The Impact of reference pricing on prescribing patterns, costs, and health services utilization of proton pump inhibitors: A quasi-experimental study in British Columbia, Canada.

INTRODUCTION: The Reference Drug Program (RDP) was established to steer patients toward equally safe and cost-effective medication under British Columbia's public drug coverage. Each RDP class covers at least one reference drug, and non-reference drugs are reimbursed up to the cost of the reference drug. In 2016, the RDP updated to include proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). This study evaluated the impact on drug expenditures, prescription patterns, and health services utilization. METHODS: We identified a cohort of individuals covered by Fair Pharmacare who used PPIs, and a control group of H2 Blockers users. We used interrupted time series analysis on administrative data from June 2014 to December 2019 on the following outcomes: new users, day supply, expenditures, drug costs, reference drug use, and physician visits and costs. RESULTS: The RDP had little impact on overall PPI use patterns. We did not observe any changes in reference drug uptake, new users, physician visits, cost-savings, or significant changes to days supplied post-policy. Cost expenditure results were likely biased due to co-occurring changes to drug prices. CONCLUSION: Inclusion of PPIs to the RDP saw no cost-savings for the provincial drug program and had little impact on prescribing patterns. Overall, our findings are consistent with existing evidence that the RDP is safe for similar therapeutic alternatives, but the impact on PPI costs remains unclear.

Effect of a Billing Code to Reimburse Nurse-Supported Rheumatology Care on Health Care Costs and Access: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to evaluate the impact of a Multidisciplinary Care Assessment (MCA) billing code on health system costs and access to care in British Columbia (BC). METHODS: Data on all people treated by rheumatologists in BC were obtained from five linked health administrative databases held by Population Data BC from April 1, 2006, to March 31, 2020. Rheumatologists were allocated to either the intervention (ever-billers) or control groups (never-billers). For the intervention group, the index date was the month of the first MCA code billing. For the control group the index dates were imputed from intervention index dates. Our analysis focused on a 48-month period (24 months before and after the index date). We evaluated the impact on two cost (costs related to rheumatoid arthritis [RA]; total health care costs) and access outcomes (rheumatology-related visits per rheumatologist; days between rheumatology visits for patients with RA) using an interrupted time series analysis. RESULTS: A total of 46 rheumatologists (31 intervention and 15 control) met our inclusion criteria. Introduction of the MCA was associated with a small but significant increase in RA-related costs that, at 2 years, translates to a net absolute change of $9.66 per patient per month, but no statistically significant changes in total health care costs. There was no statistically significant change in the number of rheumatology-related visits, but at 2 years there was a net absolute reduction in the median days between rheumatologist visits for patients with RA (6.3 days). CONCLUSION: The introduction of the MCA code was associated with a negligible increase in the RA-related costs and an improvement in access to ongoing care for patients.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on prescription drug use and costs in British Columbia: a retrospective interrupted time series study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on prescription drug use and costs. DESIGN: Interrupted time series analysis of comprehensive administrative health data linkages in British Columbia, Canada, from 1 January 2018 to 28 March 2021. SETTING: Retrospective population-based analysis of all prescription drugs dispensed in community pharmacies and outpatient hospital pharmacies and irrespective of the drug insurance payer. PARTICIPANTS: Between 4.30 and 4.37 million individuals (52% women) actively registered with the publicly funded medical services plan. INTERVENTION: COVID-19 pandemic and associated mitigation measures. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Weekly dispensing rates and costs, both overall and stratified by therapeutic groups and pharmacological subgroups, before and after the declaration of the public health emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Relative changes in post-COVID-19 outcomes were expressed as ratios of observed to expected rates. RESULTS: After the onset of the pandemic and subsequent COVID-19 mitigation measures, overall medication dispensing rates dropped by 2.4% (p<0.01), followed by a sustained weekly increase to return to predicted levels by the end of January 2021. We observed abrupt level decreases in antibacterials (30.3%, p<0.01) and antivirals (22.4%, p<0.01) that remained below counterfactuals over the first year of the pandemic. In contrast, there was a week-to-week trend increase in nervous system drugs, yielding an overall increase of 7.3% (p<0.01). No trend changes in the dispensing of respiratory system agents, ACE inhibitors, antidiabetic drugs and antidepressants were detected. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic impact on prescription drug dispensing was heterogeneous across medication subgroups. As data become available, dispensing trends in nervous system agents, antibiotics and antivirals warrant further monitoring and investigation.

