The Influence of Out-of-Pocket Cost on Wrist Fracture Treatment Selection.

PURPOSE: Patient-centered care prioritizes patients' specific health needs and desired outcomes based on their preferences, values, and goals. The aim of this study was to evaluate nonclinical factors that affect decision-making related to wrist fracture treatment options. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was administered via Amazon Mechanical Turk. Participants chose between two treatment options for theoretical wrist fractures. Each choice set contained three levels for four attributes-total out-of-pocket cost, length of cast immobilization, time to return to work, and number of posttreatment follow-up visits-determined using Medicare national average out-of-pocket costs and a range of standard treatment options. Financial stress was evaluated using the InCharge Financial Distress/Financial Well-Being Scale. RESULTS: A total of 232 responses were collected. The average financial stress score was 6.29 (SD, 1.97), with 22% (52/232) being classified as financially distressed (score < 5.00). Twenty-eight percent of the participants (n = 64) always chose the lowest cost option, and two participants (0.01%) always chose less time in a cast. Over one-third of the participants chose the cheaper monetary option 80% of the time or more. The odds of choosing a lower cost option were 1.06 times greater per $100 decrease in cost in the entire cohort and 1.03 times greater among 166 participants who did not always choose the least expensive option. In monetary terms, relative importance showed that the participants were willing to pay $19.48 and $58.37 for a week less of cast immobilization and out of work, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the important role that out-of-pocket cost plays in decision-making compared with the nonclinical components of two equivalent treatment options. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Providers should be cognizant of the cost associated with treatment options so that information on treatment cost can be incorporated into counseling and shared decision-making with patients undergoing hand surgery.

A systematic review of cost and well-being in hip and knee replacements surgical site infections.

This systematic review examined peer-reviewed literature published from 2010 to 2020 to investigate the health care system costs, hidden out-of-pocket expenses and quality of life impact of surgical site infections (SSIs) and to develop an overall summary of the burden they place on patients. SSI can significantly impact patients' treatment experience and quality of life. Understanding patients' SSI-related burden may assist in developing more effective strategies aimed at lessening the effects of SSI in financial and well-being consequences. Peer-reviewed articles on adult populations (over 18 years old) in orthopaedic elective hip and knee surgeries published from 2010 to 2020 were considered. Only publications in English and studies conducted in high-income countries were eligible for inclusion. A search strategy based on the MESH term and the CINAHL terms classification was developed. Five databases (Scopus, EMBASE, CINAHL, Medline, Web of Science) were searched for relevant sources. Reviewers categorised and uploaded identified citations to Covidence and EndNoteX9. Reviewers will assess article titles, abstracts and the full text for compliance with the inclusion criteria. Ongoing discussions between reviewers resolved disagreements at each selection process stage. The final scoping review reported the citation inclusion process and presented search results in a PRISMA flow diagram. Four main themes were extracted from a thematic analysis of included studies (N = 30): Hospital costing (n = 21); Societal perspective of health system costing (n = 2); Patients and societal well-being (n = 6) and Epidemiological database and surveillance (n = 22). This systematic review has synthesised a range of themes associated with the overall incidence and impact of SSI that can inform decision making for policymakers. Further analysis is required to understand the burden on SSI patients.

The financial burden of PARP inhibitors on patients, payors, and financial assistance programs: Who bears the cost?

OBJECTIVES: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are expensive and their use is expanding. We aimed to evaluate cost sharing patterns between patients, payors, and financial assistance programs. METHODS: We identified ovarian cancer patients prescribed a PARP inhibitor from 5/2015-9/2019 using our pharmacy database. Cost information was collected for patients who filled their prescription at our specialty pharmacy. We calculated descriptive statistics for monthly PARP inhibitor costs for patients, payors, and financial assistance programs. We used Wilcoxon rank sum tests to evaluate monthly costs based on insurance characteristics. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients filled 94 different PARP inhibitor prescriptions with 42 (45%) prescriptions obtained using any type of financial assistance program. We analyzed 232 prescription months for the 41 prescriptions with available cost data. This included 18 (44%) prescriptions for rucaparib, 18 (44%) for niraparib, and 5 (12%) for olaparib. The total monthly drug cost was average $12,422 and median $13,700. The monthly out-of-pocket (OOP) cost for patients was average $46 and median $0 (IQR $0-4). Payors had the highest monthly costs with average $12,019 and median $13,662 (IQR $9914-14,709). Financial assistance programs contributed average $358 and median $0 per month (IQR $0-150). Patients with public (p<0.01) or Medicare insurance (p<0.01) had higher OOP costs than without. CONCLUSIONS: OOP costs were generally low with 75% of patients paying <$5 per month. While limited by small sample size at a single institution, financial assistance programs appear to play a critical role to ensure access to PARP inhibitors as nearly 50% of patients utilized these programs.

