Financial burden of household out-of-pocket expenditures for prescription drugs: cross-sectional analysis based on national survey data.

Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal Pub Date : 2011-01-01 Epub Date: 2011-01-04
Logan McLeod, Basil G Bereza, Minsup Shim, Paul Grootendorst
{"title":"Financial burden of household out-of-pocket expenditures for prescription drugs: cross-sectional analysis based on national survey data.","authors":"Logan McLeod,&nbsp;Basil G Bereza,&nbsp;Minsup Shim,&nbsp;Paul Grootendorst","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Commentaries on the adequacy of insurance coverage for prescription drugs available to Canadians have emphasized differences in the coverage provided by different provincial governments. Less is known about the actual financial burden of prescription drug spending and how this burden varies by province of residence, affluence and source of primary drug coverage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from a nationally representative household expenditure survey to analyze the financial burden of prescription drugs. We focused on the drug budget share (defined as the share of the household budget spent on prescription drugs), considering how it varied by province, total household budget and likely primary source of drug insurance coverage (i.e., provincial government plan for senior citizens, social assistance plan or private coverage). We examined both \"typical\" households (at the median of the distribution of the drug budget share) and households with relatively large shares (in the top 5%). Finally, we estimated the percentage of households with catastrophic drug expenditures (defined as a drug budget share of 10% or more) and the average catastrophic drug expenditures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Senior, social assistance and general population households accounted for 21.1%, 8.9% and 69.9% of the sample of 14,430 respondents to the 2006 Survey of Household Spending, respectively. The median drug budget share in Canada was 1.1% for senior households (range 0.4% [Ontario] to 3.6% [Saskatchewan]) and 0.1% for both social assistance households and general population households, with little appreciable variation across provinces for these latter 2 categories. The 95th percentile drug budget share in Canada was 7.4% for senior households (range 3.5% [Ontario] to 12.7% [Saskatchewan]), 5.4% for social assistance households (range 2.3% [British Columbia] to 13.0% [Prince Edward Island]) and 2.6% for general population households (range 2.1% [Ontario] to 5.4% [Prince Edward Island]). The interprovincial range of the 95th percentile drug budget share was 10.7 percentage points for social assistance households, 9.2 percentage points for senior households and 3.3 percentage points for general population households.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>For most households, the financial burden of prescription drug expenditures appeared to be relatively small, with little interprovincial variation. However, a small number of households incurred catastrophic drug costs. These households were concentrated in the groups that traditionally benefit from provincial government drug plans. It is likely that some households did not purchase needed prescription drugs because of the expense, so our estimates of the financial burden of catastrophic prescription drug expenditures therefore represent a lower bound.</p>","PeriodicalId":88624,"journal":{"name":"Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal","volume":"5 1","pages":"e1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/1e/8b/OpenMed-05-e1.PMC3205811.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2011/1/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Commentaries on the adequacy of insurance coverage for prescription drugs available to Canadians have emphasized differences in the coverage provided by different provincial governments. Less is known about the actual financial burden of prescription drug spending and how this burden varies by province of residence, affluence and source of primary drug coverage.

Methods: We used data from a nationally representative household expenditure survey to analyze the financial burden of prescription drugs. We focused on the drug budget share (defined as the share of the household budget spent on prescription drugs), considering how it varied by province, total household budget and likely primary source of drug insurance coverage (i.e., provincial government plan for senior citizens, social assistance plan or private coverage). We examined both "typical" households (at the median of the distribution of the drug budget share) and households with relatively large shares (in the top 5%). Finally, we estimated the percentage of households with catastrophic drug expenditures (defined as a drug budget share of 10% or more) and the average catastrophic drug expenditures.

Results: Senior, social assistance and general population households accounted for 21.1%, 8.9% and 69.9% of the sample of 14,430 respondents to the 2006 Survey of Household Spending, respectively. The median drug budget share in Canada was 1.1% for senior households (range 0.4% [Ontario] to 3.6% [Saskatchewan]) and 0.1% for both social assistance households and general population households, with little appreciable variation across provinces for these latter 2 categories. The 95th percentile drug budget share in Canada was 7.4% for senior households (range 3.5% [Ontario] to 12.7% [Saskatchewan]), 5.4% for social assistance households (range 2.3% [British Columbia] to 13.0% [Prince Edward Island]) and 2.6% for general population households (range 2.1% [Ontario] to 5.4% [Prince Edward Island]). The interprovincial range of the 95th percentile drug budget share was 10.7 percentage points for social assistance households, 9.2 percentage points for senior households and 3.3 percentage points for general population households.

Interpretation: For most households, the financial burden of prescription drug expenditures appeared to be relatively small, with little interprovincial variation. However, a small number of households incurred catastrophic drug costs. These households were concentrated in the groups that traditionally benefit from provincial government drug plans. It is likely that some households did not purchase needed prescription drugs because of the expense, so our estimates of the financial burden of catastrophic prescription drug expenditures therefore represent a lower bound.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
家庭自付处方药费用的经济负担:基于全国调查数据的横断面分析。
背景:关于加拿大人可获得的处方药保险覆盖的充分性的评论强调了不同省政府提供的覆盖范围的差异。对于处方药支出的实际经济负担,以及这种负担如何因居住省份、富裕程度和初级药物覆盖来源而变化,所知甚少。方法:采用具有全国代表性的家庭支出调查数据,分析处方药的经济负担。我们关注的是药品预算份额(定义为家庭预算中用于处方药的份额),考虑到它在各省、家庭总预算和可能的药品保险主要来源(即省政府老年人计划、社会援助计划或私人保险)之间的差异。我们检查了“典型”家庭(在药品预算份额分布的中位数)和相对较大份额的家庭(在前5%)。最后,我们估计了灾难性药品支出(定义为药品预算份额的10%或更多)的家庭百分比和平均灾难性药品支出。结果:在二零零六年住户开支统计调查的14,430名受访者中,长者住户、社会援助住户及一般人口住户分别占21.1%、8.9%及69.9%。加拿大老年人家庭的药品预算份额中位数为1.1%(范围为0.4%[安大略省]至3.6%[萨斯喀彻温省]),社会救助家庭和普通人口家庭的药品预算份额中位数为0.1%,后两类在各省之间几乎没有明显的差异。在加拿大,老年人家庭的第95百分位药品预算份额为7.4%(范围为3.5%[安大略省]至12.7%[萨斯喀彻温省]),社会救助家庭为5.4%(范围为2.3%[不列颠哥伦比亚省]至13.0%[爱德华王子岛]),普通人口家庭为2.6%(范围为2.1%[安大略省]至5.4%[爱德华王子岛])。第95百分位药品预算份额的省际范围为社会救助家庭10.7个百分点,老年人家庭9.2个百分点,普通人口家庭3.3个百分点。解释:对于大多数家庭来说,处方药支出的经济负担似乎相对较小,省际差异很小。然而,一小部分家庭发生了灾难性的药品费用。这些家庭集中在传统上受益于省政府药品计划的群体中。很可能有些家庭因为费用而没有购买所需的处方药,所以我们对灾难性处方药支出的经济负担的估计因此代表了一个下限。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Closing Open Medicine. Use of mental health care for nonpsychotic conditions by immigrants in different admission classes and by refugees in Ontario, Canada. Comparison of sampling methods for hard-to-reach francophone populations: yield and adequacy of advertisement and respondent-driven sampling. Pan-Canadian overpricing of medicines: a 6-country study of cost control for generic medicines. Dengue fever: a Wikipedia clinical review.
×
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