The Impact of Blood Glucose Test Strips Reimbursement Limits on Utilization, Costs, and Health-care Utilization in British Columbia.

OBJECTIVE: People living with diabetes and not using insulin may not derive clinically significant benefit from routine glucose self-monitoring. As a result, in 2015, British Columbia (BC) introduced quantity restrictions for blood glucose test strips (BGTS) coverage in public plans. We studied the impact of this policy on utilization, costs, and health-care utilization. METHODS: We identified a cohort of adults (≥18 years old) with diabetes between 2013 and 2019. Using BC's administrative data, we studied utilization and costs among individuals with at least one PharmaCare-eligible BGTS claim. Using interrupted time-series analysis, we studied cost savings and determined the level of policy adherence. In addition, we investigated longitudinal changes in all-cause and diabetes-specific physician visits, all-cause hospitalizations, and health-care spending in the 3 to 5 years after policy implementation. RESULTS: Over the study period, 279.7 million BGTS were eligible for PharmaCare coverage, on which the government spent $124.3 million. After policy implementation, we observed an immediate decline in average utilization and PharmaCare expenditure on BGTS, leading to an estimated $44.6 million in savings between 2015 and 2019 (95% confidence interval $16.9 to $72.3 million). We found no association between the policy's implementation and health services utilization or overall health-care spending over the long term. CONCLUSIONS: Restricting reimbursement for BGTS in BC resulted in significant cost savings without any attendant increase in health services utilization over the subsequent 5 years. This disinvestment freed up resources that could be channeled toward other interventions.

Impact of income-based public drug coverage deductibles on adherence to asthma medications.

BACKGROUND: Cost-related nonadherence to medications can be a barrier to asthma management. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the impact of public drug plan deductibles on adherence to asthma medications. METHODS: We used a quasi-experimental regression discontinuity analysis to determine whether thresholds in deductibles for public drug coverage, determined on the basis of annual household income, decreased medication use among lower-income children and adults with asthma in British Columbia from 2013 to 2018. Using dispensed medication records, we evaluated deductible thresholds at annual household incomes of $15,000 (a deductible increase from 0% to 2% of annual household income), and $30,000 (a deductible increase from 2% to 3% annual household income). We evaluated medication costs, use, the ratio of inhaled corticosteroids-containing controller medications to total medications, excessive use of short-acting ß-agonists, and the proportion of days covered by controller therapies. All costs are reported in 2020 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: Overall, 88,935 individuals contributed 443,847 person-years of follow-up (57% of female sex, mean age 31 years). Public drug subsidy decreased by -$41.74 (95% CI, -$28.34 to -$55.13) at the $15,000-deductible threshold, a 28% reduction, and patient costs increased by $48.45 (95% CI, $35.37-$61.53). The $30,000 deductible threshold did not affect public drug costs (P = .31), but patient costs increased by $27.65 (95% CI, $15.22-$40.09), which is an 11% increase. Asthma-related medication use, inhaled corticosteroids-to-total medication ratio, excessive use of short-acting ß-agonists, and proportion of days covered by controller therapies were not impacted by deductible thresholds. CONCLUSION: Income-based deductibles reduced public drug costs with no effect on asthma-related medication use, adherence to controller therapies, or excessive reliever therapy use in lower-income individuals with asthma.

What happens to drug use and expenditure when cost sharing is completely removed? Evidence from a Canadian provincial public drug plan.

