Online Tools to Decrease Out-of-Pocket Prescription Costs for Patients: A Practical Guide for Urologists.

INTRODUCTION: Patients who seek urologic care have recently reported a high degree of financial toxicity from prescription medications, including management for nephrolithiasis, urinary incontinence, and urological oncology. Estimating out-of-pocket costs can be challenging for urologists in the US because of variable insurance coverage, local pharmacy distributions, and complicated prescription pricing schemes. This article discusses resources that urologists can adopt into their practice and share with patients to help lower out-of-pocket spending for prescription medications. METHODS: We identify 4 online tools that are designed to direct patients toward more affordable prescription medication options: the Medicare Part D Plan Finder, GoodRx, Amazon, and the Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company. A brief historical overview and summary for patients and clinicians are provided for each online resource. A patient-centered framework is provided to help navigate these 4 available tools in clinic. RESULTS: Among the 4 tools we identify, there are multiples tradeoffs to consider as financial savings and features can vary. First, patients insured by Medicare should explore the Part D Plan Finder each year to compare drug plans. Second, patients who need to urgently refill a prescription at a local pharmacy should visit GoodRx. Third, patients who are prescribed recurrent generic prescriptions for chronic conditions can utilize the Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company. Finally, patients who are prescribed 3 or more chronic medications can benefit from subscribing to Amazon RxPass. CONCLUSIONS: Prescription medications for urologic conditions can be expensive. This article includes 4 online resources that can help patients access medications at their most affordable costs. Urologists can provide this framework to their patients to help support lowering out-of-pocket drug costs.

Prescription Drug Dispensing and Patient Costs After Implementation of a No Behavioral Health Cost-Sharing Law.

Importance: On January 1, 2022, New Mexico implemented a No Behavioral Cost-Sharing (NCS) law that eliminated cost-sharing for mental health and substance use disorder (MH/SUD) treatments in plans regulated by the state, potentially reducing a barrier to treatment for MH/SUDs among the commercially insured; however, the outcomes of the law are unknown. Objective: To assess the association of implementation of the NCS with out-of-pocket spending for prescription for drugs primarily used to treat MH/SUDs and monthly volume of dispensed drugs. Design, Settings, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used a difference-in-differences research design to examine trends in outcomes for New Mexico state employees, a population affected by the NCS, compared with federal employees in New Mexico who were unaffected by NCS. Data were collected on prescription drugs for MH/SUDs dispensed per month between January 2021 and June 2022 for New Mexico patients with a New Mexico state employee health plan and New Mexico patients with a federal employee health plan. Data analysis occurred from December 2022 to January 2024. Exposure: Enrollment in a state employee health plan or federal health plan. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were mean patient out-of-pocket spending per dispensed MH/SUD prescription and the monthly volume of dispensed MH/SUD prescriptions per 1000 employees. A difference-in-differences estimation approach was used. Results: The implementation of the NCS law was associated with a mean (SE) $6.37 ($0.30) reduction (corresponding to an 85.6% decrease) in mean out-of-pocket spending per dispensed MH/SUD medication (95% CI, -$7.00 to -$5.75). The association of implementation of NCS with the volume of prescriptions dispensed was not statistically significant. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that the implementation of the New Mexico NCS law was successful in lowering out-of-pocket spending on prescription medications for MH/SUDs, but that there was no association of NCS with the volume of medications dispensed in the first 6 months after implementation. A key challenge is to identify policies that protect from high out-of-pocket spending while also promoting access to needed care.

Denial of prescription pain medication among people who use drugs in Vancouver, Canada.

