OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of patient copayment and coinsurance policies on adherence to therapy with beta-adrenergic blocking agents (beta-blockers) and on the rate of initiation of beta-blocker therapy after acute myocardial infarction (MI) in a population-based natural experiment. STUDY DESIGN: Three sequential cohorts included British Columbia residents age 66 years and older who initiated beta-blocker therapy during time intervals with full drug coverage (2001), a $10 or $25 copayment (2002), and 25% coinsurance (2003-2004). We used linked data on all prescription drug dispensings, physician services, and hospitalizations. Follow-up of each cohort was 9 months after the policy changes. METHODS: We measured the proportion of subjects in each cohort who were adherent to beta-blocker therapy over time, with adherence defined as having >80% of days covered. We also measured the proportion of patients initiating beta-blocker therapy after acute MI. Policy effects were evaluated using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Adherence to beta-blocker therapy was marginally reduced as a consequence of the copayment policy (-1.3 percentage points, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.5 , -0.04) or the coinsurance policy (-0.8 percentage points, 95% CI = -2.0, 0.3). The proportion of patients initiating beta-blockers after hospitalization for acute MI remained steady at about 61% during the study period, similar to that observed in a control population of elderly Pennsylvania residents with full drug coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Fixed patient copayment and coinsurance policies had little negative effect on adherence to relatively inexpensive beta-blocker therapy, or initiation of beta-blockers after acute MI.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of patient copayment and coinsurance policies on adherence to therapy with beta-adrenergic blocking agents (beta-blockers) and on the rate of initiation of beta-blocker therapy after acute myocardial infarction (MI) in a population-based natural experiment. STUDY DESIGN: Three sequential cohorts included British Columbia residents age 66 years and older who initiated beta-blocker therapy during time intervals with full drug coverage (2001), a $10 or $25 copayment (2002), and 25% coinsurance (2003-2004). We used linked data on all prescription drug dispensings, physician services, and hospitalizations. Follow-up of each cohort was 9 months after the policy changes. METHODS: We measured the proportion of subjects in each cohort who were adherent to beta-blocker therapy over time, with adherence defined as having >80% of days covered. We also measured the proportion of patients initiating beta-blocker therapy after acute MI. Policy effects were evaluated using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Adherence to beta-blocker therapy was marginally reduced as a consequence of the copayment policy (-1.3 percentage points, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.5 , -0.04) or the coinsurance policy (-0.8 percentage points, 95% CI = -2.0, 0.3). The proportion of patients initiating beta-blockers after hospitalization for acute MI remained steady at about 61% during the study period, similar to that observed in a control population of elderly Pennsylvania residents with full drug coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Fixed patient copayment and coinsurance policies had little negative effect on adherence to relatively inexpensive beta-blocker therapy, or initiation of beta-blockers after acute MI.
Authors: S G Priori; E Aliot; C Blomstrom-Lundqvist; L Bossaert; G Breithardt; P Brugada; A J Camm; R Cappato; S M Cobbe; C Di Mario; B J Maron; W J McKenna; A K Pedersen; U Ravens; P J Schwartz; M Trusz-Gluza; P Vardas; H J Wellens; D P Zipes Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: L Hansson; L H Lindholm; L Niskanen; J Lanke; T Hedner; A Niklason; K Luomanmäki; B Dahlöf; U de Faire; C Mörlin; B E Karlberg; P O Wester; J E Björck Journal: Lancet Date: 1999-02-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: L Hansson; L H Lindholm; T Ekbom; B Dahlöf; J Lanke; B Scherstén; P O Wester; T Hedner; U de Faire Journal: Lancet Date: 1999-11-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: R J Gibbons; K Chatterjee; J Daley; J S Douglas; S D Fihn; J M Gardin; M A Grunwald; D Levy; B W Lytle; R A O'Rourke; W P Schafer; S V Williams; J L Ritchie; M D Cheitlin; K A Eagle; T J Gardner; A Garson; R O Russell; T J Ryan; S C Smith Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1999-06 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: T J Ryan; E M Antman; N H Brooks; R M Califf; L D Hillis; L F Hiratzka; E Rapaport; B Riegel; R O Russell; E E Smith; W D Weaver; R J Gibbons; J S Alpert; K A Eagle; T J Gardner; A Garson; G Gregoratos; T J Ryan; S C Smith Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Denitza P Blagev; Eliotte L Hirshberg; Katherine Sward; B Taylor Thompson; Roy Brower; Jonathon Truwit; Duncan Hite; Jay Steingrub; James F Orme; Terry P Clemmer; Lindell K Weaver; Frank Thomas; Colin K Grissom; Dean Sorenson; Dean F Sittig; C Jane Wallace; Thomas D East; Homer R Warner; Alan H Morris Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2012-04-11 Impact factor: 2.502
Authors: Virginia Wang; Chuan-Fen Liu; Christopher L Bryson; Nancy D Sharp; Matthew L Maciejewski Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2011-06-20 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Päivi Ruokoniemi; Maarit J Korhonen; Arja Helin-Salmivaara; Piia Lavikainen; Antti Jula; Seppo Y T Junnila; Raimo Kettunen; Risto Huupponen Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Marsha A Raebel; Julie Schmittdiel; Andrew J Karter; Jennifer L Konieczny; John F Steiner Journal: Med Care Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 2.983