OBJECTIVES: The role of cost-sharing for medicines is under active policy discussion, including in proposals for value-based insurance design. To inform this debate, we estimated the impact of completely removing cost-sharing on medication use and expenditure using a quasi-experimental approach. METHODS: Fair PharmaCare, British Columbia's income-based public drug plan, includes a household out-of-pocket limit. Therefore, when one household member starts a long-term high-cost drug surpassing this maximum, cost-sharing is completely removed for other family members. We used an interrupted time series design to estimate monthly prescriptions and expenditures of other household members, 24 months before and after cost-sharing removal. RESULTS: We studied 2191 household members newly free of cost-sharing requirements, most of whom had lower incomes. R emoving cost-sharing increased the level of drug expenditure and prescription numbers by 16 and 19%, respectively (i.e. $2659.43 (95%$1507.27-$3811.59, p < 0.001); 50.0 (95%CI 25.1-74.9, p < 0.001)) relative to prior expenditures and utilization without changing pre-existing trends. Much of this change was driven by 533 individuals initiating medication for the first time after cost-sharing removal. This initiation substantially increased average expenditure, especially for antiviral agents. CONCLUSIONS: Completely removing cost-sharing, independent of health status, significantly increased medication use and expenditure particularly due to medicine initiation by new users. While costs may be preventing use, the appropriateness of additional use, especially among new users, is unclear.

Cost-related nonadherence to medicines in people with multiple chronic conditions.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is common and frequently associated with medicine nonadherence. Although cost is a common reason for nonadherence, very little research has quantified cost-related nonadherence (CRNA) to medicines specifically in people with multimorbidity, the prevalence of CRNA for different conditions nor the impact of cost when prioritising treatment between conditions. OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent of CRNA in people with multimorbidity and the patient characteristics associated with these behaviours. DESIGN AND SETTING: People reporting two or more chronic conditions responding to a rapid response module regarding prescription drug affordability fielded between January 1 and June 30 2016 in the Canadian Community Health Survey, a cross-sectional household survey. METHODS: Ordinal logistic regression, adjusted for key sociodemographic, clinical and treatment related variables, of weighted population estimates of self-reported CRNA within one group of conditions, across multiple groups of conditions, or no CRNA. RESULTS: 10.2% of 8420 Canadians with multimorbidity reported CRNA. The majority (61%) reported CRNA within one group of conditions, especially respiratory (16%) and mental health disorders (17%). CRNA was more common in younger adults, people without employer or association drug insurance plans, poorer health status, more chronic conditions, and increased out-of-pocket prescription costs. Having no prescription insurance was associated with a higher probability of CRNA across multiple groups of conditions. CONCLUSIONS: People with multimorbidity primarily forego medicines because of cost within one group of conditions. However, those without drug insurance extended these behaviours to multiple condition groups. Further work is needed to determine how people prioritise the conditions and treatments that are foregone because of cost, and how to best incorporate this information into treatment plans.

Patterns of borrowing to finance out-of-pocket prescription drug costs in Canada: a descriptive analysis.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-pocket drug costs lead many Canadians to engage in cost-related nonadherence to prescription medications, but our understanding of other consequences such as borrowing money remains incomplete. In this descriptive study, we sought to quantify the frequency of borrowing to pay for prescription drugs in Canada and characteristics of Canadians who borrowed money for this purpose. METHODS: In partnership with Statistics Canada, we designed and administered a cross-sectional rapid-response module in the Canadian Community Health Survey administered by telephone to Canadians aged 12 years or more between January and June 2016. We restricted our analyses to participants who responded to the question regarding borrowing money to pay for prescription drugs and used logistic regression to identify characteristics associated with borrowing. RESULTS: A total of 28 091 Canadians responded to the survey (overall response rate 61.8%). The weighted proportion of respondents who reported having borrowed money to pay for prescription drugs in the previous year was 2.5% (95% confidence interval 2.2%-2.8%), an estimated 731 000 Canadians. The odds of borrowing were higher among younger adults, people in poor health and people lacking prescription drug insurance. Other factors associated with increased adjusted odds of borrowing were having 2 or more chronic conditions, low household income and higher out-of-pocket prescription drug costs. INTERPRETATION: Many Canadians reported borrowing money to pay for out-of-pocket prescription drug costs, and borrowing was more prevalent among already vulnerable groups that also report other compensatory behaviours to address challenges in paying for prescription drugs. Future research should investigate policy responses intended to increase equity in access to prescription drugs.