BACKGROUND: People who use drugs experience pain at two to three times the rate of the general population and yet continue to face substantial barriers to accessing appropriate and adequate treatment for pain. In light of the overdose crisis and revised opioid prescribing guidelines, we sought to identify factors associated with being denied pain medication and longitudinally investigate denial rates among people who use drugs. METHODS: We used multivariable generalized estimating equations analyses to investigate factors associated with being denied pain medication among people who use drugs reporting pain in three prospective cohort studies in Vancouver, Canada. Analyses were restricted to study periods in which participants requested a prescription for pain from a healthcare provider. Descriptive statistics detail denial rates and actions taken by participants after being denied. RESULTS: Among 1168 participants who requested a prescription for pain between December 2012 and March 2020, the median age was 47 years and 63.0% were male. Among 4,179 six-month observation periods, 907 (21.7%) included a report of being denied requested pain medication. In multivariable analyses, age was negatively associated with prescription denial (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.97-0.99), while self-managing pain (AOR = 2.48, 95%CI:2.04-3.00), experiencing a non-fatal overdose (AOR = 1.51, 95%CI:1.22-1.88), engagement in opioid agonist therapy (AOR = 1.32, 95%CI:1.09-1.61), and daily use of heroin or other unregulated opioids (AOR = 1.32, 95%CI:1.05-1.66) were positively associated with being denied. Common actions taken (n = 895) after denial were accessing the unregulated drug supply (53.5%), doing nothing (30.6%), and going to a different doctor/emergency room (6.1%). The period following the introduction of new prescribing guidelines was not associated with a change in denial rates. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of people who use drugs continue to be denied prescriptions for pain, with such denial associated with important substance use-related harms, including non-fatal overdose. Guidelines specific to the pharmaceutical management of pain among people who use drugs are needed.

Prescription drug coverage and effective coverage of three chronic conditions of high prevalence in Chile: Hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidemia.

BACKGROUND: Access to medicines is a serious problem globally and in Chile. Despite the creation of coverage policies, part of the population with chronic conditions of high prevalence, still does not have access to the medicines it requires and disease control continues to be low. The objective of the study was to estimate the medication use and effective coverage for diabetes, dyslipidemia and hypertension in Chile, analyzing them according to sociodemographic variables and social determinants of health. METHODS: Cross-sectional analytical study with information from the 2016-2017 National Health Survey (sample = 6,233 people aged 15 years or older, expanded = 14,518,969). Descriptive analyses of medication use and effective coverage for hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidemia were carried out, and multivariate logistic regression models were developed to analyze possible associations with variables of interest. RESULTS: 60% of people with hypertension or diabetes use medications and only 27.7% in dyslipidemia. While 54.2% of those with diabetes have their glycemia controlled, in hypertension and dyslipidemia the effective coverage drops to 33.3% and 6.6%, respectively. There are no differences in use by health system, but there are differences in the control of hypertension and diabetes, favoring beneficiaries of the private subsystem. Effective coverage of dyslipidemia and hypertension also increases in those using medications. The drugs coincide with the established protocols, although beneficiaries of the private sector report greater use of innovative drugs. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of Chileans with hypertension, diabetes or dyslipidemia still do not use the required medications and do not control their conditions.

Associations Between Annual Medicare Part D Low-Income Subsidy Loss and Prescription Drug Spending and Use.

