Search

Objective: To examine changes in children's albuterol use and out-of-pocket (OOP) costs in response to increased copayments after the Food and Drug Administration banned inhalers with chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) propellants.Setting: Four health maintenance organizations (HMOs), two that increased copayments for albuterol inhalers that went from generic CFC-containing to branded CFC-free versions, and two that retained generic copayments for CFC-free inhalers (controls). We included children with asthma aged 4-17 years with commercial coverage from 2007 to 2010.Design: Interrupted time series with comparison series.Data: We obtained enrollee and plan characteristics from enrollment files, and utilization data from pharmacy and medical claims; OOP expenditures were extracted from pharmacy claims for two HMOs with cost data available.Findings: There were no significant differences in albuterol use between the group with increased cost-sharing and controls with respect to changes after the policy change. There was a postpolicy increase of $6.11 OOP per month per child using albuterol among those with increased cost-sharing versus $0.36 in controls; the difference between groups was significant (p < .01).Conclusions: Increased copayments for brand-name CFC-free albuterol after the CFC ban did not lead to a decrease in children's albuterol use, but it led to a modest increase in OOP costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 2006 numerous insurers have stopped serving the low-income segment of the Medicare Part D program, forcing millions of beneficiaries to change prescription drug plans. Using data from participating plans, we found that Medicare payments do not sufficiently reimburse insurers for the relatively high medication use among this population, creating perverse incentives for plans to avoid this part of the Part D market. Plans can accomplish this by increasing their premiums for all beneficiaries to an amount above regional benchmarks. We demonstrate that improving the accuracy of Medicare's risk and subsidy adjustments could mitigate these perverse incentives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To study the impact of eliminating cost sharing for screening mammography on mammography rates in a large Medicare Advantage (MA) health plan which in 2010 eliminated cost sharing in anticipation of the Affordable Care Act mandate.Study Setting: Large MA health maintenance organization offering individual-subscriber MA insurance and employer-supplemented group MA insurance.Study Design: We investigated the impact on breast cancer screening of a policy that eliminated a $20 copayment for screening mammography in 2010 among 53,188 women continuously enrolled from 2007 to 2012 in an individual-subscriber MA plan, compared with 42,473 women with employer-supplemented group MA insurance in the same health maintenance organization who had full screening coverage during this period. We used differences-in-differences analysis to study the impact of cost-sharing elimination on mammography rates.Principal Findings: Annual screening rates declined over time for both groups, with similar trends pre-2010 and a slower decline after 2010 among women whose copayments were eliminated. Among women aged 65-74 years in the individual-subscriber MA plan, 44.9 percent received screening in 2009 compared with 40.9 percent in 2012, while 49.5 percent of women in the employer-supplemented MA plan received screening in 2009 compared with 44.1 percent in 2012, that is, a difference-in-difference effect of 1.4 percentage points less decline in screening among women experiencing the cost-sharing elimination. Effects were concentrated among women without recent screening. There were no differences by neighborhood socioeconomic status or race/ethnicity.Conclusions: Eliminating cost sharing for screening mammography was associated with modesty lower decline in screening rates among women with previously low screening adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]