The preferences of women with ovarian cancer for oral versus intravenous recurrence regimens.

OBJECTIVE: To assess preferences of women with ovarian cancer regarding features of available anti-cancer regimens for platinum-resistant, biomarker-positive disease, with an emphasis on oral PARP inhibitor and standard intravenous (IV) chemotherapy regimens. METHODS: A discrete-choice-experiment preferences survey was designed, tested, and administered to women with ovarian cancer, with 11 pairs of treatment profiles defined using seven attributes (levels/ranges): regimen (oral daily, IV weekly, IV monthly); probability of progression-free (PFS) at 6 months (40%-60%); probability of PFS at 2 years (10%-20%); nausea (none, moderate); peripheral neuropathy (none, mild, moderate); memory problems (none, mild); and total out-of-pocket cost ($0 to $10,000). RESULTS: Of 123 participants, 38% had experienced recurrence, 25% were currently receiving chemotherapy, and 18% were currently taking a PARP inhibitor. Given attributes and levels, the relative importance weights (sum 100) were: 2-year PFS, 28; cost, 27; 6-month PFS, 19; neuropathy,14; memory problems, nausea, and regimen, all ≤5. To accept moderate neuropathy, participants required a 49% (versus 40%) chance of PFS at 6 months or 14% (versus 10%) chance at 2 years. Given a 3-way choice where PFS and cost were equal, 49% preferred a monthly IV regimen causing mild memory problems, 47% preferred an oral regimen causing moderate nausea, and 4% preferred a weekly IV regimen causing mild memory and mild neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS: These findings challenge the assumption that oral anti-cancer therapies are universally preferred by patients and demonstrate that there is no "one size fits all" regimen that is preferable to women with ovarian cancer when considering recurrence treatment regimens.

Households' out-of-pocket expenditure for healthcare in Bangladesh: A health financing incidence analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in many health indicators, providing access to affordable healthcare remains a considerable challenge in Bangladesh. Financing incidence analysis will enable an evaluation of how well the healthcare system performs to achieve equity in health financing. The objective of this study is to assess the burden of out-of-pocket (OOP) cost on different socio-economic groups by assessing the health financing incidence because OOP cost dominates household expenditure on health in Bangladesh. METHODS: The study was conducted using latest Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) 2016. We focused mainly on four specific indicators: level of monthly household OOP cost on in-patient care, urban-rural differences in OOP cost, socio-economic status differences in different payment mechanisms and the Kakwani index. Descriptive statistics were employed to analyse and summarise the selected variables based on the SES and location of residence (e.g., rural and urban). RESULTS: The study showed the overall OOP healthcare expenditure was 7.7% of the household monthly income while the poorer income group suffered more and spent up to 35% of their household income on healthcare. The Kakwani index indicated that the poorest quintile spends a greater share of their income on healthcare services than the richest quintile. CONCLUSIONS: This study observed that OOP cost in Bangladesh is regressive, that is, poorer members of society contribute a greater share of their income. Therefore, policymakers should initiate health reforms for developing and implementing risk-pooling financing mechanisms such as social health insurance to achieve the Universal Health Coverage in Bangladesh.