Importance: The Medicare Part D Low Income Subsidy (LIS) program provides millions of beneficiaries with drug plan premium and cost-sharing assistance. The extent to which LIS recipients experience subsidy losses with annual redetermination cycles and the resulting associations with prescription drug affordability and use are unknown. Objective: To examine how frequently annual LIS benefits are lost among Medicare Part D beneficiaries and how this is associated with prescription drug use and out-of-pocket costs. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study of Medicare Part D beneficiaries from 2007 to 2018, annual changes in LIS recipients among those automatically deemed eligible (eg, due to dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid) and nondeemed beneficiaries who must apply for LIS benefits were analyzed using Medicare enrollment and Part D event data. Subsidy losses were classified in 4 groups: temporary losses (<1 year); extended losses (≥1 year); subsidy reductions (change to partial LIS); and disenrollment from Medicare Part D after subsidy loss. Temporary losses could more likely represent subsidy losses among eligible beneficiaries. Multinomial logit models were used to examine associations between beneficiary characteristics and subsidy loss; linear regression models were used to compare changes in prescription drug cost and use in the months after subsidy losses vs before. Analyses were conducted between November 2022 and November 2023. Exposure: Subsidy loss at the beginning of each year among subsidy recipients in December of the prior year. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were out-of-pocket costs and prescription drug fills overall and for 4 classes: antidiabetes, antilipid, antidepressant, and antipsychotic drugs. Results: In 2008, 731 070 full LIS beneficiaries (17%) were not deemed automatically eligible (39% were aged <65 years; 59% were female). Nearly all beneficiaries deemed automatically eligible (≥99%) retained the subsidy annually from 2007 to 2018, compared with 78% to 84% of nondeemed beneficiaries. Among nondeemed beneficiaries, disabled individuals younger than 65 years and racial and ethnic minority groups were more likely to have temporary subsidy losses vs none. Temporary losses were associated with an average 700% increase in out-of-pocket drug costs (+$52.72/mo [95% CI, 52.52-52.92]) and 15% reductions in prescription fills (-0.58 fills/mo [95% CI, -0.59 to -0.57]) overall. Similar changes were found for antidiabetes, antilipid, antidepressant, and antipsychotic prescription drug classes. Beneficiaries who retained their subsidy had few changes. Conclusions and Relevance: The conclusions of this cohort study suggest that efforts to help eligible beneficiaries retain Medicare Part D subsidies could improve drug affordability, treatment adherence, and reduce disparities in medication access.

Use of drugs with pharmacogenomics (PGx)-based dosing guidelines in a Danish cohort of persons with chronic kidney disease, both on dialysis and not on dialysis: Perspectives for prescribing optimization.

AIM: The objective of this registry study is to assess the utilization of pharmacogenomic (PGx) drugs among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: This study was a retrospective study of patients affiliated with the Department of Nephrology, Aalborg University Hospital, Denmark in 2021. Patients diagnosed with CKD were divided into CKD without dialysis and CKD with dialysis. PGx prescription drugs were retrieved from the Patient Administration System. Actionable dosing guidelines (AG) for specific drug-gene pairs for CYP2D6, CYP2C9, CYP2C19 and SLCO1B1 were retrieved from the PharmGKB homepage. RESULTS: Out of 1241 individuals, 25.5% were on dialysis. The median number of medications for each patient was 9 within the non-dialysis group and 16 within the dialysis group. Thirty-one distinct PGx drugs were prescribed. Altogether, 76.0% (943 individuals) were prescribed at least one PGx drug and the prevalence of prescriptions of PGx drugs was higher in the dialysis group compared to the non-dialysis group. The most frequently prescribed drugs with AG were metoprolol, pantoprazole, atorvastatin, simvastatin and warfarin. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that a substantial proportion of patients with CKD are exposed to drugs or drug combinations for which there exists AG related to PGx of CYP2D6, CYP2C19, CYP2C9 and SLCO1B1.

Why the increase? Examining the rise in prescription medication expenditures in the United States between 2011 and 2020.

The objective of this cross-sectional analysis was to identify determinants of increasing medicine expenditures in the US between 2011 and 2020. Prescription medication expenditures from the 2011-2020 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey (MEPS) were used to calculate total annual medication expenditures by payer categories (Out-of-pocket, Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE/Veterans Administration/CHAMPVA (TVAC), Other Government Sources, Private Insurance, and Other Sources). From here, expenditures were stratified by therapeutic category using Multum Lexicon Drug Class to examine trends in expenditures by therapeutic area. Linear regression was used to identify temporal trends in medication expenditures. From 2011 to 2020, total annual prescription medication expenditures rose from $341.49 to $473.12 billion per year with metabolic agents being the most costly category. Among the metabolic agents, antidiabetic agents were the most costly therapeutic area, with an increasing trend observed from $27.15 to $89.17 billion over the same period. Medicare, Medicaid, Private Insurance, TVAC, and Other Sources also saw an increasing trend in antidiabetic agent expenditure, while no trend was observed for Out-of-pocket and Other Government Sources. Insulin had the highest expenditure among antidiabetic agents. Further studies are warranted to explore specific factors contributing to the increasing trend.

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 Prescription Drug Coverage on Disparities in Adherence and Medication Use: A Systematic Review.

