Out-of-Pocket Cost Modeling of Adjuvant Antiestrogen and Radiation Therapy After Lumpectomy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer Across Medicaid and Medicare Plans.

PURPOSE: The optimal adjuvant therapy (antiestrogen therapy [ET] + radiation therapy or ET alone, or in some reports radiation therapy alone) in older women with early-stage breast cancer has been highly debated. However, granular details on the role of insurance in the out-of-pocket cost for patients receiving ET with or without radiation therapy are lacking. This project disaggregates out-of-pocket costs by insurance plans to increase treatment cost transparency. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Several radiation therapy schedules are accepted standards as per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. For our financial estimate model, we used the 5-fraction and 15-fraction radiation therapy and ET prescribed over a 5-year duration. The total aggregate out-of-pocket costs were determined from the sum of treatment costs, deductibles, and copays/coinsurance based on Medicaid, Original Medicare, Medigap Plan G, and Medicare Part D Rx plans. The model assumes a Medicare- and/or Medicaid-eligible patient ≥70 years of age with node-negative, early-stage estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer. Patient out-of-pocket costs were estimated from publicly available insurance data from plan-specific benefit coverage materials using a 5-year time horizon. RESULTS: Original Medicare beneficiaries face a total out-of-pocket treatment charge of $2738.52 for ET alone, $2221.26 for 5-fraction radiation therapy alone, $2573.92 for 15-fraction radiation therapy alone, $3361.26 for combined ET+ 5-fraction radiation therapy, and $3713.92 for combined ET + 15-fraction radiation therapy. Medigap Plan G beneficiaries have an out-of-pocket charge of $1130.00 with radiation therapy alone and face an out-of-pocket of $2270.00 for ET alone and combined ET+ radiation therapy. For Medicaid beneficiaries, all treatments approved by Medicaid are covered without limit, resulting in no out-of-pocket expense for either adjuvant treatment option. CONCLUSIONS: This model (based on actual cost estimates per insurance plan rather than claims data), by estimating expenses within Medicare and Medicaid plans, provides a level of transparency to patient cost. With knowledge of the costs borne by patients themselves, treatment decisions informed by patients' individual priorities and preferences may be further enhanced.

Cancer History, Health Insurance Coverage, and Cost-Related Medication Nonadherence and Medication Cost-Coping Strategies in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the relationship between cancer history and cost-related medication nonadherence (CRN) as well as cost-coping strategies, by health insurance coverage. METHODS: We used the 2013 to 2016 National Health Interview Survey to identify adults aged 18 to 64 years with (n = 3599) and without (n = 56 909) a cancer history. Cost-related changes in medication use included (1) CRN, measured as skipping, taking less, or delaying medication because of cost, and (2) cost-coping strategies, measured as requesting lower cost medication or using alternative therapies to save money. Separate multivariable logistic regressions were used to calculate the adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of CRN and cost-coping strategies associated with cancer history, stratified by insurance. RESULTS: Cancer survivors were more likely than adults without a cancer history to report CRN (AOR 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.43) and cost-coping strategies (AOR 1.10; 95% CI 0.99-1.19). Among the privately insured, the difference in CRN by cancer history was the greatest among those enrolled in high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) without health savings accounts (HSAs) (AOR 1.78; 95% CI 1.30-2.44). Among adults with HDHP and HSA, cancer survivors were less likely to report cost-coping strategies (AOR 0.62; 95% CI 0.42-0.90). Regardless of cancer history, CRN and cost-coping strategies were the highest for those uninsured, enrolled in HDHP without HSA, and without prescription drug coverage under their health plan (all P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors are prone to CRN and more likely to use cost-coping strategies. Expanding options for health insurance coverage, use of HSAs for those with HDHP, and enhanced prescription drug coverage may effectively address CRN.

The effect of complementary private health insurance on the use of health care services.

This study estimates the effect of complementary private health insurance (PHI) on the use of health care. The empirical analysis focuses on an institutional setting in which empirical findings are still limited; namely on PHI covering co-payment for treatments that are only partly financed by a universal health care system. The analysis is based on Danish data recently collected specifically for this purpose, which makes identification strategies assuming selection on observables only, and on both observables and unobservables also, both plausible and possible. We find evidence of a substantial positive and significant effect of complementary PHI on the use of prescription medicine and chiropractic care, a smaller but significant effect on dental care, weaker indications of effects for physiotherapy and general practice, and finally that the use of hospital-based outpatient care is largely unaffected. This implies that complementary PHI is generally not simply a marker of a higher propensity to use health care but induces additional use of some health care services over and above what would be used in the absence of such coverage.