Adherence and out-of-pocket costs among Medicare beneficiaries who are prescribed oral targeted therapies for advanced prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Abiraterone and enzalutamide are high-cost oral therapies that increasingly are used to treat patients with advanced prostate cancer; these agents carry the potential for significant financial consequences to patients. In the current study, the authors investigated coping and material measures of the financial hardship of these therapies among patients with Medicare Part D coverage. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective cohort study on a 20% sample of Medicare Part D enrollees who underwent treatment with abiraterone or enzalutamide between July 2013 and June 2015. The authors described the variability in adherence rates and out-of-pocket payments among hospital referral regions in the first 6 months of therapy and determined whether adherence and out-of-pocket payments were associated with patient factors and the socioeconomic characteristics of where a patient was treated. RESULTS: There were 4153 patients who filled abiraterone or enzalutamide prescriptions through Medicare Part D in 228 hospital referral regions. The mean adherence rate was 75%. The median monthly out-of-pocket payment for abiraterone and enzalutamide was $706 (range, $0-$3505). After multilevel, multivariable adjustment for patient and regional factors, adherence was found to be lower in patients who were older (69% for patients aged ≥85 years vs 76% for patients aged <70 years; P < .01) and in those with low-income subsidies (69% in those with a subsidy vs 76% in those without a subsidy; P < .01). Both Hispanic ethnicity and living in a hospital referral region with a higher percentage of Hispanic beneficiaries were found to be independently associated with higher out-of-pocket payments for abiraterone and enzalutamide. CONCLUSIONS: There were substantial variations in the adherence rate and out-of-pocket payments among Medicare Part D beneficiaries who were prescribed abiraterone and enzalutamide. Sociodemographic patient and regional factors were found to be associated with both adherence and out-of-pocket payments.

The impact of state parity laws on copayments for and adherence to oral endocrine therapy for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to endocrine therapy for breast cancer is often inadequate, in part because of out-of-pocket costs for medication. Numerous states have enacted parity laws to limit patient cost-sharing for oral anticancer drugs. The objective of this study was to estimate the impact of these laws on patient copayments for and adherence to oral endocrine therapy for breast cancer. METHODS: Administrative health insurance claims data from 2007 to 2014 derived from a US health care database were used to identify female patients aged 18 to 64 years with invasive cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast who initiated endocrine therapy and were enrolled in fully insured health plans in states that either enacted parity legislation between 2008 and 2013 or had not yet enacted such legislation by 2015. Differences-in-differences analysis was used to compare copayments for and adherence to endocrine therapy during the 1-year period before and after each year of legislation enactment. RESULTS: In total, 6900 individuals who received 7778 unique drug therapy courses were identified. Parity legislation was associated with significant decreases in the 25th percentile of copayments for anastrozole of $4.39 (95% confidence interval [CI], -$4.52 to -$4.26; P < .001) and for exemestane of $3.08 (95% CI, -$4.80 to -$1.35; P < .001). The median copayment for exemestane decreased by $10.25 (95% CI, -$12.61 to -$7.89; P < .001). A higher median monthly copayment was significantly associated with a greater risk of medication nonadherence (adjusted risk ratio, 1.006 per dollar increase; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Parity laws had a modest effect on lowering the cost of anastrozole and exemestane, but more focused efforts to limit out-of-pocket costs for endocrine therapy may have a greater impact on medication adherence.

Total and out-of-pocket costs of different primary management strategies in ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Communicating healthcare costs to patients is an important component of delivering high-quality value-based care, yet cost data are lacking. This is especially relevant for ovarian cancer, where no clinical consensus on optimal first-line treatment exists. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to generate cost estimates of different primary management strategies in ovarian cancer. STUDY DESIGN: All women who underwent treatment for ovarian cancer from 2006-2015 were identified from the MarketScan database (n=12,761) in this observational cohort study. Total and out-of-pocket costs were calculated with the use of all claims within 8 months from initial treatment and normalized to 2017 US dollars. The generalized linear model method was used to assess cost by strategy. RESULTS: Among patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and those who underwent primary debulking, mean adjusted total costs were $113,660 and $107,153 (P<.001) and mean out-of-pocket costs were $2519 and $2977 (P<.001), respectively. Total costs for patients who had intravenous standard, intravenous dose-dense, and intraperitoneal/intravenous chemotherapy were $105,047, $115,099, and $121,761 (P<.001); and out-of-pocket costs were $2838, $3405, and $2888 (P<.001), respectively. Total costs for regimens that included bevacizumab were higher than those without it ($171,468 vs $104,482; P<.001); out-of-pocket costs were $3127 vs $2898 (P<.001). Among patients who did not receive bevacizumab, 25% paid ≥$3875, and 10% paid ≥$6265. For patients who received bevacizumab, 25% paid ≥$4480, and 10% paid ≥$6635. Among patients enrolled in high-deductible health plans, median out-of-pocket costs were $4196, with 25% paying ≥$6680 and 10% paying ≥$9751. CONCLUSION: Costs vary across different treatment strategies, and patients bear a significant out-of-pocket burden, especially those enrolled in high-deductible health plans.

