.

Results: The study recorded an average contribution rate per prescription as follows: 11.28% for 2011 (95% CI: 10.76-11.80), 14.10% for 2012, 19.97% for 2013, and 29.08% for 2014. Correspondingly, the mean patient charge per prescription for 2011 was €6.58 (95% CI: 6.22-6.94), €8.28 for 2012, €8.35 for 2013, and €10.87 for 2014. During the 2011-2014 period, mean percentage rate of patient contribution increased by 157.75%, while average patient charge per prescription in current prices increased by 65.22%. The use of a newly introduced internal reference price (IRP) system increased the level of prescription charge at a rate of 2.41% for 2012 (100% surcharge on patients), 26.24% for 2013 (49.95% on patients and 50.04% on the appropriate health insurance funds), and 47.72% for 2014 (85.06% on patients and 14.94% on funds).

Conclusion: Increased cost-sharing rates for prescription drugs can reduce public pharmaceutical expenditure, but international experience shows that rising OOP expenses can compromise patients’ ability to pay, particularly when it comes to chronic diseases and vulnerable populations. Various suggestions could be effective in refining the cost-sharing approach by giving greater consideration to chronic patients, and to the poor and elderly.