Literature DB >> 8052275

Effects of a limiting Medicaid drug-reimbursement benefits on the use of psychotropic agents and acute mental health services by patients with schizophrenia.

S B Soumerai1, T J McLaughlin, D Ross-Degnan, C S Casteris, P Bollini.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We examined the effects of a three-prescription monthly payment limit (cap) on the use of psychotropic drugs and acute mental health care by noninstitutionalized patients with schizophrenia. We hypothesized that reducing access to such drugs would increase the use of emergency mental health services and the rate of partial hospitalizations (full-day or half-day treatment programs) and psychiatric-hospital admissions.
METHODS: We linked Medicaid claims data for a period of 42 months with clinical records from two community mental health centers (CMHCs) and the single state psychiatric hospital in New Hampshire, where Medicaid imposed a three-prescription limit on reimbursement for drugs during 11 months (months 15 through 25) of the study. For comparison, we used Medicaid claims for a period of 42 months in New Jersey, which had no limit on drug reimbursement. The study patients (n = 268) and the comparison patients (n = 1959) were permanently disabled, noninstitutionalized patients with schizophrenia, 19 through 60 years of age, who were insured by Medicaid. We conducted interrupted time-series regression analyses to estimate the effects of the cap on the use of medications and mental health services.
RESULTS: The cap resulted in immediate reductions (range, 15 to 49 percent) in the use of antipsychotic drugs, antidepressants and lithium, and anxiolytic and hypnotic drugs (P < 0.01). It also resulted in coincident increases of one to two visits per patient per month in visits to CMHCs (range of increase, 43 to 57 percent; P < 0.001) and sharp increases in the use of emergency mental health services and partial hospitalization (1.2 to 1.4 episodes per patient per month), but no change in the frequency of hospital admissions. After the cap was discontinued, the use of medications and most mental health services reverted to base-line levels (measured in the first 14 months of the study). The estimated average increase in mental health care costs per patient during the cap ($1,530) exceeded the savings in drug costs to Medicaid by a factor of 17.
CONCLUSIONS: Limits on coverage for the costs of prescription drugs can increase the use of acute mental health services among low-income patients with chronic mental illnesses and increase costs to the government, even aside from the increases caused in pain and suffering on the part of patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8052275     DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199409083311006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  101 in total

1.  Is there a link between pharmaceutical consumption and improved health in OECD countries?

Authors:  R D Miller; H E Frech
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Changing doctor prescribing behaviour.

Authors:  P S Gill; M Mäkelä; K M Vermeulen; N Freemantle; G Ryan; C Bond; T Thorsen; F M Haaijer-Ruskamp
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  1999-08

3.  Medicare prescription coverage and congressional gridlock.

Authors:  S B Soumerai; A S Adams; D Ross-Degnan
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Income-based drug benefit policy: impact on receipt of inhaled corticosteroid prescriptions by Manitoba children with asthma.

Authors:  A L Kozyrskyj; C A Mustard; M S Cheang; F E Simons
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-10-02       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 5.  The effect of managed care on prescription drug costs and benefits.

Authors:  A Lyles; F B Palumbo
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 6.  Reassessing the relevance of pharmacoeconomic analyses in formulary decisions.

Authors:  J A Johnson; E Friesen
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Medicaid cost control measures aimed at second-generation antipsychotics led to less use of all antipsychotics.

Authors:  William B Vogt; Geoffrey Joyce; Jing Xia; Riad Dirani; George Wan; Dana P Goldman
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 6.301

Review 8.  Consumer-directed health care: will it improve health system performance?

Authors:  Karen Davis
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 3.402

9.  Investigating the cost implications of including all respiratory medicines in PCRS schemes.

Authors:  Jackie O'Dwyer; Aileen Murphy
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 1.568

Review 10.  Cost of pharmacological care of the elderly: implications for healthcare resources.

Authors:  Ciaran O'Neill; Carmel M Hughes; James Jamison; Anna Schweizer
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 3.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.