Patrick W Sullivan1, Michael B Nichol. 1. Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research Program, University of Colorado School of Pharmacy, Denver, CO 80262, USA. Patrick.Sullivan@UCHSC.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: As a result of the over-the-counter (OTC) introduction of loratadine, health plans have been struggling to determine the best policy to incorporate this change within their existing drug benefit structure for second-generation antihistamines (SGA). The objective of this study was to examine the economic impact of payer policies in response to the Rx-to-OTC switch of loratadine. STUDY DESIGN: Decision analysis was used to model the budgetary impact and cost-effectiveness of four policies for SGA benefits for the managed care organization (MCO), employer, and Medicaid perspectives separately. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Outcomes included direct medical costs and lost productivity (employers only), discounted, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) saved because of amelioration of allergic rhinitis symptoms and avoidance of unintentional injuries associated with the use of first-generation antihistamines (FGA). Bayesian probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted using second-order Monte Carlo simulation. RESULTS: Providing limited OTC and second-tier prescription benefits would cost approximately 0.13 dollars and 0.30 dollars compared to third-tier prescription benefits for employers and MCOs, respectively, and would save Medicaid 0.02 dollars per member per month (PMPM). Providing limited coverage for OTC loratadine while retaining second-tier prescription benefits for SGA was the optimal policy for a willingness to pay below 26,200 dollars per QALY for all payers. CONCLUSIONS: Offering second-tier prescription and limited OTC benefits provides greater effectiveness and is not significantly more expensive PMPM than discontinuation. Some of the drug savings from limiting coverage of prescription SGA may be attenuated by the cost of lost productivity and direct medical expenditures due to unintentional injuries associated with increased FGA use in addition to the increased cost of therapeutic substitutes.
OBJECTIVE: As a result of the over-the-counter (OTC) introduction of loratadine, health plans have been struggling to determine the best policy to incorporate this change within their existing drug benefit structure for second-generation antihistamines (SGA). The objective of this study was to examine the economic impact of payer policies in response to the Rx-to-OTC switch of loratadine. STUDY DESIGN: Decision analysis was used to model the budgetary impact and cost-effectiveness of four policies for SGA benefits for the managed care organization (MCO), employer, and Medicaid perspectives separately. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Outcomes included direct medical costs and lost productivity (employers only), discounted, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) saved because of amelioration of allergic rhinitis symptoms and avoidance of unintentional injuries associated with the use of first-generation antihistamines (FGA). Bayesian probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted using second-order Monte Carlo simulation. RESULTS: Providing limited OTC and second-tier prescription benefits would cost approximately 0.13 dollars and 0.30 dollars compared to third-tier prescription benefits for employers and MCOs, respectively, and would save Medicaid 0.02 dollars per member per month (PMPM). Providing limited coverage for OTC loratadine while retaining second-tier prescription benefits for SGA was the optimal policy for a willingness to pay below 26,200 dollars per QALY for all payers. CONCLUSIONS: Offering second-tier prescription and limited OTC benefits provides greater effectiveness and is not significantly more expensive PMPM than discontinuation. Some of the drug savings from limiting coverage of prescription SGA may be attenuated by the cost of lost productivity and direct medical expenditures due to unintentional injuries associated with increased FGA use in addition to the increased cost of therapeutic substitutes.