首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Pharmacology >Commentary: Patient Cost Sharing and Medical Expenditures for the Elderly
【24h】

Commentary: Patient Cost Sharing and Medical Expenditures for the Elderly

机译:评论:病人的费用分担和老年人的医疗费用

获取原文
           

摘要

Fukushima et al. recently published research on the relationship between cost sharing policies and medical spending by the elderly (Fukushima et al., 2016 ). Japan, as the nation in the most advanced stage of population aging, is indeed the best place to search for answers (Ogura et al., 2007 ). The authors provided us with a valuable contribution on the effects of such policies on the demand for medical services and costs within the subpopulation of senior citizens. The study has been conducted within a sound methodological framework and significantly expands our knowledge on the oldest among the world's large nations. I would like to complement their revealing findings with few additional facts crucial for understanding these issues. One of the baseline results of the study claims: “lower cost sharing significantly increases medical spending.” This actually follows the natural logic that a patient is likely to consume more care if it is effectively free at the point of usage. Three decades ago policy makers believed it should be possible for a cost sharing mechanism to contain costs and induce net savings (Keeler and Rolph, 1983 ). It appears that the final balance is highly dependent on prevailing governing practices and legislative framework within the observed market (Remler and Glied, 2006 ). Besides there are studies showing that increased co-payments—especially for pharmaceuticals—have a detrimental effect on access and compliance—potentially leading to worse health outcomes (Shrank et al., 2006 ; Roberts et al., 2012a , b ; Maimaris et al., 2013 ; Barnieh et al., 2014 ; Putrik et al., 2014 ; Simoens and Sinnaeve, 2014 ; Barbui and Conti, 2015 ; Tefferi et al., 2015 ). There are findings from Greece where major increases in patient co-payments were coupled with a reduction in public services in areas such as infection and mental health. This national case also adds to the literature (Ayuso-Mateos et al., 2013 ; Siskou et al., 2013 ; Kentikelenis et al., 2014 ). However, the impact of increased co-payments on health is still subject to ongoing debate (Mann et al., 2014 ). WHO had serious concerns on accessibility and co-payment. Therefore, it settled on a target of 80% availability for affordable essential medicines, including generics. Targeted therapeutic areas were major Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs), such as diabetes and hypertension. This policy aimed to address global concerns with the impact of NCDs on morbidity and mortality ~(1) . The article conveys an important message with regards to the role of cost sharing in prescribing and dispensing medicines (Johnson et al., 1997 ). The authors noticed the concerning fact that reduced cost sharing after the age of 70 increases demand for brand-name medicines, unlike generics. This change ultimately leads to an expanding market share of original drug dispensing and sales. The roots of this change could be found in consumer behavior. There is traditionally a strong lack of confidence in the quality of copycat medicines attributed to the Japanese patient (Kobayashi et al., 2011 ). This explains the willingness to pay slightly more for an original drug compared to generic alternative in a reduced cost-sharing