医疗保险D部分对类风湿关节炎受益人获得专业生物药物和费用分担的影响。

Jennifer M Polinski, Penny E Mohr, Lorraine Johnson
{"title":"医疗保险D部分对类风湿关节炎受益人获得专业生物药物和费用分担的影响。","authors":"Jennifer M Polinski,&nbsp;Penny E Mohr,&nbsp;Lorraine Johnson","doi":"10.1002/art.24560","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Many worry that the use of specialty tiering for biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) by Medicare Part D plans imposes a heavy financial burden on beneficiaries with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To date, no one has examined the cost-sharing structures for biologic DMARDs in Part D plans or the resulting cost burden for patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We followed 14,929 vulnerable, low-income patients with RA who were enrolled in the Medicare Replacement Drug Demonstration (MRDD) in 2005. As the MRDD population transitioned into Part D in 2006, we examined correlates of Part D enrollment and compared the cost-sharing provisions for biologic DMARDs in the Medicare Advantage and stand-alone plans. We simulated the out-of-pocket costs of beneficiaries under 3 cost-sharing scenarios.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-one percent of MRDD beneficiaries with RA enrolled in Part D. Enrollment predictors were female sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.48, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.32-1.67), prior MRDD benefit use (OR 2.29, 95% CI 2.04-2.58), other self-reported drug coverage (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.36-1.71), and receiving an MRDD subsidy (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.74-2.30). Compared with stand-alone plans, Medicare Advantage plans had lower deductibles, lower premiums, and fewer prior authorization, step therapy, and quantity limit restrictions. However, approximately 75% of all plans used coinsurance as the preferred form of cost sharing. Out-of-pocket costs exceeded $4,000 annually in all cost-sharing scenarios.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most MRDD beneficiaries with RA enrolled in Part D. Although plans assume some costs for biologic DMARDs, the majority of costs are shifted to beneficiaries and to Medicare. Such cost shifting may place these medications out of the beneficiary's financial reach and expose Medicare to high financial liability.</p>","PeriodicalId":8405,"journal":{"name":"Arthritis and rheumatism","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/art.24560","citationCount":"37","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Medicare Part D on access to and cost sharing for specialty biologic medications for beneficiaries with rheumatoid arthritis.\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer M Polinski,&nbsp;Penny E Mohr,&nbsp;Lorraine Johnson\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/art.24560\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Many worry that the use of specialty tiering for biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) by Medicare Part D plans imposes a heavy financial burden on beneficiaries with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To date, no one has examined the cost-sharing structures for biologic DMARDs in Part D plans or the resulting cost burden for patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We followed 14,929 vulnerable, low-income patients with RA who were enrolled in the Medicare Replacement Drug Demonstration (MRDD) in 2005. As the MRDD population transitioned into Part D in 2006, we examined correlates of Part D enrollment and compared the cost-sharing provisions for biologic DMARDs in the Medicare Advantage and stand-alone plans. We simulated the out-of-pocket costs of beneficiaries under 3 cost-sharing scenarios.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-one percent of MRDD beneficiaries with RA enrolled in Part D. Enrollment predictors were female sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.48, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.32-1.67), prior MRDD benefit use (OR 2.29, 95% CI 2.04-2.58), other self-reported drug coverage (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.36-1.71), and receiving an MRDD subsidy (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.74-2.30). Compared with stand-alone plans, Medicare Advantage plans had lower deductibles, lower premiums, and fewer prior authorization, step therapy, and quantity limit restrictions. However, approximately 75% of all plans used coinsurance as the preferred form of cost sharing. Out-of-pocket costs exceeded $4,000 annually in all cost-sharing scenarios.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most MRDD beneficiaries with RA enrolled in Part D. Although plans assume some costs for biologic DMARDs, the majority of costs are shifted to beneficiaries and to Medicare. Such cost shifting may place these medications out of the beneficiary's financial reach and expose Medicare to high financial liability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8405,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthritis and rheumatism\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/art.24560\",\"citationCount\":\"37\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthritis and rheumatism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/art.24560\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthritis and rheumatism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/art.24560","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 37

