OBJECTIVES: To examine the association of medication adherence with healthcare use and costs among Medicaid beneficiaries with congestive heart failure (CHF), to investigate whether the association was a graded one, and to estimate the potential savings due to improved adherence. STUDY DESIGN: Using Medicare and Medicaid data for 4 states, adherence was estimated using the medication possession ratio (MPR). METHODS: Multivariate logistic and 2-part general linear models were estimated to study the primary objectives. The MPR was specified in multiple ways to examine its association with healthcare use and costs. RESULTS: Adherent beneficiaries were less likely to have a hospitalization (0.4 percentage points), had fewer hospitalizations (13%), had in excess of 2 fewer inpatient days (25%), were less likely to have an emergency department (ED) visit (3%), and had fewer ED visits (10%) than nonadherent beneficiaries. Total healthcare costs were $5910 (23%) less per year for adherent beneficiaries compared with nonadherent beneficiaries. The relationship between medication adherence and healthcare costs was graded. For example, beneficiaries with adherence rates of 95% or higher had about 15% lower healthcare costs than those with adherence rates between 80% and less than 95% ($17,665 vs $20,747, P <.01). The relationship between adherence and total healthcare costs was even more stark when the most adherent beneficiaries were segmented into finer subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare costs among Medicaid beneficiaries with CHF would be lower if more patients were adherent to prescribed medication regimens. Researchers should reconsider whether a binary threshold for adherence is sufficient to examine the association of adherence with outcomes and healthcare costs.
OBJECTIVES: To examine the association of medication adherence with healthcare use and costs among Medicaid beneficiaries with congestive heart failure (CHF), to investigate whether the association was a graded one, and to estimate the potential savings due to improved adherence. STUDY DESIGN: Using Medicare and Medicaid data for 4 states, adherence was estimated using the medication possession ratio (MPR). METHODS: Multivariate logistic and 2-part general linear models were estimated to study the primary objectives. The MPR was specified in multiple ways to examine its association with healthcare use and costs. RESULTS: Adherent beneficiaries were less likely to have a hospitalization (0.4 percentage points), had fewer hospitalizations (13%), had in excess of 2 fewer inpatient days (25%), were less likely to have an emergency department (ED) visit (3%), and had fewer ED visits (10%) than nonadherent beneficiaries. Total healthcare costs were $5910 (23%) less per year for adherent beneficiaries compared with nonadherent beneficiaries. The relationship between medication adherence and healthcare costs was graded. For example, beneficiaries with adherence rates of 95% or higher had about 15% lower healthcare costs than those with adherence rates between 80% and less than 95% ($17,665 vs $20,747, P <.01). The relationship between adherence and total healthcare costs was even more stark when the most adherent beneficiaries were segmented into finer subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare costs among Medicaid beneficiaries with CHF would be lower if more patients were adherent to prescribed medication regimens. Researchers should reconsider whether a binary threshold for adherence is sufficient to examine the association of adherence with outcomes and healthcare costs.
Authors: Cynthia L Leibson; Allen W Brown; Kirsten Hall Long; Jeanine E Ransom; Jay Mandrekar; Turner M Osler; James F Malec Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2012-04-26 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: Barbara Riegel; Christopher S Lee; Sarah J Ratcliffe; Sabina De Geest; Sheryl Potashnik; Megan Patey; Steven L Sayers; Lee R Goldberg; William S Weintraub Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2012-05-30 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Kevin P Cohoon; Cynthia L Leibson; Jeanine E Ransom; Aneel A Ashrani; Myung S Park; Tanya M Petterson; Kirsten Hall Long; Kent R Bailey; John A Heit Journal: Surgery Date: 2015-01-26 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Saul Blecker; Yiyi Zhang; Daniel E Ford; Eliseo Guallar; Susan Dosreis; Donald M Steinwachs; Lisa B Dixon; Gail L Daumit Journal: Gen Hosp Psychiatry Date: 2010-03-16 Impact factor: 3.238
Authors: Kevin P Cohoon; Jeanine E Ransom; Cynthia L Leibson; Aneel A Ashrani; Tanya M Petterson; Kirsten Hall Long; Kent R Bailey; John A Heit Journal: Am J Med Date: 2016-03-21 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Jia-Rong Wu; Darren A DeWalt; David W Baker; Dean Schillinger; Bernice Ruo; Kristen Bibbins-Domingo; Aurelia Macabasco-O'Connell; George M Holmes; Kimberly A Broucksou; Brian Erman; Victoria Hawk; Crystal W Cene; Christine DeLong Jones; Michael Pignone Journal: J Clin Nurs Date: 2013-12-20 Impact factor: 3.036
Authors: Emily C Gathright; Mary A Dolansky; John Gunstad; Joseph D Redle; Richard A Josephson; Shirley M Moore; Joel W Hughes Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Jia-Rong Wu; Susan K Frazier; Mary Kay Rayens; Terry A Lennie; Misook L Chung; Debra K Moser Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2012-07-02 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Christine D Jones; George M Holmes; Darren A Dewalt; Brian Erman; Kimberly Broucksou; Victoria Hawk; Crystal W Cene; Jia-Rong Wu; Michael Pignone Journal: J Card Fail Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 5.712