The impact of reducing cardiovascular medication copayments on health spending and resource utilization.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of reductions in statin and clopidogrel copayments on cardiovascular resource utilization, major coronary events, and insurer spending. BACKGROUND: Copayments are widely used to contain health spending but cause patients to reduce their use of essential cardiovascular medications. Reducing copayments for post-myocardial infarction secondary prevention has beneficial effects, but the impact of this strategy for lower risk patients and other drugs remains unclear. METHODS: An evaluation was conducted of health care spending and resource use by a large self-insured employer that reduced statin copayments for patients with diabetes or vascular disease and reduced clopidogrel copayments for all patients prescribed this drug. Eligible individuals in the intervention company (n = 3,513) were compared with a control group from other companies without such a policy (n = 49,803). Analyses were performed using segmented regression models with generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Lowering copayments was associated with significant reductions in rates of physician visits (relative change statin users 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57 to 0.98; clopidogrel users 0.87; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.96) and hospitalizations and emergency department admissions (relative change statin users 0.90; 95% CI 0.80 to 0.92; clopidogrel users 0.89; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.90) although not major coronary events. Patient out-of-pocket spending for drugs and other medical services decreased (relative change statin users 0.79; 95% CI 0.75 to 0.83; clopidogrel users 0.74; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.82). Providing more generous coverage did not increase overall spending (relative change statin users 1.03; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.09; clopidogrel users 0.94; 95% CI 0.87 to 1.03). CONCLUSIONS: Lowering copayments for statins and clopidogrel was associated with reductions in health care resource use and patient out-of-pocket spending. The policy appeared cost neutral with respect to overall health spending.