BACKGROUND: Sources of regional variation in spending for prescription drugs under Medicare Part D are poorly understood, and such variation may reflect differences in health status, use of effective treatments, or selection of branded drugs over lower-cost generics. METHODS: We analyzed 2008 Medicare data for 4.7 million beneficiaries for prescription-drug use and expenditures overall and in three drug categories: angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (statins), and selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs). Differences in per capita expenditures across hospital-referral regions (HRRs) were decomposed into annual prescription volume and cost per prescription. The ratio of prescriptions filled as branded drugs to all prescriptions filled was calculated. We adjusted all measures for demographic, socioeconomic, and health-status differences. RESULTS: Mean adjusted per capita pharmaceutical spending ranged from $2,413 in the lowest to $3,008 in the highest quintile of HRRs. Most (75.9%) of that difference was attributable to the cost per prescription ($53 vs. $63). Regional differences in cost per prescription explained 87.5% of expenditure variation for ACE inhibitors and ARBs and 56.3% for statins but only 36.1% for SSRIs and SNRIs. The ratio of branded-drug to total prescriptions, which correlated highly with cost per prescription, ranged across HRRs from 0.24 to 0.45 overall and from 0.24 to 0.55 for ACE inhibitors and ARBs, 0.29 to 0.60 for statins, and 0.15 to 0.51 for SSRIs and SNRIs. CONCLUSIONS: Regional variation in Medicare Part D spending results largely from differences in the cost of drugs selected rather than prescription volume. A reduction in branded-drug use in some regions through modification of Part D plan benefits might lower costs without reducing quality of care. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging and others.).
BACKGROUND: Sources of regional variation in spending for prescription drugs under Medicare Part D are poorly understood, and such variation may reflect differences in health status, use of effective treatments, or selection of branded drugs over lower-cost generics. METHODS: We analyzed 2008 Medicare data for 4.7 million beneficiaries for prescription-drug use and expenditures overall and in three drug categories: angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (statins), and selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs). Differences in per capita expenditures across hospital-referral regions (HRRs) were decomposed into annual prescription volume and cost per prescription. The ratio of prescriptions filled as branded drugs to all prescriptions filled was calculated. We adjusted all measures for demographic, socioeconomic, and health-status differences. RESULTS: Mean adjusted per capita pharmaceutical spending ranged from $2,413 in the lowest to $3,008 in the highest quintile of HRRs. Most (75.9%) of that difference was attributable to the cost per prescription ($53 vs. $63). Regional differences in cost per prescription explained 87.5% of expenditure variation for ACE inhibitors and ARBs and 56.3% for statins but only 36.1% for SSRIs and SNRIs. The ratio of branded-drug to total prescriptions, which correlated highly with cost per prescription, ranged across HRRs from 0.24 to 0.45 overall and from 0.24 to 0.55 for ACE inhibitors and ARBs, 0.29 to 0.60 for statins, and 0.15 to 0.51 for SSRIs and SNRIs. CONCLUSIONS: Regional variation in Medicare Part D spending results largely from differences in the cost of drugs selected rather than prescription volume. A reduction in branded-drug use in some regions through modification of Part D plan benefits might lower costs without reducing quality of care. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging and others.).
Authors: Elliott S Fisher; David E Wennberg; Thérèse A Stukel; Daniel J Gottlieb; F L Lucas; Etoile L Pinder Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2003-02-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Elliott S Fisher; David E Wennberg; Thérèse A Stukel; Daniel J Gottlieb; F L Lucas; Etoile L Pinder Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2003-02-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Haiden A Huskamp; Patricia A Deverka; Arnold M Epstein; Robert S Epstein; Kimberly A McGuigan; Richard G Frank Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-12-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: William H Shrank; Margaret Stedman; Susan L Ettner; Dee DeLapp; June Dirstine; M Alan Brookhart; Michael A Fischer; Jerry Avorn; Steven M Asch Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-07-24 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: William H Shrank; Tuyen Hoang; Susan L Ettner; Peter A Glassman; Kavita Nair; Dee DeLapp; June Dirstine; Jerry Avorn; Steven M Asch Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2006-02-13
Authors: Anne Spinewine; Kenneth E Schmader; Nick Barber; Carmel Hughes; Kate L Lapane; Christian Swine; Joseph T Hanlon Journal: Lancet Date: 2007-07-14 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Marc A Pfeffer; John J V McMurray; Eric J Velazquez; Jean-Lucien Rouleau; Lars Køber; Aldo P Maggioni; Scott D Solomon; Karl Swedberg; Frans Van de Werf; Harvey White; Jeffrey D Leimberger; Marc Henis; Susan Edwards; Steven Zelenkofske; Mary Ann Sellers; Robert M Califf Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-11-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Julie Donohue; A James O'Malley; Marcela Horvitz-Lennon; Anna Levine Taub; Ernst R Berndt; Haiden A Huskamp Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2014-03-01 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Julie M Donohue; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Marcela Horvitz-Lennon; Aiju Men; Ernst R Berndt; Haiden A Huskamp Journal: J Ment Health Policy Econ Date: 2016-06