BACKGROUND: The cost of diabetes medications and supplies is rising, resulting in access challenges. This study assessed the prevalence of and factors predicting underground exchange activities-donating, trading, borrowing, and purchasing diabetes medications and supplies. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A convenience sample of people affected by diabetes was recruited online to complete a survey. Mixed method analysis was undertaken, including logistic regression to examine the relationship between self-reported difficulty purchasing diabetes medications and supplies and engagement in underground exchange activity. Thematic qualitative analysis was used to examine open-text responses. RESULTS: Participants (N = 159) self-reported engagement in underground exchange activities, including donating (56.6%), donation receiving (34.6%), trading (23.9%), purchasing (15.1%), and borrowing (22%). Such activity took place among a variety of individuals, including friends, family, coworkers, online acquaintances and strangers. Diabetes-specific financial stress predicted engagement in trading diabetes mediations or supplies (OR 6.3, 95% CI 2.2-18.5) and receiving donated medications or supplies (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.1-7.2). One overarching theme, unmet needs, and three subthemes emerged: (1) factors influencing underground exchange activity, (2) perceived benefits of underground exchange activity, and (3) perceived consequences of underground exchange activity. CONCLUSION: Over half of the participants in this study engaged in underground exchange activities out of necessity. Providers must be aware about this underground exchange and inquire about safety and possible alternative resources. There is an urgent need to improve access to medications that are essential for life. Our study points to a failure in the US healthcare system since such underground exchanges may not be necessary if medications and supplies were accessible.
BACKGROUND: The cost of diabetes medications and supplies is rising, resulting in access challenges. This study assessed the prevalence of and factors predicting underground exchange activities-donating, trading, borrowing, and purchasing diabetes medications and supplies. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A convenience sample of people affected by diabetes was recruited online to complete a survey. Mixed method analysis was undertaken, including logistic regression to examine the relationship between self-reported difficulty purchasing diabetes medications and supplies and engagement in underground exchange activity. Thematic qualitative analysis was used to examine open-text responses. RESULTS:Participants (N = 159) self-reported engagement in underground exchange activities, including donating (56.6%), donation receiving (34.6%), trading (23.9%), purchasing (15.1%), and borrowing (22%). Such activity took place among a variety of individuals, including friends, family, coworkers, online acquaintances and strangers. Diabetes-specific financial stress predicted engagement in trading diabetes mediations or supplies (OR 6.3, 95% CI 2.2-18.5) and receiving donated medications or supplies (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.1-7.2). One overarching theme, unmet needs, and three subthemes emerged: (1) factors influencing underground exchange activity, (2) perceived benefits of underground exchange activity, and (3) perceived consequences of underground exchange activity. CONCLUSION: Over half of the participants in this study engaged in underground exchange activities out of necessity. Providers must be aware about this underground exchange and inquire about safety and possible alternative resources. There is an urgent need to improve access to medications that are essential for life. Our study points to a failure in the US healthcare system since such underground exchanges may not be necessary if medications and supplies were accessible.
Entities:
Keywords:
cost of illness; diabetes; diabetes technology; health services accessibility; insulin; social media
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: P L Kristensen; L Tarnow; C Bay; K Nørgaard; T Jensen; H-H Parving; H Perrild; H Beck-Nielsen; J S Christiansen; B Thorsteinsson; U Pedersen-Bjergaard Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2017-02-14 Impact factor: 4.359
Authors: William T Cefalu; Daniel E Dawes; Gina Gavlak; Dana Goldman; William H Herman; Karen Van Nuys; Alvin C Powers; Simeon I Taylor; Alan L Yatvin Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2018-05-08 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Mary A M Rogers; Joyce M Lee; Renuka Tipirneni; Tanima Banerjee; Catherine Kim Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Adam Gaffney; Andrea Christopher; Alan Katz; Dan Chateau; Chelsey McDougall; David Bor; David Himmelstein; Steffie Woolhandler; Danny McCormick Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-05-07 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Hanna J Barton; Ryan J Coller; Shanmugapriya Loganathar; Nawang Singhe; Mary L Ehlenbach; Barbara Katz; Gemma Warner; Michelle M Kelly; Nicole E Werner Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2021-05 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Monica Chauhan; Hamza Alhamad; Rachel McCrindle; Terence K L Hui; R Simon Sherratt; Parastou Donyai Journal: Pharmacy (Basel) Date: 2021-04-20
Authors: Julia E Blanchette; M J Tran; Ernest G Grigorian; Eli Iacob; Linda S Edelman; Tamara K Oser; Michelle L Litchman Journal: JMIR Diabetes Date: 2022-04-15