[Co-payment for public health care services--public opinion survey]. / Wspólplacenie za uslugi medyczne--badanie opinii spolecznej.

One of the solutions aimed at improving the functioning of the healthcare system in Poland is to introduce patients' co-payment for public healthcare services. In all countries where the healthcare system is at a high level there already exists a co-payment system and it is regarded by many specialists as a necessary and indispensable condition for the proper functioning of healthcare. The aim of this study was to show respondents' attitudes and opinions regarding the proposal of introduction co-payments as and additional form of financing medical care. The questionnaire survey covered a group of 2,409 persons (50.7% men and 49.3% women). Most respondents, despite the overall rising dissatisfaction with the quality and availability of medical services do not see the need for co-payments. The opinion about the implementation of co-payments. The opinion about the implementation of co-payments depends on many factors, to the most important belong age, education, place of residence and income. More often, the co-payments is in favour of young people in good health condition, who live in big cities, having a university degree and determining their financial situation as good. Before the introduction of co-payment - certain social groups, which would be exempt from additional fees, should be specified. To the highest costs that patients are able to carry belong: paying for a home visit of family doctor or specialist, for surgical procedures, and for complex tests performed during the hospital stay (including computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging).

The introduction of a targeted user-pays approach to funding high-level residential aged care in Australia: an empirical investigation of the impact on price.

In response to predictions that population ageing will increase government spending over the coming decades, in 1997-98, the Australian Government introduced means-tested income fees and accommodation charges for those admitted to nursing homes with income and assets above set threshold levels. Immediately prior, all residents paid the same price for their care and were not required to contribute towards the cost of their accommodation. In addition, in relation to those eligible to pay a higher price, the Government reduced its subsidisation of the cost of their care. The Government anticipated that the initiative would more equitably share the cost of age-related services across the public and private sectors, and result in some cost savings for itself. The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of the policy on the average price paid by residents. The findings suggest that the policy may have contributed to an increase in the average price paid, but statistical evidence is limited due to a number of data issues. Results also indicate that the rate of increase in the price was greater after the Residential Aged Care Structural Reform package was introduced. The study contributes to the economic analysis of the sector by evaluating time series estimates of prices paid by residents since the early 1970s.

Paradoxical effects of cost reduction measures in managed care systems for treatment of severe psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: Insurance companies vary widely in their coverage policies for severe psoriasis therapies. Unfortunately, coverage policies for psoriasis therapies do not necessarily follow current treatment paradigms, such that more expensive second or third line treatments may be more easily obtained than first line treatments. METHODS: We reviewed insurance policy bulletins, statements of coverage/medical necessity, and prior authorization forms for three large insurance carriers regarding psoriasis treatment with biologic agents and phototherapy. A cost comparison was performed to estimate total costs to patients and insurer under the current system as well as a hypothetical system in which co-pays and deductibles are eliminated. Additionally, we reviewed the total cost to an insurer for placing a patient on a trial of home phototherapy before approving use of expensive biologics. RESULTS: Requirements for coverage for phototherapy treatments are often the same, if not more stringent, than those for biologics. On an annual per patient basis, insurance companies pay an estimated $5, $76, and $23,408 for home phototherapy, office phototherapy, and biologics, respectively. The first year cost to patients, however, is estimated to be $2,590, $3,040, and $920 for home phototherapy, office phototherapy, and biologics, respectively. An initial 3-month trial of home phototherapy yields a graded annual cost savings to insurers of $21,610 to $2,110 per patient. DISCUSSION: The evolution of psoriasis treatment has resulted in a paradoxical situation in which the use of lower-cost psoriasis treatments, with longer safety track records, is discouraged relative to newer options. If co-pays, deductibles, and prior authorization requirements that discourage phototherapy were reduced or eliminated, more patients and physicians would likely choose phototherapy over biologics. This has the potential to reduce overall healthcare costs for psoriasis management.

Effects of prescription coinsurance and income-based deductibles on net health plan spending for older users of inhaled medications.

