首页> 外文期刊>Journal of managed care pharmacy : >Retrospective database analysis of the impact of prior authorization for type 2 diabetes medications on health care costs in a medicare advantage prescription drug plan population
【24h】

Retrospective database analysis of the impact of prior authorization for type 2 diabetes medications on health care costs in a medicare advantage prescription drug plan population

机译:回顾性数据库分析,分析了事先获得批准的2型糖尿病药物对医疗保险优势处方药计划人群中医疗费用的影响

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Health plans and pharmacy benefit managers have implemented utilization management strategies for newer type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) medications to control pharmacy expenditures. Little is known about the impact of utilization management strategies on overall health care costs and subsequent use of T2DM medications among members who request, but do not receive, a T2DM medication requiring prior authorization (PA). Objective: To examine the relationship between the receipt of a T2DM medication requiring PA, health care costs, and subsequent treatment for T2DM. Methods: A retrospective cohort study using pharmacy, medical, and laboratory claims data was conducted among Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug plan members with a denied claim for a T2DM medication requiring PA (sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor [DPP-4i], and exenatide, an incretin mimetic) between January 1, 2008, and June 30, 2009. Subjects were required to have 12 months of continuous enrollment both before and after the index date. The entire study period was 24 months in duration, including a 12-month pre-index and 12-month postindex period. Three cohorts were identified: 1 that received a medication requiring PA (denied claim, subsequent fill) and 2 nonfilling control groups. Both control groups requested a medication requiring PA, as evidenced by the denied claim, but neither received the medication, either because the medication was not authorized or the member chose not to fill. Claimsbased estimates were used to infer whether the individual likely met the criteria for PA, with 1 control group designated as having met the claimsbased criteria (qualifying nonfilling cohort) and the other not having done so (nonqualifying nonfilling cohort.) The primary endpoint evaluated was the relationship between PA medication fill status and plan-paid costs (medical [including laboratory] and pharmacy) over the 12-month postdenial period, with generalized linear models adjusting for key covariates including demographics, concomitant medications, pre-index costs, preindex adherence, and comorbidities. The secondary endpoint of T2DM medication use (post-denial) among the 2 nonfilling control groups was also evaluated. Results: There were 1,728 members identified who received medication for T2DM requiring PA (the received authorization cohort) and 2,373 who did not (606 qualifying nonfilling cohort; 1,767 nonqualifying nonfilling cohort.) Cohorts were similar with regard to age and gender, but the nonfilling cohort had more comorbidities. Total unadjusted plan-paid 12-month costs were lowest among the received authorization cohort ($11,739), slightly higher ($11,980) for the qualifying nonfilling cohort, and notably higher for the nonqualifying nonfilling cohort ($12,962), although no differences were statistically significant. After adjusting for key covariates, the difference between the nonqualifying nonfilling cohort ($11,980) and the received authorization cohort ($11,729) was statistically significant (P = 0.034). Large differences in plan-paid medical costs ($10,127 for the nonqualifying nonfilling cohort vs. $8,192 for the received authorization cohort) appeared to drive the overall cost totals and were significant in both the unadjusted (P = 0.005) and adjusted models (P < 0.001). Pharmacy costs were significantly lower for the nonqualifying nonfilling cohort in the adjusted model and for the qualifying nonfilling cohort in both models (all P < 0.001), but the lower pharmacy costs were not offset by the higher medical costs. In examining the use of medication for treatment of T2DM following the denied claim, 10.6% of the qualifying nonfilling cohort and 13.4% of the nonqualifying nonfilling cohort added another oral therapy, 10.2% and 5.8% added insulin, and 11.9% and 7.1% had treatment intensification, respectively. More than half (56.1%) of the qualifying nonfilling cohort, but only 32.1% of the nonqualifying nonfilling cohort
机译:背景:健康计划和药房收益管理者已对较新的2型糖尿病(T2DM)药物实施了利用率管理策略,以控制药房支出。对于要求但不接受需要事先授权(PA)的T2DM药物的成员,利用管理策略对总体医疗保健成本以及随后使用T2DM药物的影响知之甚少。目的:研究接受需要PA的T2DM药物的接收,医疗保健费用以及T2DM的后续治疗之间的关系。方法:在Medicare Advantage处方药计划成员中进行了一项使用药房,医学和实验室索赔数据的回顾性队列研究,该患者对要求PA的T2DM药物(西格列汀,二肽基肽酶-4抑制剂[DPP-4i]和exenatide,一种肠降血糖素模拟药物),在2008年1月1日至2009年6月30日之间。受试者必须在索引日期前后连续入学12个月。整个研究期为24个月,包括12个月的前索引期和12个月的后索引期。确定了三个队列:1个接受了需要PA的药物治疗(拒绝治疗,随后加药)和2个未加药的对照组。两个对照组都要求获得需要PA的药物,这是被拒绝的要求所证明的,但是由于药物未被授权或成员选择不填充而没有接受药物。基于声明的估计用于推断个人是否符合PA的标准,其中一个对照组被指定为满足声明的标准(符合条件的非充血队列),另一个没有达到要求的标准(不符合条件的非充血队列)。在拒绝后的12个月内,PA药物填充状态与计划支付的费用(医学[包括实验室]和药房)之间的关系,并针对包括人口统计学,伴随用药,索引前成本,索引前依从性等关键协变量进行了调整的广义线性模型和合并症。还评估了2个非充填对照组中T2DM药物使用的次要终点(拒绝后)。结果:确认有1,728名成员接受了需要PA的T2DM药物治疗(已获得授权的队列),而2,373名没有接受PA的成员(606名合格的非充血队列; 1,767名不合格的非充血队列)。年龄和性别的队列相似,但是队列有更多的合并症。在收到的授权队列中,未经调整的按计划支付的12个月总费用最低(11,739美元),合格的非填充队列稍高(11,980美元),非合格的非填充队列尤为高(12,962美元),尽管差异无统计学意义。在对关键协变量进行调整之后,不合格的未填充队列(11,980美元)与收到的授权队列(11,729美元)之间的差异具有统计学意义(P = 0.034)。计划支付的医疗费用之间的巨大差异(不合格的未加注队列的费用为10,127美元,收到的授权队列的费用为8,192美元)似乎是总体费用的总和,在未调整的模型(P = 0.005)和调整后的模型中均很显着(P <0.001 )。在调整后的模型中,不合格的非充填队列和两个模型中的合格的非充填队列的药房成本都显着降低(所有P <0.001),但是较低的药剂成本不会被较高的医疗费用所抵消。在拒绝索赔后检查使用药物治疗T2DM时,有10.6%的合格非充血队列和13.4%的不充盈队列增加了另一种口服治疗,10.2%和5.8%增了胰岛素,以及11.9%和7.1%分别加大治疗力度。超过一半(56.1%)的符合资格的非充任队列,但只有32.1%的不符合资格的非充任队列

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