setting. The uniqueness of the Japanese pharmaceutical market and its global impact refers to its mammoth size (World's second largest) and the smallest share of generics compared to other major high-income OECD economies (Penner-Hahn and Shaver, 2005 ). National efforts to increase generic replacement of brand name drugs have long been a source of public debate among Japanese authorities (Jakovljevic et al., 2014 ). The surprising findings of Fukushima et al. appropriately indicate the need for differential cost sharing rates as a strategy to contain drug acquisition costs in future. There is a variety of measures used to increase the prescribing of generics vs. originators in Europe. These include compulsory substitution, e.g., in Sweden (Andersson et al., 2005 ), compulsory INN prescribing, e.g., in Lithuania (Garuoliene et al., 2011 ), or high voluntary INN prescribing as in the UK (Godman et al., 2013 ). The high use of generics should not be troubled conditional to guaranteed quality. Some of these historical experiences might be applicable to Japanese policy challenges as well. We should be aware that a general provision of guidelines has limited impact visible in the demise of the RMO guidelines in France for GPs (Sermet et al., 2010 ). The comprehensive approach to instigating a limited list of well-proven medicines, coupled with simple advice, has worked well in Stockholm, Sweden. It leads to improved care through consistency in use of well-proven medicines as well as reduced pharmaceutical expenditure (Gustafsson et al., 2011 ). The phenomenon of a shrinking labor force and threatened financial sustainability of health care provision was recognized in the Japanese market a few decades ago (Ogura, 1994 ). The development of policies a
机译:福岛等。最近发表的关于费用分担政策与老年人医疗支出之间关系的研究(Fukushima et al。,2016)。作为人口老龄化最先进的国家,日本确实是寻找答案的最佳地点(Ogura等,2007)。作者为我们在此类政策对老年人群中的医疗服务需求和费用的影响方面做出了宝贵贡献。这项研究是在一个合理的方法框架内进行的,极大地扩展了我们对世界大国中最古老国家的了解。我想用很少的其他事实来补充他们的发现,这些事实对于理解这些问题至关重要。这项研究的基线结果之一是:“较低的费用分担会显着增加医疗支出。”实际上,这遵循自然的逻辑,即如果患者在使用时有效地免费,则患者可能会需要更多的护理。三十年前,政策制定者认为,成本分担机制应该有可能控制成本并实现净节约(Keeler和Rolph,1983年)。最终的平衡似乎在很大程度上取决于所观察市场中的现行治理实践和立法框架(R​​emler和Glied,2006年)。此外,有研究表明,特别是针对药品的共同付款增加,对获取和合规性有不利影响,有可能导致健康状况恶化(Shrank等,2006; Roberts等,2012a,b; Maimaris等) ; 2013; Barnieh等人,2014; Putrik等人,2014; Simoens和Sinnaeve,2014; Barbui和Conti,2015; Tefferi等人,2015)。希腊的调查结果表明,患者共付额的大幅增加,加上感染和精神卫生等领域公共服务的减少。这个国家案例也增加了文献(Ayuso-Mateos等,2013; Siskou等,2013; Kentikelenis等,2014)。然而,共付额增加对健康的影响仍在不断争论中(Mann等,2014)。世卫组织对无障碍获取和共同付款感到严重关切。因此,它的目标是将包括仿制药在内的负担得起的基本药物的可用性提高到80%。靶向治疗领域是主要的非传染性疾病(NCD),例如糖尿病和高血压。该政策旨在解决全球关注的非传染性疾病对发病率和死亡率的影响[1]。这篇文章传达了关于费用分担在处方药和配药中的作用的重要信息(Johnson等,1997)。作者注意到一个令人担忧的事实,即与仿制药品不同,70岁后降低的成本分摊增加了对名牌药品的需求。这种变化最终导致原始药物分配和销售的市场份额不断扩大。这种变化的根源可以在消费者的行为中找到。传统上,日本患者对仿制药品的质量非常缺乏信心(Kobayashi等,2011)。这就解释了在降低成本分摊的情况下,与通用替代品相比,愿意为原始药物支付更高价格的意愿。日本药品市场的独特性及其对全球的影响是指与其他主要的高收入OECD经济体相比,日本药品市场规模庞大(世界第二大),仿制药所占份额最小(Penner-Hahn和Shaver,2005年)。长期以来,国家努力增加对品牌药的仿制药替代一直是日本当局之间公开辩论的源泉(Jakovljevic等,2014)。福岛等人的惊人发现。适当表明需要采用差异化成本分摊率作为控制未来药物购买成本的策略。在欧洲,有各种各样的措施可用来增加对仿制药和原研药的处方。这些措施包括例如在瑞典(Andersson等,2005)的强制替代,在立陶宛的强制性INN处方(Garuoliene等,2011)或在英国的高自愿性INN处方(Godman等, 2013)。不应在保证质量的前提下大量使用泛型。这些历史经验中的一些也许也适用于日本的政策挑战。我们应该意识到,指南的一般性规定在法国的RMO指南对GP的废止中影响有限(Sermet等,2010)。在瑞典斯德哥尔摩,采用一种全面的方法来激发数量有限的经过验证的药物,再加上简单的建议,效果很好。通过持续使用久经考验的药物以及减少药品支出,它可以改善护理水平(Gustafsson等,2011)。几十年前,日本市场已经认识到劳动力萎缩和威胁到医疗服务的财务可持续性的现象(Ogura,1994)。政策制定

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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