BACKGROUND: Health plans that increase prescription cost-sharing for their patients may increase overall plan costs. We analyzed the impact on health plan spending of a switch in public drug insurance from full coverage to a prescription copayment (copay), and then to income-based deductibles plus coinsurance (IBD). METHODS: We studied British Columbia residents 65 years of age or older who were dispensed inhaled steroids, beta2 agonists or anticholinergics on or after January 1996. Multivariable linear regression was used to estimate health plan costs for the population using inhalers by the Ministry of Health (MOH) during the copay and IBD policies. We estimated costs for excess physician visits and emergency hospitalizations based on data from a previously published cohort study and cost data from the MOH. We estimated the net change in MOH spending as the sum of changes in spending for inhalers, physician visits, hospitalizations, and policy administration costs. RESULTS: Net health plan spending increased by C$1.98 million per year during the copay policy [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.10-4.34], and C$5.76 million per year during the first 10 months of the IBD policy (95% CI: 1.75-10.58). Out-of-pocket spending by older patients increased 30% during the copay policy (95% CI: 24-36) and 59% during the IBD policy (95% CI: 56-63). CONCLUSIONS: British Columbia's experience indicates that cost containment focused on cost-shifting to patients may increase net expenditures for the treatment of some diseases. Health plans should consult experts to anticipate the potential cross-program impacts of policy changes.

Do drug formulary policies reflect evidence of value?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the extent to which preferred drug lists and tiered formularies reflect evidence of value, as measured in published cost-utility analyses (CUAs). METHODS: Using 1998-2001 data from a large registry of cost-effectiveness analyses, we examined the 2004 Florida Medicaid preferred drug list and the 2004 Harvard Pilgrim Pharmacy Program 3-tier formulary, and compared cost-utility ratios (standardized to 2002 US dollars) of drugs with preferred and nonpreferred status. RESULTS: Few drugs on the formularies had any cost-utility data available. Of those that did, median cost-utility ratios were somewhat higher (less favorable) for Florida's preferred drugs compared with the nonpreferred drugs (25,465 dollars vs 13,085 dollars; P = .09). Ratios did not differ for drugs on tiers 1 and 2 of the Harvard Pilgrim formulary, although they were higher for tier 3 and for excluded drugs (18,309 dollars, 18,846 dollars, 52,119 dollars, and 22,580 dollars, respectively; P = .01). Among therapies reported to be cost-saving or to have cost-utility ratios below 50,000 dollars, 77% had favored status in Florida Medicaid and 73% in Harvard Pilgrim. Among dominated drug interventions (reported to be more costly and less effective than alternatives), 95% had favored status in Florida Medicaid and 56% in Harvard Pilgrim. CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the paucity of published cost-utility data available to formulary committees. Some discrepancies prevail between the value of drugs, as reflected in published cost-utility ratios, and the formulary placement policies of 2 large health plans.

Horizontal inequity in health care utilization in Japan.

International comparisons of horizontal inequity in health has recently become one of the most pertinent issues in health economics. However, no previous studies have been undertaken on Japan. This omission is rectified in this paper. Moreover, we consider the dynamics of horizontal inequity in health over six years from 1992 to 1998. These dynamics have never been considered in this field. In a rigorous international comparison, though we cannot find any horizontal inequity in health in 1998, we find pro-rich inequity before 1995. The reason for this may be the reform of the health insurance system in 1997.

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

BACKGROUND: Drug benefit policies are an important determinant of a population's use of prescription drugs. This study was undertaken to determine whether a change in a provincial drug benefit policy, from a fixed deductible and copayment system to an income-based deductible system, resulted in changes in receipt of prescriptions for inhaled corticosteroids by Manitoba children with asthma. METHODS: Using Manitoba's health care administrative databases, we identified a population-based cohort of 10,703 school-aged children who met our case definition for asthma treatment before and after the province's drug benefit policy was changed in April 1996. The effects of the program change on the probability of receiving a prescription for an inhaled corticosteroid and on the mean number of inhaled corticosteroid doses dispensed were compared between a group of children insured under other drug programs (the comparison group) and 2 groups of children insured under the deductible program: those living in low-income neighbourhoods and those living in higher-income neighbourhoods. All analyses were adjusted for a measure of asthma severity. RESULTS: For higher-income children with severe asthma who were covered by the deductible program, the probability of receiving an inhaled corticosteroid prescription and the mean annual number of inhaled corticosteroid doses declined after the change to the drug policy. A trend toward a decrease in receipt of prescriptions was also observed for low-income children, but receipt of prescriptions was unaltered in the comparison group. Before the policy change, among children with severe asthma, the mean annual number of inhaled corticosteroid doses was lowest for low-income children, and this pattern persisted after the change. Among children with mild to moderate asthma, those covered by the deductible program (both low income and higher income) were less likely to receive prescriptions for inhaled corticosteroids than those in the comparison group, and this difference was statistically significant for the higher-income children. INTERPRETATION: The change to an income-based drug benefit policy was associated with a decrease in the use of inhaled corticosteroids by higher-income children with severe asthma and did not improve use of these drugs by low-income children.