Surveillance for cancer recurrence in long-term young breast cancer survivors randomly selected from a statewide cancer registry.

PURPOSE: This study examined clinical breast exam (CBE) and mammography surveillance in long-term young breast cancer survivors (YBCS) and identified barriers and facilitators to cancer surveillance practices. METHODS: Data collected with a self-administered survey from a statewide, randomly selected sample of YBCS diagnosed with invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ younger than 45 years old, stratified by race (Black vs. White/Other). Multivariate logistic regression models identified predictors of annual CBEs and mammograms. RESULTS: Among 859 YBCS (n = 340 Black; n = 519 White/Other; mean age = 51.0 ± 5.9; diagnosed 11.0 ± 4.0 years ago), the majority (> 85%) reported an annual CBE and a mammogram. Black YBCS in the study were more likely to report lower rates of annual mammography and more barriers accessing care compared to White/Other YBCS. Having a routine source of care, confidence to use healthcare services, perceived expectations from family members and healthcare providers to engage in cancer surveillance, and motivation to comply with these expectations were significant predictors of having annual CBEs and annual mammograms. Cost-related lack of access to care was a significant barrier to annual mammograms. CONCLUSIONS: Routine source of post-treatment care facilitated breast cancer surveillance above national average rates. Persistent disparities regarding access to mammography surveillance were identified for Black YBCS, primarily due to lack of access to routine source of care and high out-of-pocket costs. IMPLICATIONS: Public health action targeting cancer surveillance in YBCS should ensure routine source of post-treatment care and address cost-related barriers. Clinical Trials Registration Number: NCT01612338.

Trends of medical expenditures and quality of life in US adults with diabetes: the medical expenditure panel survey, 2002-2011.

BACKGROUND: Studies indicate a relationship between cost and quality of life (QOL) in diabetes care, however, the interaction is complex and the relationship is not well understood. The aim of this study was to 1) examine the relationship of quartiles of QOL on cost amongst U.S. adults with diabetes, 2) investigate how the relationship may change over time, and 3) examine the incremental effect of QOL on cost while controlling for other relevant covariates. METHODS: Data from 2002-2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) was used to examine the association between QOL and medical expenditures among adults with diabetes (aged ≥18 years) N = 20,442. Unadjusted means were computed to compare total healthcare expenditure and the out-of-pocket expenses by QOL quartile categories. QOL measures were Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) derived from the Short-Form 12. A two-part model was then used to estimate adjusted incremental total healthcare expenditure and out-of-pocket expenses adjusting for relevant covariates. RESULTS: Differences between the highest and lowest quartiles totaled $11,801 for total expenditures and $989 for out-of-pocket expenses. Over time, total expenditures remained stable, while out-of-pocket expenses decreased, particularly for the lowest quartile of physical component of QOL. Similar trends were seen in the mental component, however, differences between quartiles were smaller (average $5,727 in total expenses; $287 in out-of-pocket). After adjusting for covariates, those in the highest quartile of physical component of QOL spent $7,500 less, and those in the highest quartile of mental component spent $3,000 less than those in the lowest quartiles. CONCLUSIONS: A clear gradient between QOL and cost with increasing physical and mental QOL associated with lower expenditures and out-of-pocket expenses was found. Over a 10-year time period those with the highest physical QOL had significantly less medical expenditures compared to those with the lowest physical QOL. This study demonstrates the significant individual and societal impact poor QOL has on patients with diabetes. Understanding how differences in a subjective measure of health, such as QOL, has on healthcare expenditures helps reveal the burden of disease not reflected by using only behavioral and physiological measures.

