OBJECTIVE: Medicare Part D provides formulary protections for antipsychotics but does not exempt these drugs from cost-sharing. We investigated the impact of Part D coverage on antipsychotic drug spending, adherence, and clinical outcomes among beneficiaries with varying indications for use. METHODS: We conducted a historical cohort study of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries who received antipsychotic drugs, with diagnoses of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder or with no mental health diagnoses (N=10,190). Half had a coverage gap; half had no gap because of low-income subsidies. Using fixed effects regression models, we examined changes in spending and adherence as beneficiaries experienced cost-sharing increases after reaching the gap. We examined changes in hospitalizations and emergency department visits using proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Across all diagnostic groups, total monthly expenditure on antipsychotic drugs decreased with cost-sharing increases in the gap compared with those with no gap (eg, schizophrenia: -$123 95% confidence interval [-$138, -$108]), and out-of-pocket spending increased (eg, schizophrenia: $104 [$98, $110]). Adherence similarly decreased, with the largest declines among those with schizophrenia (-20.6 percentage points [-22.3, -18.9] in proportion of days covered). Among beneficiaries with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, hospitalizations and emergency department visit rates increased with cost-sharing increases (eg, schizophrenia: hazard ratio=1.32 [1.06, 1.65] for all hospitalizations), but did not among subjects without mental health diagnoses. Clinical event rates did not change among beneficiaries with low-income subsidies without gaps. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence of interruptions in antipsychotic use attributable to Part D cost-sharing. Adverse events increased among beneficiaries with approved indications for use, but not among beneficiaries without such indications.
OBJECTIVE: Medicare Part D provides formulary protections for antipsychotics but does not exempt these drugs from cost-sharing. We investigated the impact of Part D coverage on antipsychotic drug spending, adherence, and clinical outcomes among beneficiaries with varying indications for use. METHODS: We conducted a historical cohort study of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries who received antipsychotic drugs, with diagnoses of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder or with no mental health diagnoses (N=10,190). Half had a coverage gap; half had no gap because of low-income subsidies. Using fixed effects regression models, we examined changes in spending and adherence as beneficiaries experienced cost-sharing increases after reaching the gap. We examined changes in hospitalizations and emergency department visits using proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Across all diagnostic groups, total monthly expenditure on antipsychotic drugs decreased with cost-sharing increases in the gap compared with those with no gap (eg, schizophrenia: -$123 95% confidence interval [-$138, -$108]), and out-of-pocket spending increased (eg, schizophrenia: $104 [$98, $110]). Adherence similarly decreased, with the largest declines among those with schizophrenia (-20.6 percentage points [-22.3, -18.9] in proportion of days covered). Among beneficiaries with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, hospitalizations and emergency department visit rates increased with cost-sharing increases (eg, schizophrenia: hazard ratio=1.32 [1.06, 1.65] for all hospitalizations), but did not among subjects without mental health diagnoses. Clinical event rates did not change among beneficiaries with low-income subsidies without gaps. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence of interruptions in antipsychotic use attributable to Part D cost-sharing. Adverse events increased among beneficiaries with approved indications for use, but not among beneficiaries without such indications.
Authors: Christine Y Lu; Alyce S Adams; Dennis Ross-Degnan; Fang Zhang; Yuting Zhang; Carl Salzman; Stephen B Soumerai Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Tewodros Eguale; David L Buckeridge; Nancy E Winslade; Andrea Benedetti; James A Hanley; Robyn Tamblyn Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2012-05-28
Authors: Vicki Fung; Carol M Mangione; Jie Huang; Norman Turk; Elaine S Quiter; Julie A Schmittdiel; John Hsu Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2009-12-30 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Yuting Zhang; Julie M Donohue; Judith R Lave; Gerald O'Donnell; Joseph P Newhouse Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-07-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Marcia Valenstein; Laurel A Copeland; Frederic C Blow; John F McCarthy; John E Zeber; Leah Gillon; C Raymond Bingham; Thomas Stavenger Journal: Med Care Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Vicki C Fung; Lindsay N Overhage; Louisa G Sylvia; Noreen A Reilly-Harrington; Masoud Kamali; Keming Gao; Richard C Shelton; Terence A Ketter; William V Bobo; Michael E Thase; Joseph R Calabrese; Mauricio Tohen; Thilo Deckersbach; Andrew A Nierenberg Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: Aaron S Kesselheim; Krista F Huybrechts; Niteesh K Choudhry; Lisa A Fulchino; Danielle L Isaman; Mary K Kowal; Troyen A Brennan Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Vicki Fung; Mary Price; Alisa B Busch; Mary Beth Landrum; Bruce Fireman; Andrew A Nierenberg; Joseph P Newhouse; John Hsu Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 2.229