Vaginal Estrogen Prescribing and Cost Trends Among Medicare Part D Beneficiaries.

IF 0.8 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.) Pub Date : 2024-03-26 DOI:10.1097/SPV.0000000000001504
Alexandra L Tabakin, Wai Lee, Harvey A Winkler, Dara F Shalom
{"title":"Vaginal Estrogen Prescribing and Cost Trends Among Medicare Part D Beneficiaries.","authors":"Alexandra L Tabakin, Wai Lee, Harvey A Winkler, Dara F Shalom","doi":"10.1097/SPV.0000000000001504","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>In 2016, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists issued a Committee Opinion on the safety of vaginal estrogen (VE) in estrogen-dependent breast cancer patients. Since that time, prescribing trends of VE have not been studied.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Our objective was to analyze expenditure and prescribing trends of VE from 2016 to 2020 for Medicare Part D beneficiaries.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>In this retrospective review, we queried the Medicare Part D Spending and Prescriber Datasets from 2016 to 2020 to identify claims for VE. Trends regarding claims, expenditures, beneficiaries, and prescribers were examined. A subanalysis of the Medicare Part D Prescriber Dataset was performed for obstetrician-gynecologist-specific trends. Statistical analysis was done with the Kruskal-Wallis test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 2016 to 2020 for all specialties, the number of VE claims decreased annually from 945,331 in 2016 to 320,571 in 2020. Most claims were for Estrace (49.5%) followed by Yuvafem (23.3%), Vagifem (14.5%), and Estring (12.7%). The number of VE prescribers decreased from 20,216 to 5,380, with obstetrician-gynecologists comprising 60% of all prescribers. Beneficiaries decreased by more than 70% from 439,210 to 123,318, whereas average spending per beneficiary increased from $688.52 to $1,027.55. Total annual spending on VE decreased from $277,891,645 to $106,679,580. However, average spending per claim increased from $293.40 to $355.28 and increased for all products besides Yuvafem.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Vaginal estrogen claims, beneficiaries, and total expenditures across all provider types have decreased from 2016 to 2020. However, spending per beneficiary and VE claims have increased. Our data suggest that utilization and accessibility of vaginal estrogen may be influenced, in part, by cost.</p>","PeriodicalId":75288,"journal":{"name":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000001504","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: In 2016, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists issued a Committee Opinion on the safety of vaginal estrogen (VE) in estrogen-dependent breast cancer patients. Since that time, prescribing trends of VE have not been studied.

Objective: Our objective was to analyze expenditure and prescribing trends of VE from 2016 to 2020 for Medicare Part D beneficiaries.

Study design: In this retrospective review, we queried the Medicare Part D Spending and Prescriber Datasets from 2016 to 2020 to identify claims for VE. Trends regarding claims, expenditures, beneficiaries, and prescribers were examined. A subanalysis of the Medicare Part D Prescriber Dataset was performed for obstetrician-gynecologist-specific trends. Statistical analysis was done with the Kruskal-Wallis test.

Results: From 2016 to 2020 for all specialties, the number of VE claims decreased annually from 945,331 in 2016 to 320,571 in 2020. Most claims were for Estrace (49.5%) followed by Yuvafem (23.3%), Vagifem (14.5%), and Estring (12.7%). The number of VE prescribers decreased from 20,216 to 5,380, with obstetrician-gynecologists comprising 60% of all prescribers. Beneficiaries decreased by more than 70% from 439,210 to 123,318, whereas average spending per beneficiary increased from $688.52 to $1,027.55. Total annual spending on VE decreased from $277,891,645 to $106,679,580. However, average spending per claim increased from $293.40 to $355.28 and increased for all products besides Yuvafem.

Conclusions: Vaginal estrogen claims, beneficiaries, and total expenditures across all provider types have decreased from 2016 to 2020. However, spending per beneficiary and VE claims have increased. Our data suggest that utilization and accessibility of vaginal estrogen may be influenced, in part, by cost.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
医疗保险 D 部分受益人的阴道雌激素处方和成本趋势。
重要性:2016 年,美国妇产科医师学会就雌激素依赖型乳腺癌患者使用阴道雌激素 (VE) 的安全性发表了委员会意见。从那时起,VE 的处方趋势一直未得到研究:我们的目标是分析 2016 年至 2020 年医疗保险 D 部分受益人的 VE 支出和处方趋势:在这项回顾性研究中,我们查询了 2016 年至 2020 年的医疗保险 D 部分支出和处方数据集,以确定 VE 的报销申请。我们对索赔、支出、受益人和处方者的趋势进行了研究。对医疗保险 D 部分处方者数据集进行了子分析,以了解妇产科医生的特定趋势。统计分析采用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验:从 2016 年到 2020 年,所有专科的 VE 申请数量每年都在减少,从 2016 年的 945 331 份减少到 2020 年的 320 571 份。大多数索赔是针对 Estrace(49.5%),其次是 Yuvafem(23.3%)、Vagifem(14.5%)和 Estring(12.7%)。VE 处方者的人数从 20 216 人减少到 5 380 人,其中妇产科医生占所有处方者的 60%。受益人从 439 210 人减少到 123 318 人,降幅超过 70%,而每位受益人的平均支出从 688.52 美元增加到 1 027.55 美元。VE 年度总支出从 277,891,645 美元降至 106,679,580 美元。然而,每份索赔的平均支出从 293.40 美元增至 355.28 美元,除 Yuvafem 外,所有产品的支出均有所增加:从 2016 年到 2020 年,阴道雌激素索赔额、受益人和所有提供商类型的总支出均有所下降。然而,每位受益人的支出和阴道雌激素报销额都有所增加。我们的数据表明,阴道雌激素的使用率和可及性可能部分受到成本的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Development and Validation of a Simulation Model for Ureteral Stent Placement. Implementing a Digital Platform for Recurrent Urinary Tract Infections. Unexpected Pathology During Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair in an Urban Population. Green Cystoscopy: Does Minimizing the Use of Drapes Increase Infection Rates? Noninferiority Randomized Clinical Trial: KIM Sling With Reusable Trocars Versus TVT Exact Sling.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1