Giving formulary and drug cost information to providers and impact on medication cost and use: a longitudinal non-randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Providers wish to help patients with prescription costs but often lack drug cost information. We examined whether giving providers formulary and drug cost information was associated with changes in their diabetes patients' drug costs and use. We conducted a longitudinal non-randomized evaluation of the web-based Prescribing Guide ( www.PrescribingGuide.com ), a free resource available to Hawaii's providers since 2006, which summarizes the formularies and copayments of six health plans for drugs to treat 16 common health conditions. All adult primary care physicians in Hawaii were offered the Prescribing Guide, and providers who enrolled received a link to the website and regular hardcopy updates. METHODS: We analyzed prescription claims from a large health plan in Hawaii for 5,883 members with diabetes from 2007 (baseline) to 2009 (follow-up). Patients were linked to 299 "main prescribing" providers, who on average, accounted for >88 % of patients' prescriptions and drug costs. We compared changes in drug costs and use for "study" patients whose main provider enrolled to receive the Prescribing Guide, versus "control" patients whose main provider did not enroll to receive the Prescribing Guide. RESULTS: In multivariate analyses controlling for provider specialty and clustering of patients by providers, both patient groups experienced similar increases in number of prescriptions (+3.2 vs. +2.7 increase, p = 0.24), and days supply of medications (+141 vs. +129 increase, p = 0.40) averaged across all drugs. Total and out-of-pocket drug costs also increased for both control and study patients. However, control patients showed higher increases in yearly total drug costs of $208 per patient (+$792 vs. +$584 increase, p = 0.02) and in 30-day supply costs (+$9.40 vs. +$6.08 increase, p = 0.03). Both groups experienced similar changes in yearly out-of-pocket costs (+$41 vs + $31 increase, p = 0.36) and per 30-day supply (-$0.23 vs. -$0.19 decrease, p = 0.996). CONCLUSION: Giving formulary and drug cost information to providers was associated with lower increases in total drug costs but not with lower out-of-pocket costs or greater medication use. Insurers and health information technology businesses should continue to increase providers' access to formulary and drug cost information at the point of care.

Physician-Based Approaches to Price Transparency: A Solution in Search of a Problem?

Physician-based transparency approaches have been advanced as a strategy for informing patients of the likely financial consequences of using services. The structure of health care pricing and insurance coverage, and the low uptake of existing tools, suggest these approaches are likely to be unwieldy and unsuccessful. They may also generate new ethical challenges.

Measuring financial toxicity in head and neck cancer: a systematic review.

Objective: The current study systematically reviews the literature about financial toxicity (FT) in head and neck cancer patients. Three databases were reviewed: PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Methods: Full text English papers published from 2000 to 2022 reporting on quantitative results about FT in head and neck cancer survivors collected through structured questionnaires or interviews were included. Results: Twenty-seven articles were included. Most of the articles were published after 2015 and from United States. There was a slight prevalence of papers dealing with oropharyngeal cancer, squamous-cell carcinoma and locally advanced head and neck cancer. Measures of FT were obtained through validated questionnaires like COST, FIT and FDQ. Collected data were mostly referrable to financial spending, financial resources, psychosocial aspect, support seeking, coping care and coping lifestyle subdomain. FT scores by COST were found to be worse in the COVID era. Financial counseling and adequate information about the costs of treatment were two effective strategies to mitigate FT. Conclusions: FT is a relatively new challenge in head and neck cancer treatment, whose expenses are higher than therapies for other cancers. A universal method to assess FT and a unified guideline for the administration of questionnaires are needed to mitigate FT and to improve patient outcomes.

Adherence to oral anticoagulants in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: the role of patients' characteristics and out-of-pocket payments.

BACKGROUND: Recent practice guidelines favor direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over warfarin for primary stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). However, challenges persist in Iraq's private pharmaceutical sector. DOACs have been sold at high and inconsistent retail prices and lack insurance coverage, leading to significant out-of-pocket (OOP) costs. The objective of this study is to investigate the impact of OOP costs on oral anticoagulants (OAC) adherence among NVAF patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This multicenter cross-sectional study interviewed 359 eligible patients attending three private cardiology clinics within Iraq's southern region from December 2022 to February 2023. The 8-item Morisky Adherence Scale evaluated patient adherence. Statistical analyses, including descriptive analysis, ANOVA, and chi-square. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The most frequently prescribed OAC were DOACs (62.8%). Patient adherence level to OAC was chiefly medium (54.6%) with no significant difference in adherence based on OAC type. Patient adherence was significantly associated with monthly income (p = 0.001), number of daily pills (p = 0.006), and OACs' average monthly cost (p = 0.011). CONCLUSION: Addressing the issue of cost-related non-adherence to OACs requires multiple actions. These include ensuring comprehensive health insurance coverage for OACs, increasing the use of affordable generic alternatives, and establishing effective cost-related discussions between healthcare providers and patients.

