首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Springer Open Choice >Paying for Drugs After the Medicare Part D Beneficiary Reaches the Catastrophic Limit: Lessons on Cost Sharing from Other US Policy Partnerships Between Government and Commercial Industry
【2h】

Paying for Drugs After the Medicare Part D Beneficiary Reaches the Catastrophic Limit: Lessons on Cost Sharing from Other US Policy Partnerships Between Government and Commercial Industry

机译:在Medicare D部分受益人达到灾难性限制后支付药品费用:政府和商业机构之间其他美国政策合作伙伴的成本分担教训

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

In 2018, the Medicare Part D catastrophic threshold is $5000 in out-of-pocket total drug spending incurred by the beneficiary. Above this, Medicare pays 80%, prescription drug plans (PDPs) pay 15%, and beneficiaries pay a 5% copay. However, recent growth in catastrophic spending is caused by expensive specialty drugs. The 5% copay, on top of out-of-pocket spending, could result in beneficiaries not accessing specialty drugs. To assist beneficiaries, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) proposes to eliminate beneficiary catastrophic cost sharing, while PDPs pay 80% and Medicare pays 20%. Our objective was to assess other government cost-sharing approaches and consider how they would affect pharmaceutical access, PDP Part D incentives, and pharmaceutical innovation. We reviewed published literature and government reports on cost sharing between US government divisions or between government and private commercial entities. We discussed their cost-sharing applicability to Part D. We found that the US government has utilized numerous cost-sharing approaches to enhance public–private partnerships. We reviewed four cost-sharing arrangements and their applicability to Medicare: the Byrd-Bond Amendment to the Clean Air Act—Medicare bulk purchases drugs costing $8000 + ; North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)—cost sharing based on high-risk markets; the Ryan White Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency (CARE) Act—grants to PDPs in high-risk markets and grants to beneficiaries who cannot afford drugs; and the Department of Veterans Affairs—drug price negotiation for expensive drugs. In conclusion, a variety of federal cost-sharing approaches provide precedent for altering PDP cost sharing. The government tends to prefer options that have been tried elsewhere.
机译:在2018年,Medicare D部分的灾难性阈值是受益人自付费用的总药品支出中的$ 5,000。在此之上,Medicare支付80%,处方药计划(PDP)支付15%,受益人支付5%共付额。但是,最近灾难性支出的增长是由昂贵的特种药物引起的。除了自付费用外,还需支付5%的共付额,否则受益人将无法获得特殊药物。为了帮助受益人,Medicare付款咨询委员会(MedPAC)建议消除受益人的灾难性成本分摊,而PDP支付80%,Medicare支付20%。我们的目标是评估其他政府的费用分摊方法,并考虑它们将如何影响药品获取,PDP D部分激励措施和药品创新。我们审查了有关美国政府部门之间或政府与私人商业实体之间成本分摊的公开文献和政府报告。我们讨论了它们在D部分中的成本分摊适用性。我们发现,美国政府已采用了许多成本分摊方法来增强公私伙伴关系。我们审查了四种费用分摊安排及其对医疗保险的适用性:《清洁空气法》的伯德修正案(Medicare批量购买价格为8000美元以上的药品);北大西洋公约组织(NATO)-基于高风险市场的成本分摊; 《莱恩·怀特(Ryan White)》《莱恩·怀特(Ryan White)综合艾滋病资源应急法》(CARE)-向高风险市场中的PDP提供补助,并向无力购买毒品的受益人提供补助;以及退伍军人事务部-昂贵药品的药品价格谈判。总之,各种联邦成本分摊方法为改变PDP成本分担提供了先例。政府倾向于选择其他地方尝试过的选择。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号