![]()
| EMBARGOED
FOR RELEASE 12:01 a.m. Wednesday, Dec. 4 |
For
more information, contact: |
Higher
Drug Cost-Sharing Saves Money for Retiree Health Plans,
But Enrollees Pay More; Drug Utilization Isn't Necessarily Reduced
Policymakers Should
Consider How Copayments Change Use
When Designing Medicare Drug Benefit, Health Affairs Article Says
BETHESDA, Md.Employer
health plans that charge retirees higher copayments for retail pharmaceuticals
saved themselves 18.7 percent per member on average in 2001, but their enrollees
on average had 59.4 percent higher out-of-pocket costs ($389 versus $244), according
to a new study published as a Health Affairs Web exclusive.
The study demonstrates the effects that plan design might have on costs and
drug use under any Medicare prescription benefit, write authors Cindy Parks
Thomas, Stanley S. Wallack and colleagues from Brandeis University's Schneider
Institute for Health Policy. The authors write that the study shows that higher
copayments lead to the use of less-expensive drugs and fewer retail purchases,
although they argue that Medicare should consider using copayment strategies
in combination with other cost-containment mechanisms such as encouraging generics,
mail-order delivery of prescriptions, prior authorization, and provider education.
The authors studied prescription drug claims made by more than 29,000 retirees
age 65 and older enrolled in 96 employer plans managed by one pharmacy benefit
management firm. They compared prescription drug use and costs in a number of
plan designs, including those with multiple "tiers" of benefits and
cost-sharing requirements.
They compared plans with cost sharing categorized as "more-aggressive"
and "less-aggressive," defined by whether they required an above-
or below-average copayment for brand-name drugs, or whether they required coinsurance
of more or less than 30 percent for brand-name drugs. The "more-aggressive"
cost-sharing plans had average per-enrollee costs to the plan of $1,155 and
average enrollee out-of-pocket costs of $389 in 2001. The "less-aggressive"
plans had average per-enrollee plan costs of $1,421 and average enrollee out-of-pocket
costs of $244 in 2001.
Enrollees in the more-aggressive plans had on average overall costs of $1,544
in 2001, compared to less-aggressive plans, which had fewer 30-day equivalent
prescriptions and overall costs of $1,665 per enrollee. The study attributes
half of the difference in costs to the higher cost-sharing in the more-aggressive
plans, but says the greater use of generics, less expensive brands, and more
mail-order delivery lowers the costs of drugs in those plans.
Across all the plan designs studied, average annual spending per enrollee was
$1,571 in 2001, with average member out-of-pocket cost-sharing of 18 percent.
The plans that had the highest member cost-sharing were the single-tiered plans
with at least 50% member coinsurance for retail purchases, combined with mail
order incentives, and the three-tier plans that charged between 10 percent and
40 percent member coinsurance, depending on the type of drug. Those plans had
total member out-of-pocket cost sharing of 28 percent and 22 percent, respectively.
The study also found that enrollees are more likely to use generics when they
fill their prescriptions at retail pharmacies under plans that have the greatest
spread in copayments between brand-name and generic drugs. This is particularly
true in plans that make use of coinsurance, which as a percentage of the total
cost is variable based on the total price of the drug and not a flat copayment.
For example, the authors found that in three-tier plans with a maximum 30 percent
coinsurance for retail purchases and an actual copayment difference of $15 between
generic and brand-name drugs, 44.5 percent of prescriptions were generic. In
a three-tier plan with a $5 to $10 difference between tiers, only 36.1 percent
were generic.
In addition, the study found that use of generic medications and use of mail
order can save money both for enrollees, through lower copayments, and plans,
through lower overall costs. The average mail-order price for all prescriptions
was 16.4 percent less than retail. However, use of generics saved the most,
with the average price of a generic prescription over 70 percent less than the
average brand, at the pharmacy or through mail order.
The research was funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.
Health Affairs, published
by Project HOPE, is a bimonthly multidisciplinary journal devoted to publishing
the leading edge in health policy thought and research.
###
©2002 Project HOPEThe People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.