The impact of the implementation of a national policy on dementia on healthcare costs in older patients with dementia in Korea: a quasi-experimental difference-in-difference study.

Background: Owing to the aging population, the prevalence of dementia is increasing worldwide and has become an important public health problem. In 2018, Korea implemented the National Dementia Care Policy to strengthen the management of dementia and reduce its related burden on medical expenses. This study investigated the effect this policy on total and out-of-pocket costs in elderly patients with dementia. Methods: Data were from the National Health Insurance System. The study population included 10,549,863 individuals aged 65 years or older, recorded between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020. The treatment group comprised of dementia patients and the control group those diagnosed with the five most common diseases found in individuals aged 65 years or above. The difference-in-difference was used to explore changes in total and out-of-pocket healthcare costs per diagnosed case between the treatment and control group before and after the intervention period. Findings: Policy implementation was associated with a significant decrease in patient out-of-pocket cost. In the covariate-controlled model, no statistically significant changes were found for total mean healthcare cost. However, patient out-of-pocket cost decreased by 0.05 per diagnosed case. Interpretation: The National Dementia Care Policy led to a reduction in patient out-of-pocket cost in elderly patients with dementia. National policies need to be monitored to reduce the economic burden of patients with dementia while maintaining the financial sustainability of the healthcare system. Funding: This research was financially supported by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (MOTIE) and Korea Planning & Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (Project No. 20024263).

Out-of-pocket expenditure among patients with diabetes in Bangladesh: A nation-wide population-based study.

Background and objectives: Diabetes has become one of the fastest growing public health emergencies worldwide. The objective of this study was to estimate the average annual out-of-pocket cost of diabetes treatment as well as to find out the catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) and their determinants in Bangladeshi context. Data and methods: The study utilised data from the most recent nationally representative Household Income and Expenditure Survey 2016-2017. The incidence of CHE was estimated by applying 10% and 25% of the annual total household expenditure threshold levels. The factors associated with CHE was presented as adjusted odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Results: The annual average out-of-pocket cost per diabetes patient was US$ 323 (BDT 25,473). The cost of medication was the main cost driver contributed for 75.43% of the total out-of-pocket cost. The incidence of CHE was 14.34%, and 5.86% of the study households for 10% and 25% of the threshold levels, respectively. The patient aged more than 60 (AOR: 4.89; CI 0.82 to 28.95), uneducated (AOR: 1.83; CI 0.25 to 2.12), comorbid condition (AOR: 1.62; CI 0.94 to 2.79), small household size (AOR: 3.20; CI 0.58 to 17.51), rural resident (AOR: 1.85; CI 0.46 to 1.57), poorest asset quintile (AOR: 4.06; CI 1.43 to 13.87) and private facility type (AOR: 8.16; CI 3.46 to 19.;25) were significantly associated with the incidence of CHE due to diabetes treatment. Conclusions: There are considerable out-of-pocket costs needed for diabetes care in Bangladesh. The evidence of catastrophic expenditure suggests the urgent need to improve financial risk protection to ensure access to care.

Progressivity of out-of-pocket costs under Australia's universal health care system: A national linked data study.

BACKGROUND: In line with affordability and equity principles, Medicare-Australia's universal health care program-has measures to contain out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, particularly for lower income households. This study examined the distribution of OOP costs for Medicare-subsidised out-of-hospital services and prescription medicines in Australian households, according to their ability to pay. METHODS: OOP costs for out-of-hospital services and medicines in 2017-18 were estimated for each household, using 2016 Australian Census data linked to Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) and Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme (PBS) claims. We derived household disposable income by combining income information from the Census linked to income tax and social security data. We quantified OOP costs as a proportion of equivalised household disposable income and calculated Kakwani progressivity indices (K). RESULTS: Using data from 82% (n = 6,830,365) of all Census private households, OOP costs as a percentage of equivalised household disposable income decreased from 1.16% in the poorest decile to 0.63% in the richest decile for MBS services, and from 1.35% to 0.35% for PBS medicines. The regressive trend was less pronounced for MBS services (K = -0.06), with percentage OOP cost relatively stable between the 2nd and 9th income deciles; while percentage OOP cost decreased with increasing income for PBS medicines (K = -0.24). CONCLUSION: OOP costs for out-of-hospital Medicare services were mildly regressive while those for prescription medicines were distinctly regressive. Actions to reduce inequity in OOP costs, particularly for medicines, should be considered.