摘要

目的:许多人担心医疗保险D部分计划中生物疾病改善抗风湿药物(DMARDs)的专业分级给类风湿关节炎(RA)受益人带来沉重的经济负担。迄今为止,还没有人研究过D部分计划中生物dmard的成本分担结构或由此产生的患者成本负担。方法:我们对2005年参加医疗保险替代药物示范(MRDD)的14929名弱势低收入RA患者进行了随访。随着MRDD人群在2006年过渡到D部分,我们检查了D部分登记的相关性,并比较了医疗保险优势计划和独立计划中生物dmard的成本分担规定。我们模拟了三种费用分摊方案下受益人的自付费用。结果:81%的RA MRDD受益人入组d部分,入组预测因子为女性(优势比[OR] 1.48, 95%可信区间[95% CI] 1.32-1.67),既往MRDD获益使用(OR 2.29, 95% CI 2.04-2.58),其他自我报告的药物覆盖率(OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.36-1.71),以及接受MRDD补贴(OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.74-2.30)。与独立计划相比,医疗保险优势计划有更低的免赔额、更低的保费、更少的事先授权、分步治疗和数量限制。然而,大约75%的计划使用共同保险作为成本分摊的首选形式。在所有分摊费用的情况下,自付费用每年超过4 000美元。结论:大多数患有RA的MRDD受益人参加了d部分。尽管计划承担了生物dmard的一些费用,但大部分费用转移给了受益人和医疗保险。这种成本转移可能会使这些药物超出受益人的经济承受能力,并使医疗保险承担高额的财务责任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Impact of Medicare Part D on access to and cost sharing for specialty biologic medications for beneficiaries with rheumatoid arthritis.

Objective: Many worry that the use of specialty tiering for biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) by Medicare Part D plans imposes a heavy financial burden on beneficiaries with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To date, no one has examined the cost-sharing structures for biologic DMARDs in Part D plans or the resulting cost burden for patients.

Methods: We followed 14,929 vulnerable, low-income patients with RA who were enrolled in the Medicare Replacement Drug Demonstration (MRDD) in 2005. As the MRDD population transitioned into Part D in 2006, we examined correlates of Part D enrollment and compared the cost-sharing provisions for biologic DMARDs in the Medicare Advantage and stand-alone plans. We simulated the out-of-pocket costs of beneficiaries under 3 cost-sharing scenarios.

Results: Eighty-one percent of MRDD beneficiaries with RA enrolled in Part D. Enrollment predictors were female sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.48, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.32-1.67), prior MRDD benefit use (OR 2.29, 95% CI 2.04-2.58), other self-reported drug coverage (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.36-1.71), and receiving an MRDD subsidy (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.74-2.30). Compared with stand-alone plans, Medicare Advantage plans had lower deductibles, lower premiums, and fewer prior authorization, step therapy, and quantity limit restrictions. However, approximately 75% of all plans used coinsurance as the preferred form of cost sharing. Out-of-pocket costs exceeded $4,000 annually in all cost-sharing scenarios.

Conclusion: Most MRDD beneficiaries with RA enrolled in Part D. Although plans assume some costs for biologic DMARDs, the majority of costs are shifted to beneficiaries and to Medicare. Such cost shifting may place these medications out of the beneficiary's financial reach and expose Medicare to high financial liability.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Arthritis and rheumatism
Arthritis and rheumatism 医学-风湿病学
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
1 months
期刊最新文献
Double-blind, Randomized, 8-week Placebo-controlled followed by a 16-week open label extension study, with the LPA1 receptor antagonist SAR100842 for Patients With Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis Secukinumab Achievement of Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) Related Remission: 2-Year Results from a Phase 3 Study Assessment of methods to quantitatively evaluate global synovitis activity with FDG-PET/CT Antibodies Against Domain 1 and Domain 4/5 of β2 Glycoprotein I : Clinical Relevance in Obstetric Anti-Phospholipid Syndrome A Self-Determination Theory Based Intervention to Increase Levels of Cardiorespiratory Fitness, Self-Determined Motivation, Physical Activity and Improve Health Outcomes Among Patients Living with Rheumatoid Arthritis
×
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