Literature DB >> 28625684

Brand Medications and Medicare Part D: How Eye Care Providers' Prescribing Patterns Influence Costs.

Paula Anne Newman-Casey1, Maria A Woodward1, Leslie M Niziol2, Paul P Lee1, Lindsey B De Lott3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To quantify costs of eye care providers' Medicare Part D prescribing patterns for ophthalmic medications and to estimate the potential savings of generic or therapeutic drug substitutions and price negotiation.
DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Eye care providers prescribing medications through Medicare Part D in 2013.
METHODS: Medicare Part D 2013 prescriber public use file and summary file were used to calculate medication costs by physician specialty and drug. Savings from generic or therapeutic drug substitutions were estimated for brand drugs. The potential savings from price negotiation was estimated using drug prices negotiated by the United States Veterans Administration (USVA). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Total cost of brand and generic medications prescribed by eye care providers.
RESULTS: Eye care providers accounted for $2.4 billion in total Medicare part D prescription drug costs and generated the highest percentage of brand name medication claims compared with all other providers. Brand medications accounted for a significantly higher proportion of monthly supplies by volume, and therefore, also by total cost for eye care providers compared with all other providers (38% vs. 23% by volume, P < 0.001; 79% vs. 56% by total cost, P < 0.001). The total cost attributable to eye care providers is driven by glaucoma medications, accounting for $1.2 billion (54% of total cost; 72% of total volume). The second costliest category, dry eye medications, was attributable mostly to a single medication, cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion (Restasis, Allergan, Irvine, CA), which has no generic alternative, accounting for $371 million (17% of total cost; 4% of total volume). If generic medications were substituted for brand medications when available, $148 million would be saved (7% savings); if generic and therapeutic substitutions were made, $882 million would be saved (42% savings). If Medicare negotiated the prices for ophthalmic medications at USVA rates, $1.09 billion would be saved (53% savings).
CONCLUSIONS: Eye care providers prescribe more brand medications by volume than any other provider group. Efforts to reduce prescription expenditures by eye care providers should focus on increasing the use of generic medications, primarily through therapeutic substitutions. Policy changes enabling Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices could decrease costs to Medicare.
Copyright © 2017 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28625684      PMCID: PMC5732892          DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.05.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmology        ISSN: 0161-6420            Impact factor:   12.079


  20 in total

1.  Medicare Part D payments for neurologist-prescribed drugs.

Authors:  Lindsey B De Lott; James F Burke; Kevin A Kerber; Lesli E Skolarus; Brian C Callaghan
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 9.910

2.  Pharmaceutical Industry-Sponsored Meals and Physician Prescribing Patterns for Medicare Beneficiaries.

Authors:  Colette DeJong; Thomas Aguilar; Chien-Wen Tseng; Grace A Lin; W John Boscardin; R Adams Dudley
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 21.873

Review 3.  Endophthalmitis following open-globe injuries.

Authors:  Y Ahmed; A M Schimel; A Pathengay; M H Colyer; H W Flynn
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 3.775

4.  Cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsions for the treatment of dry eye: a review of the clinical evidence.

Authors:  Philip Ames; Anat Galor
Journal:  Clin Investig (Lond)       Date:  2015

5.  Two multicenter, randomized studies of the efficacy and safety of cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion in moderate to severe dry eye disease. CsA Phase 3 Study Group.

Authors:  K Sall; O D Stevenson; T K Mundorf; B L Reis
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 12.079

6.  Topical cyclosporine 0.05% for the prevention of dry eye disease progression.

Authors:  Sanjay N Rao
Journal:  J Ocul Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 2.671

7.  The Most Common Barriers to Glaucoma Medication Adherence: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

Authors:  Paula Anne Newman-Casey; Alan L Robin; Taylor Blachley; Karen Farris; Michele Heisler; Ken Resnicow; Paul P Lee
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  A comparison of vitamin a and cyclosporine a 0.05% eye drops for treatment of dry eye syndrome.

Authors:  Eun Chul Kim; Jun-Sub Choi; Choun-Ki Joo
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-10-09       Impact factor: 5.258

Review 9.  Disclosure of Industry Payments to Physicians: An Epidemiologic Analysis of Early Data From the Open Payments Program.

Authors:  Deborah C Marshall; Madeleine E Jackson; Jona A Hattangadi-Gluth
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 7.616

View more
  13 in total

1.  Cost-Utility Analysis of Glaucoma Medication Adherence.

Authors:  Paula Anne Newman-Casey; Mariam Salman; Paul P Lee; Justin D Gatwood
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 12.079

2.  A Comparison of Resource Use and Costs of Caring for Patients With Exfoliation Syndrome Glaucoma Versus Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma.

Authors:  Siddarth Rathi; Chris Andrews; David S Greenfield; Joshua D Stein
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-01-08       Impact factor: 5.258

Review 3.  Advances in dry eye disease treatment.

Authors:  Erin C O'Neil; Matthew Henderson; Mina Massaro-Giordano; Vatinee Y Bunya
Journal:  Curr Opin Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 3.761

4.  The Association between Medication Adherence and Visual Field Progression in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study.

Authors:  Paula Anne Newman-Casey; Leslie M Niziol; Brenda W Gillespie; Nancy K Janz; Paul R Lichter; David C Musch
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2020-01-10       Impact factor: 12.079

5.  The Effect of Market Competition on the Price of Topical Eye Drops.

Authors:  Arjun Watane; Meghana Kalavar; Joshua Reyes; Nicolas A Yannuzzi; Jayanth Sridhar
Journal:  Semin Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 1.975

6.  Nation-Wide Analysis of Glaucoma Medication Prescription in Fiscal Year of 2019 in Japan.

Authors:  Masaki Tanito
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-06-11

Review 7.  Topical corticosteroids for dry eye.

Authors:  Su-Hsun Liu; Ian J Saldanha; Alison G Abraham; Thanitsara Rittiphairoj; Scott Hauswirth; Darren Gregory; Cristos Ifantides; Tianjing Li
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-10-21

8.  Trends in Glaucoma Surgeries Performed by Glaucoma Subspecialists versus Nonsubspecialists on Medicare Beneficiaries from 2008 through 2016.

Authors:  Siddarth Rathi; Chris A Andrews; David S Greenfield; Joshua D Stein
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2020-06-26       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Ophthalmic Medication Expenditures and Out-of-Pocket Spending: An Analysis of United States Prescriptions from 2007 through 2016.

Authors:  Evan M Chen; Ninani Kombo; Christopher C Teng; Prithvi Mruthyunjaya; Kristen Nwanyanwu; Ravi Parikh
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 14.277

10.  Predicting Adherence With the Glaucoma Treatment Compliance Assessment Tool.

Authors:  Facundo G Sanchez; Steven L Mansberger; Paula A Newman-Casey
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 2.290

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.