Effect of incentive payments on chronic disease management and health services use in British Columbia, Canada: Interrupted time series analysis.

We studied the effects of incentive payments to primary care physicians for the care of patients with diabetes, hypertension, and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) in British Columbia, Canada. We used linked administrative health data to examine monthly primary care visits, continuity of care, laboratory testing, pharmaceutical dispensing, hospitalizations, and total h ealth care spending. We examined periods two years before and two years after each incentive was introduced, and used segmented regression to assess whether there were changes in level or trend of outcome measures across all eligible patients following incentive introduction, relative to pre-intervention periods. We observed no increases in primary care visits or continuity of care after incentives were introduced. Rates of ACR testing and antihypertensive dispensing increased among patients with hypertension, but none of the other modest increases in laboratory testing or prescriptions dispensed reached statistical significance. Rates of hospitalizations for stroke and heart failure among patients with hypertension fell relative to pre-intervention patterns, while hospitalizations for COPD increased. Total hospitalizations and hospitalizations via the emergency department did not change. Health care spending increased for patients with hypertension. This large-scale incentive scheme for primary care physicians showed some positive effects for patients with hypertension, but we observe no similar changes in patient management, reductions in hospitalizations, or changes in spending for patients with diabetes and COPD.

Impact of income-based deductibles on drug use and health care utilization among older adults.

BACKGROUND: Income-based deductibles are present in several provincial public drug plans in Canada and have been the subject of extensive debate. We studied the impact of such deductibles in British Columbia's Fair PharmaCare plan on drug and health care utilization among older adults. METHODS: We used a quasi-experimental regression discontinuity design to compare the impact of deductibles in BC's PharmaCare plan between older community-dwelling adults registered for the plan who were born in 1928 through 1939 (no deductible) and those born in 1940 through 1951 (deductible equivalent to 2% of household income). We used 1.2 million person-years of data between 2003 and 2015 to study public drug plan expenditures, overall drug use, and physician and hospital resource utilization in these 2 groups. RESULTS: The income-based deductible led to a 28.6% decrease in person-years in which public drug plan benefits were received (95% confidence interval [CI] -29.7% to -27.5%) and to a reduction in the per capita extent of annual benefits by $205.59 (95% CI -$247.81 to -$163.37). Despite this difference in public subsidy, we found no difference in the number of drugs received or in total drug spending once privately paid amounts were accounted for (p = 0.4 and 0.8, respectively). Further, we found only small or nonexistent changes in health care resource utilization at the 1939 threshold. INTERPRETATION: A modest income-based deductible had a considerable impact on the extent of public subsidy for prescription drugs. However, it had only a trivial impact on overall access to medicines and use of other health services. Unlike copayments, modest income-based deductibles may safely reduce public spending on drugs for some population groups.

A population-based analysis of incentive payments to primary care physicians for the care of patients with complex disease.

