Literature DB >> 21791689

Implementation of Medicare Part D and nondrug medical spending for elderly adults with limited prior drug coverage.

J Michael McWilliams1, Alan M Zaslavsky, Haiden A Huskamp.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Implementation of Medicare Part D was followed by increased use of prescription medications, reduced out-of-pocket costs, and improved medication adherence. Its effects on nondrug medical spending remain unclear.
OBJECTIVE: To assess differential changes in nondrug medical spending following the implementation of Part D for traditional Medicare beneficiaries with limited prior drug coverage. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Nationally representative longitudinal survey data and linked Medicare claims from 2004-2007 were used to compare nondrug medical spending before and after the implementation of Part D by self-reported generosity of prescription drug coverage before 2006. Participants included 6001 elderly Medicare beneficiaries from the Health and Retirement Study, including 2538 with generous and 3463 with limited drug coverage before 2006. Comparisons were adjusted for sociodemographic and health characteristics and checked for residual confounding by conducting similar comparisons for a control cohort from 2002-2005. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Nondrug medical spending assessed from claims, in total and by type of service (inpatient and skilled nursing facility vs physician services).
RESULTS: Total nondrug medical spending was differentially reduced after January 1, 2006, for beneficiaries with limited prior drug coverage (-$306/quarter [95% confidence interval {CI}, -$586 to -$51]; P = .02), relative to beneficiaries with generous prior drug coverage. This differential reduction was explained mostly by differential changes in spending on inpatient and skilled nursing facility care (-$204/quarter [95% CI, -$447 to $2]; P = .05). Differential reductions in spending on physician services (-$67/quarter [95% CI, -$134 to -$5]; P = .03) were not associated with differential changes in outpatient visits (-0.06 visits/quarter [95% CI, -0.21 to 0.08]; P = .37), suggesting reduced spending on inpatient physician services for beneficiaries with limited prior drug coverage. In contrast, nondrug medical spending in the control cohort did not differentially change after January 1, 2004, for beneficiaries with limited prior drug coverage in 2002 ($14/quarter [95% CI, -$338 to $324]; P = .93), relative to beneficiaries with generous prior coverage.
CONCLUSION: Implementation of Part D was associated with significant differential reductions in nondrug medical spending for Medicare beneficiaries with limited prior drug coverage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21791689     DOI: 10.1001/jama.2011.1026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  19 in total

1.  Medicare Part D plan generosity and medication use among dual-eligible nursing home residents.

Authors:  Haiden A Huskamp; David G Stevenson; A James O'Malley; Stacie B Dusetzina; Susan L Mitchell; Barbara J Zarowitz; Michael E Chernew; Joseph P Newhouse
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Nonlinear pricing in drug benefits and medication use: the case of statin compliance in Medicare Part D.

Authors:  Kyoungrae Jung; Roger Feldman; A Marshall McBean
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-12-19       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Association of Medicare Part D medication out-of-pocket costs with utilization of statin medications.

Authors:  Pinar Karaca-Mandic; Tami Swenson; Jean M Abraham; Robert L Kane
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2012-12-26       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Understanding Trends in Medicare Spending, 2007-2014.

Authors:  Laura M Keohane; Robert J Gambrel; Salama S Freed; David Stevenson; Melinda B Buntin
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-03-06       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Hospitalizations for Chronic Conditions Among Indigenous Australians After Medication Copayment Reductions: the Closing the Gap Copayment Incentive.

Authors:  Amal N Trivedi; Ross Bailie; Jodie Bailie; Alex Brown; Margaret Kelaher
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Did Medicare Part D Affect National Trends in Health Outcomes or Hospitalizations? A Time-Series Analysis.

Authors:  Becky A Briesacher; Jeanne M Madden; Fang Zhang; Hassan Fouayzi; Dennis Ross-Degnan; Jerry H Gurwitz; Stephen B Soumerai
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2015-06-16       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Medicare part D research and policy highlights, 2012: impact and insights.

Authors:  Denys T Lau; JoAnn Stubbings
Journal:  Clin Ther       Date:  2012-03-13       Impact factor: 3.393

8.  Racial/ethnic disparities in Medicare Part D experiences.

Authors:  Amelia M Haviland; Marc N Elliott; Robert Weech-Maldonado; Katrin Hambarsoomian; Nate Orr; Ron D Hays
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  How increasing medical access to opioids contributes to the opioid epidemic: Evidence from Medicare Part D.

Authors:  David Powell; Rosalie Liccardo Pacula; Erin Taylor
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2020-03-04       Impact factor: 3.883

10.  Cost sharing and decreased branded oral anti-diabetic medication adherence among elderly Part D Medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Naomi C Sacks; James F Burgess; Howard J Cabral; Steven D Pizer; Marie E McDonnell
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2013-02-13       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.