Prescription drug cost-sharing is a barrier to medication adherence, particularly for low-income and minority populations. In this systematic review, we examined the impact of prescription drug cost-sharing and policies to reduce cost-sharing on racial/ethnic and income disparities in medication utilization. We screened 2,145 titles and abstracts and identified 19 peer-reviewed papers that examined the interaction between cost-sharing and racial/ethnic and income disparities in medication adherence or utilization. We found weak but inconsistent evidence that lower cost-sharing is associated with reduced disparities in adherence and utilization, but studies consistently found that significant disparities remained even after adjusting for differences in cost-sharing across individuals. Study designs varied in their ability to measure the causal effect of policy or cost-sharing changes on disparities, and a wide range of policies were examined across studies. Further research is needed to identify the types of policies that are best suited to reduce disparities in medication adherence.

Sources of nonmedically used prescription psychotherapeutic drugs using real-world data from adolescents and adults assessed for substance use treatment--2014-2022.

BACKGROUND: Nonmedical use (NMU) of prescription psychotherapeutic drugs (PPD) may increase risk for significant morbidity and mortality in the overdose crisis. OBJECTIVE: This study examines sources of PPD using real-world data from adolescents and adults reporting past 30-day NMU of PPDs. METHODS: A convenience sample of individuals aged ≥10 years assessed for substance use disorders (SUD) treatment was analyzed using the 2014-2022 National Addictions Vigilance Intervention and Prevention Program datasets. PPD include prescription opioids, prescription tranquilizers/sedatives, and prescription stimulants. RESULTS: Overall, among assessments of adolescents aged 10-18 years (N = 1991) and young adults aged 19-24 years (N = 15,166), "family/friend" (46.08-47.41 %) and "dealer" (33.82-42.71 %) were the most common sources. Among assessments of adults aged ≥25 years (N = 89,225), "own prescription" was the most common source and increased in frequency as age increased. Across all age groups, "family/friend" was the most frequent source for all drug classes (41.96-48.76 %) except for nonmedically used buprenorphine/methadone, for which "own prescription" was the most common source (51.85 %) among adults. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates heterogeneity in sources of nonmedically used PPD across age groups. Tailored prevention strategies for different age groups and improving timely access to medical care to ensure proper treatment of chronic medical conditions including SUD are needed.

Characteristics of Prescription Drug Fills Using Pharmacy-Pharmacy Benefit Manager Discount Programs: The "GoodRx" Model.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to characterize products using pharmacy-pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) discounts and to estimate the association among such discounts, prescription utilization, and out-of-pocket costs. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study using IQVIA's Formulary Impact Analyzer, which contains anonymized, individual-level pharmacy claims representing US retail pharmacy transactions. We focused on 20 products with the greatest number of transactions using a pharmacy-PBM discount. Our unit of analysis was a treatment episode, defined as the length of time from an incident fill to no continuous use for 60 consecutive days after allowing for indefinite stockpiling. Outcome measures included products with greatest pharmacy-PBM discount use, characteristics of treatment episodes, and out-of-pocket costs with and without pharmacy-PBM discount. RESULTS: Across all products, 3.82% of transactions and 7.69% of treatment episodes were accompanied by a pharmacy-PBM discount. Commonly discounted products included generic treatments for chronic disease (lisinopril, levothyroxine, metformin) and neuropsychiatric conditions (alprazolam, amphetamine, buprenorphine, hydrocodone). The median postdiscount out-of-pocket cost was >2.5-fold higher during treatment episodes with a discount than those without ($15.15, interquartile range [IQR] $8.53-32.00, vs $5.88, IQR $1.40-15.00). Median treatment episode duration was 249 days (IQR 132-418) with discount use compared with 236 days (IQR 121-396) without discount use, although treatment episodes that began with a discount had fewer transactions per treatment episode and were shorter (median 212 days, IQR 114-360) than those that did not (313 days, IQR 178-500). CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacy-PBM discounts may foster market competition and improve access for under- and uninsured individuals; however, these programs may not generate savings for many insured individuals.