BACKGROUND: In 2007, the province of British Columbia implemented incentive payments to primary care physicians for the provision of comprehensive, continuous, guideline-informed care for patients with 2 or more chronic conditions. We examined the impact of this program on primary care access and continuity, rates of hospital admission and costs. METHODS: We analyzed all BC patients who qualified for the incentive based on their diagnostic profile. We tracked primary care contacts and continuity, hospital admissions (total, via the emergency department and for targeted conditions), and cost of physician services, hospital care and pharmaceuticals, for 24 months before and 24 months after the intervention. RESULTS: Of 155 754 eligible patients, 63.7% had at least 1 incentive payment billed. Incentive payments had no impact on primary care contacts (change in contacts per patient per month: 0.016, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.047 to 0.078) or continuity of care (mean monthly change: 0.012, 95% CI -0.001 to 0.024) and were associated with increased total rates of hospital admission (change in hospital admissions per 1000 patients per month: 1.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.89), relative to preintervention trends. Annual costs per patient did not decline (mean change: $455.81, 95% CI -$2.44 to $914.08). INTERPRETATION: British Columbia's $240-million investment in this program improved compensation for physicians doing the important work of caring for complex patients, but did not appear to improve primary care access or continuity, or constrain resource use elsewhere in the health care system. Policymakers should consider other strategies to improve care for this patient population.

The impact of policies to reduce blood glucose test strip utilization and costs in Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Several strategies have been proposed to manage the utilization of blood glucose test strips (BGTS) in Canada; however their potential impacts on utilization and costs of publically funded test strips are unknown. METHODS: We investigated the impact of three potential policies that would restrict the number of test strips reimbursed by the public drug plans in Ontario and British Columbia (BC), and incorporated negotiated price reductions. These policies were based on recommendations from the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, a briefing document by the Canadian Diabetes Association, and a new policy introduced by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. BGTS utilization rates were assessed in two cross-sectional analyses among adults aged 18 years or older in BC and 65 or older in Ontario who received publicly-funded BGTS between January 2004 and December 2012. We modeled the 5-year utilization and cost implications of the three policies using time-series analysis. RESULTS: In 2012, there were 317,130 test strip recipients in Ontario and 136,659 recipients in BC, at a cost of $104.4 million and $22.6 million respectively. Under the scenarios of reduced BGTS quantities, 5-year cost savings ranged between $98.8 million (18.2% reduction) and $224.1 million (41.4% reduction) in Ontario and between $23.1 million (19.2% reduction) and $51.1 million (42.4% reduction) in BC. Price reductions of 15% resulted in annual savings of $14.4 million (13.7% reduction) in Ontario and $3.4 million (14.1% reduction) in BC. CONCLUSIONS: Policies that align with evidence and expert guidance could impart substantial cost savings in multiple jurisdictions despite different public drug plans.

The Impact of Private Insurance Coverage on Prescription Drug Use in Ontario, Canada.

Canadians obtain prescription drug coverage through a patchwork of public insurance, private benefit plans and out-of-pocket payments. Prior evidence suggests that insurance coverage, in general, leads to higher utilization rates of essential medicines; it is unclear whether individuals with private insurance have better access to medicines. Using data from the 2008 Canadian Community Health Survey, we identified cohorts from Ontario who reported having been diagnosed by a physician with asthma, high blood pressure or diabetes. Using propensity score stratification techniques, we compared drug utilization of individuals holding private insurance with that of individuals holding either public insurance (for those aged over 65 years) or no insurance (aged under 65 years). In five out of six comparisons, individuals with private insurance were more likely to take prescribed drugs than those without. Raw differences in the percentage of patients taking medicines ranged from 0.1 to 8.1%. Ontarians with chronic conditions holding private drug insurance are more likely to use prescription drugs than those who do not. Whether these inequities result in health outcome differences remains unknown.

Impact of allowing pharmacists to independently renew prescriptions: A population-based study.

