Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10146922›Full record

ReviewPharmacoEconomics1993

Economic impact of cost-containment strategies in third party programmes in the US. Part II.

C M Kozma, R M Schulz, W M Dickson, J T Dye, E R Cox, D A Holdford, L Michael, W N Yates, T L Young

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in PharmacoEconomics, 1993. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Reference-based pricing of prescription drugs: exploring the equivalence of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 1999
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

C M KozmaCollege of Pharmacy, University of South Carolina, Columbia.
R M Schulz
W M Dickson
J T Dye
E R Cox
D A Holdford
L Michael
W N Yates
T L Young

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This is the second article in a 2-part series that examines the economic impact of several different strategies used to control costs in third party programmes. This article investigates 5 different methods: (a) formularies; (b) capitation; (c) drug utilisation review; (d) prior approval; and (e) drug product selection. The published literature indicates that use of formularies decreases drug expenditures, but these savings may be offset by expenditures in other areas of healthcare programmes. Capitation, though less well studied than other strategies, may show some effectiveness in reducing costs by increasing generic dispensing and promoting switching from prescription drug to over-the-counter. Drug utilisation review, as a systematic programme of claims data review, has been shown to yield positive economic return in a variety of areas, including both impersonal and face-to-face educational interventions with healthcare practitioners. Prior approval and drug product selection both result in savings when examined in isolation from other aspects of healthcare. Cost-shifting, administrative costs and costs incurred because of possible decreased access to care have yet to be fully accounted for.

Indexed as

Cost ControlCapitation FeeDrug Utilization ReviewFormularies as TopicHumansInsurance, Health, ReimbursementUnited States

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.