"Conscientious Guardian" vs. "Commercialized Jungle": Pharmacists and Pharmacy Design in the Postwar United States.

Pharmacists and pharmacies are key drivers in the American marketplace. They serve as an endpoint of the pharmaceutical supply chain and are the dispensers of a range of consumer goods, some nonthreatening and others potentially harmful to public health. In adding pharmacies to the roster of consumerist locales in the postwar period, scholars might draw even deeper connections about the transformation of health, corporate medicine, and American economic power. To understand the interface of consumerism, corporatism, and health in postwar America, this article holds the postwar pharmacy as a key site of commodity exchange and business and positions it within the larger American firmament, paying attention to the design of pharmacies. In particular, the article will add to the knowledge about the tangible ways that medical and health care spaces are constructed, organized, and designed to best generate profits. Besides prescription medications, alcohol, tobacco, and sugar-rich products were also vital elements of the postwar pharmacy and will be featured in this article. What is more, this article focuses on a central debate between pharmacists during the postwar period about how pharmacies were shifting from the role of healer to that of a retailer - from a "conscientious guardian" to a "commercialized jungle" - in order to highlight how the public health role of pharmacies was undermined by industry pressures for profit. Based on unused corporate guides and manuals, company records, photographs, and management documents, this article will spotlight the underexplored interiority of pharmacies - the store's insides, processes of organization, and design features related to potentially habit-changing substances.

Pharmaceutical demand response to utilization management.

Prescription drug insurance increasingly imposes prior authorization (requiring providers to request coverage before claim approval) to manage utilization. Prior authorization has been criticized because of its administrative burden on providers. The primary alternative to managing utilization is imposing out-of-pocket (OOP) payment to incentivize beneficiaries to seek lower-cost care, effectively providing beneficiaries with partial insurance. Would beneficiaries prefer indirectly paying for prior authorization through higher premiums; or would they prefer prior authorization was replaced by higher OOP costs? This tradeoff depends on how much OOP costs could be displaced by prior authorization, which depends on their relative impact on demand. I estimate the effect of prior authorization and OOP costs on pharmaceutical demand in Medicare Part D, addressing endogeneity caused by unobserved drug quality and selection into plans. Despite criticism of prior authorization, I find that Medicare beneficiaries would prefer higher premiums to pay for prior authorization, over higher OOP costs.

The cost of simplifying treatments for cystic fibrosis: Implications of the SIMPLIFY trial.

BACKGROUND: Dornase alfa and hypertonic saline are mucoactive therapies that can improve respiratory symptoms in people with cystic fibrosis (CF). A recent randomized control trial showed that participants with well-preserved pulmonary function taking elexacaftor + tezacaftor + ivacaftor (ETI) who discontinued dornase alfa or hypertonic saline for 6 weeks had no clinically meaningful decline in lung function. This may prompt discussions with care providers regarding ongoing use of these medications. OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs of outpatient medications between people taking ETI who continued or discontinued (1) dornase alfa or (2) hypertonic saline from 2 clinical trials and project cost differences in the US CF population if these 2 medications were used only intermittently for symptom relief instead of chronically. METHODS: The SIMPLIFY study was 2 parallel multicenter trials that randomized participants 1:1 to either continue or discontinue therapy. To estimate costs, we used data from the Merative MarketScan Databases to identify people with CF from 2020 to 2021. Our primary outcomes were differences in costs of outpatient prescription drugs among those who continued vs discontinued dornase alfa and, separately, hypertonic saline. We obtained adjusted differences in median costs. To estimate the annual cost savings if the population of people with CF taking ETI used these medications only intermittently, we multiplied the proportion of people in MarketScan with CF diagnoses who were taking each of these medications by the median cost savings per year and subtracted the cost of "rescue" use. RESULTS: A total of 392 participants from the dornase alfa trial and 273 from the hypertonic saline trial were included in analyses. The adjusted difference in median medication costs was not significant for the hypertonic saline trial, but we observed a significantly decreased 6-week cost of medications in the dornase alfa trial (adjusted median difference in costs between discontinue and continue of $5,860 (95% CI = $4,870-$6,850); P < 0.0001). We estimated that two-thirds of people with CF use ETI and dornase alfa in the United States; if they discontinued dornase alfa except for intermittent use, the resulting annual savings would be $1.21 billion. CONCLUSIONS: Although the costs of dornase alfa and hypertonic saline are smaller compared with ETI, reduction in use would lead to substantial prescription drug cost savings and reduce the treatment burden. However, individual benefits of these therapies should be considered, and decisions regarding changes in therapy remain an important discussion between people with CF and their providers. Study registration number: NCT04378153.