OBJECTIVES: To study the impact of a 2009 policy change in British Columbia (BC) that allowed pharmacists to independently renew certain prescriptions for chronic conditions. DESIGN: Population-based analysis. SETTING: BC, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: All residents of BC (more than 3.9 million). INTERVENTION: Prescription drug use data were collected from the PharmaNet database. This database contains a record of all ambulatory prescription drug dispensations in BC including a variable indicating whether a pharmacist renewed the prescription. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We studied pharmaceutical and physician insurance claims datasets for all BC residents for 2 years following the 2009 policy change. We assessed the number and types of drugs renewed by pharmacists, and whether these complied with the policy. Further, we matched pharmacist-renewed prescriptions to equivalent potentially renewable prescriptions and assessed the impact on ambulatory physician visits. RESULTS: Over the first 2 years, pharmacists renewed 150,950 prescriptions in BC. Almost one-half of these renewals did not appear to match the conditions set out in the new regulatory policy (n = 69,970, 47%). Those that did match the conditions (n = 80,980, 53%) represented a very small proportion of the 47 million prescriptions that pharmacists could have renewed (0.17%). The most frequently renewed medications were treatments for dyslipidemias, hypertension, diabetes, and gastroesophageal reflux disease. Pharmacist-renewed prescriptions were preceded by a 30% relative decrease in ambulatory physician visits in the week before dispensing, but there was also a 17% relative increase in visits in the week following the pharmacist-renewed prescription. CONCLUSION: Overall, the use of pharmacist renewals was very low and one-half of the renewals were not policy-concordant. Pharmacist renewals were associated with the intended reductions in physician visits before dispensing, but there was also an unintended increase in visits after dispensing. These findings suggest that future policies such as this one need to be differently designed and closely monitored.

Growth in private payments for health care by Canadian households.

INTRODUCTION: Despite first-dollar public coverage for hospital and physician services, Canadians spend more privately on health care than citizens of most other developed countries. We quantified recent growth in private payments by Canadian households for health care. METHODS: Using data from 163,081 respondents to Statistics Canada's annual Survey of Household Spending from 1998 to 2009, we calculated inflation-adjusted per-household spending on private health insurance premiums and out-of-pocket payments on six types of health care services. Further, we estimated the prevalence and some socio-economic determinants of households spending over 10% of after-tax income on health care using logistic regression. RESULTS: We found that Canadian households spent $19.8 billion on private payments for health care in 2009. This represents an average of $1523 per household-a 37% increase over 1998. The top three spending categories in 2009 were private health insurance premiums ($5.9 billion), dental ($4.9 billion) and prescription drugs ($4.2 billion). Even after adjusting for inflation, expenditure on every category of health care spending increased between 1998 and 2009. The proportion of households spending more than 10% of after-tax income on health care increased by 56% (from 3.3% to 5.2%). Households including a senior, with a low income, and in British Columbia or the Atlantic Provinces were significantly more likely to reach this threshold. INTERPRETATION: Over the period studied, the burden of private health care expenditures increased substantially for Canadian households. As direct charges reduce the use of necessary health care services, investigation into the health consequences of these increases is warranted.

The effect of cost on adherence to prescription medications in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Many patients do not adhere to treatment because they cannot afford their prescription medications, putting them at increased risk of adverse health outcomes. We determined the prevalence of cost-related nonadherence and investigated its associated characteristics, including whether a person has drug insurance. METHODS: Using data from the 2007 Canada Community Health Survey, we analyzed the responses of 5732 people who answered questions about cost-related nonadherence to treatment. We determined the national prevalence of cost-related nonadherence and used logistic regression to evaluate the association between cost-related nonadherence and a series of demographic and socioeconomic variables, including province of residence, age, sex, household income, health status and having drug insurance. RESULTS: Cost-related nonadherence was reported by 9.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.5%-10.6%) of Canadians who had received a prescription in the past year. In our adjusted model, we found that people in poor health (odds ratio [OR] 2.64, 95% CI 1.77-3.94), those with lower income (OR 3.29, 95% CI 2.03-5.33), those without drug insurance (OR 4.52, 95% CI 3.29-6.20) and those who live in British Columbia (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.49-4.42) were more likely to report cost-related nonadherence. Predicted rates of cost-related nonadherence ranged from 3.6% (95% CI 2.4-4.5) among people with insurance and high household incomes to 35.6% (95% CI 26.1%-44.9%) among people with no insurance and low household incomes. INTERPRETATION: About 1 in 10 Canadians who receive a prescription report cost-related nonadherence. The variability in insurance coverage for prescription medications appears to be a key reason behind this phenomenon.