Epilepsy-Related Direct Medical and Direct Non-Medical Cost in Adult Patients Living with Epilepsy at a Tertiary Neurology Center in Rwanda.

Objective: Up to one in four patients living with epilepsy (PwE) mentions financial constraints as a reason for loss to follow-up at the Ndera tertiary neuropsychiatry hospital. Therefore, we evaluated the annual direct medical cost (DMC) and direct non-medical cost (DnMC) of epilepsy and calculated costs assuming different follow-up frequency. Materials and Methods: DMC data were obtained from a descriptive retrospective study of medical records, pharmacy dispensation and hospital logs of PwE, following their initial consultation in 2018 and who adhered to the normal clinical practice of monthly consultations for one year. DnMC data were collected through structured interviews of PwE in a cross-sectional cohort in August 2020. DnMC included biomedical care costs (eg, transportation, hospitality) and non-biomedical costs (traditional healer visits). We report weighted means for total costs, health insurance costs, and out-of-pocket costs (OoP). Results: Mean annual total cost was 389.4 US$, of which 226.2 US$ was covered by the Rwandan Health Insurance co-payment for DMC and 163.2 US$ was OoP paid by patients. Mean weighted annual DMC (n = 55) was 248.9 US$. Mean weighted annual DMC for medical consultations and antiseizure medication accounted for 30.7 US$ and 161.7 US$, respectively. Based on structured interviews (n = 69), mean weighted annual DnMC for biomedical care was 73.0 US$. Mean DnMC for traditional healer care was 67.6 US$. Weighted annual total OoP was 163.2 US$ or 20% of the GDP per capita. OoP consisted of 14% DMC co-payment, 45% biomedical DnMC, and 41% traditional healer DnMC. Conclusion: Epilepsy-related costs at a tertiary center are an important economic burden for PwE and Rwandan Health Insurance. Biomedical and traditional healer DnMC constitute 86% of total OoP. Future prospective studies should evaluate outcomes and costs of reduced visit frequency, indirect costs, and costs of comorbidities.

Anabolic and Antiresorptive Osteoporosis Treatment: Trends, Costs, and Sequence in a Commercially Insured Population, 2003-2021.

New anabolic medications (abaloparatide and romosozumab) were recently approved for osteoporosis, and data suggest that prescribing antiresorptive medications after a course of anabolic medications offers better outcomes. This study aimed to characterize prescription trends, demographics, geographical distributions, out-of-pocket costs, and treatment sequences for anabolic and antiresorptive osteoporosis medications. Using a commercial claims database (Clinformatics Data Mart), adult patients with osteoporosis from 2003 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed and stratified based on osteoporosis medication class. Patient demographics and socioeconomic variables, provider types, and out-of-pocket costs were collected. Multivariable regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of receiving osteoporosis treatment. A total of 2,988,826 patients with osteoporosis were identified; 616,635 (20.6%) received treatment. Patients who were female, Hispanic or Asian, in the Western US, had higher net worth, or had greater comorbidity burden were more likely to receive osteoporosis medications. Among patients who received medication, 31,112 (5.0%) received anabolic medication; these were more likely to be younger, White patients with higher education level, net worth, and greater comorbidity burden. Providers who prescribed the most anabolic medications were rheumatologists (18.5%), endocrinologists (16.8%), and general internists (15.3%). Osteoporosis medication prescriptions increased fourfold from 2003 to 2020, whereas anabolic medication prescriptions did not increase at this rate. Median out-of-pocket costs were $17 higher for anabolic than antiresorptive medications, though costs for anabolic medications decreased significantly from 2003 to 2020 (compound annual growth rate: -0.6%). A total of 8388 (1.4%) patients tried two or more osteoporosis medications, and 0.6% followed the optimal treatment sequence. Prescription of anabolic osteoporosis medications has not kept pace with overall osteoporosis treatment, and there are socioeconomic disparities in anabolic medication prescription, potentially driven by higher median out-of-pocket costs. Although prescribing antiresorptive medications after a course of anabolic medications offers better outcomes, this treatment sequence occurred in only 0.6% of the study cohort. © 2023 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.