Drug use and spending under a formulary informed by cost-effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: The National Academy of Medicine has called for value-based drug formularies to address health plan prescription drug spending while maintaining access to high-value medicines. Thirty employer-sponsored plans implemented a "Value-Based Formulary-essentials" (VBF-e) program that uses cost-effectiveness evidence to inform cost-sharing and coverage exclusion. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if the VBF-e was associated with changes in medication use and patient out-of-pocket spending and health plan spending on prescription drugs and other health care. METHODS: This was a cohort study using a difference-in-differences design from 2015 through 2019 with 1 year of follow-up after VBF-e implementation at Premera Blue Cross, the largest nonprofit health plan in the Pacific Northwest. The VBF-e exposure group was composed of all individuals aged younger than 65 years and enrolled at least 12 months prior to their employer group's VBF-e implementation date. The contemporaneous control group was composed of propensity score-matched individuals with the same inclusion criteria but their employer group that did not implement VBF-e. We prespecified the following outcomes: days of medication on hand overall and by VBF-e tier (high-value generic, brand, and specialty drugs were in tiers 1 to 3, respectively, and low-value drugs were in tier 4 or excluded from coverage); prescription drug spending; and other health care use (emergency department visits, hospital days, and outpatient visits). RESULTS: Comparing 12,111 exposed (mean age = 36.0; 49.8% female sex) participants with 24,222 control participants (mean age = 34.7; 49.6% female sex), VBF-e reduced use of low-value drugs by 0.3 days per member per month (PMPM) (95% CI = -0.5 to -0.1; 17% decrease) for tier 4 drugs and 0.4 days PMPM (95% CI = -0.5 to -0.4; 83% decrease) for excluded drugs. High-value specialty drug use increased by 0.1 days PMPM (95% CI = 0.0-0.1; 123% increase). Health plan spending decreased by $14 PMPM (95% CI = -26 to -4) and member out-of-pocket spending increased by $1 PMPM (95% CI = 1-2). Other health care use did not change significantly. CONCLUSIONS: An exclusion formulary informed by cost-effectiveness evidence reduced low-value drug use, increased high-value specialty drug use, reduced health plan spending, and increased member out-of-pocket spending without increasing acute care use. DISCLOSURES: This research was supported by a grant from the Patrick and Catherine Weldon Donaghue Medical Research Foundation's Greater Value Portfolio Program. Study Registration Number: NCT04904055.

Costs of Prescription Drugs for Children and Parental Adherence to Long-Term Medications.

Importance: The adverse effects of prescription drug costs on medication adherence and health have been well described for individuals. Because many families share financial resources, high medication costs for one could lead to cost-related nonadherence in another; however, these family-level spillover effects have not been explored. Objective: To evaluate whether the cost of a child's newly initiated medication was associated with changes in their parent's adherence to their own medications and whether that differed by likely duration of treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used interrupted time-series analysis with a propensity score-matched control group from a large national US health insurer database (2010-2020) and included children initiating medication and their linked presumed parents using long-term medications. Exposure: The cost of the child's initiated medication. Child medication cost was classified based on highest (≥90th) or lowest (<10th) decile from out-of-pocket medication spending, stratified by whether the medication was intended for short- or long-term use. Children initiating high-cost medications (based on the highest decile) were propensity-score matched with children initiating low-cost medications. Main Outcome and Measures: The child's parent's adherence to long-term medication assessed by the widely used proportion of days covered metric in 30-day increments before and after the child's first fill date. Parent demographic characteristics, baseline adherence, and length of treatment, and family unit size and out-of-pocket medication spending were key subgroups. Results: Across 47 154 included pairs, the parents' mean (SD) age was 42.8 (7.7) years. Compared with a low-cost medication, initiating a high-cost, long-term medication was associated with an immediate 1.9% (95% CI, -3.8% to -0.9%) reduction in parental adherence sustained over time (0.2%; 95% CI, -0.1% to 0.4%). Similar results were observed for short-term medications (0.6% immediate change; 95% CI, -1.3% to -0.01%). Previously adherent parents, parents using treatment for longer periods, and families who spent more out-of-pocket on medications were more sensitive to high costs, with immediate adherence reductions of 2.8% (95% CI, -4.9% to -0.6%), 2.7% (95% CI, -4.7% to -0.7%), and -3.8% (95% CI, -7.2% to -0.5%), respectively, after long-term medication initiation. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study small reductions in adherence across parents with higher child drug costs were observed. Health care systems should consider child-level or even household-level spending in adherence interventions or prescription policy design.

Effects of U.S. State Medical Cannabis Laws on Treatment of Chronic Noncancer Pain.

BACKGROUND: State medical cannabis laws may lead patients with chronic noncancer pain to substitute cannabis in place of prescription opioid or clinical guideline-concordant nonopioid prescription pain medications or procedures. OBJECTIVE: To assess effects of state medical cannabis laws on receipt of prescription opioids, nonopioid prescription pain medications, and procedures for chronic noncancer pain. DESIGN: Using data from 12 states that implemented medical cannabis laws and 17 comparison states, augmented synthetic control analyses estimated laws' effects on receipt of chronic noncancer pain treatment, relative to predicted treatment receipt in the absence of the law. SETTING: United States, 2010 to 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 583 820 commercially insured adults with chronic noncancer pain. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of patients receiving any opioid prescription, nonopioid prescription pain medication, or procedure for chronic noncancer pain; volume of each treatment type; and mean days' supply and mean morphine milligram equivalents per day of prescribed opioids, per patient in a given month. RESULTS: In a given month during the first 3 years of law implementation, medical cannabis laws led to an average difference of 0.05 percentage points (95% CI, -0.12 to 0.21 percentage points), 0.05 percentage points (CI, -0.13 to 0.23 percentage points), and -0.17 percentage points (CI, -0.42 to 0.08 percentage points) in the proportion of patients receiving any opioid prescription, any nonopioid prescription pain medication, or any chronic pain procedure, respectively, relative to what we predict would have happened in that month had the law not been implemented. LIMITATIONS: This study used a strong nonexperimental design but relies on untestable assumptions involving parallel counterfactual trends. Statistical power is limited by the finite number of states. Results may not generalize to noncommercially insured populations. CONCLUSION: This study did not identify important effects of medical cannabis laws on receipt of opioid or nonopioid pain treatment among patients with chronic noncancer pain. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Drug Abuse.

A checklist for a consistent, comprehensive medication review.

INTRODUCTION: Medicare Advantage Part D plans and stand-alone Part D prescription drug plans are required by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to have qualified providers, including pharmacists, and offer annual comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) for eligible Medicare beneficiaries. Although guidance on the components of a CMR is available, providers have flexibility in how to deliver the CMR to patients and which content to cover. With the variety of patient needs, CMR content is not always consistently delivered in practice. Our research group performed an extensive evaluation to create and test an ideal CMR content coverage checklist for CMR provision. CMR CONTENT CHECKLIST: The CMR Content Checklist can be used for quality improvement purposes to evaluate the comprehensiveness of pharmacist services-to assess either within pharmacist variation across patients or within organization variations between pharmacists or sites. INCORPORATING THE CMR CONTENT CHECKLIST INTO PRACTICE: Testing in a real-world setting demonstrated where gaps in service coverage existed. The CMR Content Checklist could be used as the first step for quality improvement given that it provides details on the key aspects of the service that can inform quality measure development.