SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2008
Pharmaceutical policies: effects of cap and co-payment on rational drug use.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
58 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 164 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmaceutical policies: effects of financial incentives for prescribers.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Pharmaceutical policies: effects of cap and co-payment on rational use of medicines.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Pharmaceutical policies: effects of reference pricing, other pricing, and purchasing policies.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Interventions to improve safe and effective medicines use by consumers: an overview of systematic reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Association between drug insurance cost sharing strategies and outcomes in patients with chronic diseases: a systematic review.PloS one · 2014Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The influence of health systems on hypertension awareness, treatment, and control: a systematic literature review.PLoS medicine · 2013Pooled it
- Pharmaceutical policies: effects of restrictions on reimbursement.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- Systematic review on quality control for drug management programs: is quality reported in the literature?BMC health services research · 2009Pooled it
- Improving antibiotic prescribing - Recommendations for funding and pricing policies to enhance use of point-of-care tests.Health policy OPEN · 2024Article
- Patients' insights into unused medications during the COVID-19 outbreak: A qualitative study.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024Article
- Analysis of rational prescription of medicines by village clinics: a repeated cross-sectional study of a province in eastern China.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Exploring the effectiveness of demand-side retail pharmaceutical expenditure reforms : Cross-country evidence from weighted-average least squares estimation.International journal of health economics and management · 2023Article
- Article
- Healthcare Utilization with Drug Acquisition and Expenses at the National Health Insurance Fund in Sudan.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Budget cap and pay-back model to control spending on medicines: A case study of Bulgaria.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Policies and Practices Catalyzing the Use of Generic Medicines: A Systematic Search and Review.Ethiopian journal of health sciences · 2021Review
- The effect of pharmaceutical co-payment increase on the use of social assistance-A natural experiment study.PloS one · 2021Article
- Affordable and equitable access to subsidised outpatient medicines? Analysis of co-payments under the Additional Drug Package in Kyrgyzstan.International journal for equity in health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGrowing expenditures on prescription drugs represent a major challenge to many health systems. Cap and co-payment (direct cost-share) policies are intended as an incentive to deter unnecessary or marginal utilisation, and to reduce third-party payer expenditures by shifting parts of the financial burden from the insurer to patients, thus increasing their financial responsibility for prescription drugs. Direct patient drug payment policies include caps (maximum number of prescriptions or drugs that are reimbursed), fixed co-payments (patients pay a fixed amount per prescription or drug), coinsurance (patients pay a percent of the price), ceilings (patients pay the full price or part of the cost up to a ceiling, after which drugs are free or available at reduced cost), and tier co-payments (differential co-payments usually assigned to generic and brand drugs).
objectivesTo determine the effects of cap and co-payment (cost-sharing) policies on drug use, healthcare utilisation, health outcomes and costs (expenditures). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following databases and web sites: Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Register (date of last search: 6 September 07), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (27 August 07), MEDLINE (29 August 07), EMBASE (29 August 07), NHS EED (27 August 07), ISI Web of Science (09 January 07), CSA Worldwide Political Science Abstracts (21 October 03), EconLit (23 October 03), SIGLE (12 November 03), INRUD (21 November 03), PAIS International (23 March 04), International Political Science Abstracts (09 January 04), PubMed (25 February 04), NTIS (03 March 04), IPA (22 April 04), OECD Publications & Documents (30 August 05), SourceOECD (30 August 05), World Bank Documents & Reports (30 August 05), World Bank e-Library (04 May 05), JOLIS (22 February 06), Global Jolis (22 February 06), WHOLIS(22 February 06), WHO web site browsed (25 August 05). SELECTION CRITERIA: We defined policies in this review as laws, rules, or financial or administrative orders made by governments, non-government organisations or private insurers. We included randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials, interrupted time series analyses, repeated measures studies and controlled before-after studies of cap or co-payment policies for a large jurisdiction or system of care. To be included, a study had to include an objective measure of at least one of the following outcomes: drug use, healthcare utilisation, health outcomes or costs (expenditures). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed study limitations. We undertook quantitative analysis of time series data for studies with sufficient data. MAIN
resultsWe included 30 evaluations (in 21 studies). Of these, 11 evaluated fixed co-payment, six evaluated coinsurance with a ceiling, four evaluated caps, three evaluated fixed co-payment with a ceiling, three evaluated tier co-payment, one evaluated ceiling, one evaluated fixed co-payment and coinsurance with a ceiling, and one evaluated a fixed co-payment with a cap. Most of the included evaluations were observational studies and the quality of the evidence was found to be generally low to moderate. Introducing or increasing direct co-payments reduced drug use and saved plan drug expenditures across studies. Patients responded through drug discontinuation or by cost-sharing. Investigators found reductions for life-sustaining drugs or drugs that are important in treating chronic conditions as well as other drugs. Few studies reported on the effects on health and healthcare utilisation. One study found adverse effects on health through increased healthcare utilisation when a cap was introduced in a vulnerable population. No statistically significant change in use of healthcare services was found in other studies when a cap was introduced on a drug considered over-prescribed in a vulnerable population, or following a shift from a two-tier to a three-tier system with increased co-payments for tier-1 drugs in a general population. AUTHORS'
conclusionsWe found a diversity of cap and co-payment policies. Poor reporting of the intensity of interventions and differences in setting, populations and interventions made it difficult to make comparisons across studies. Cap and co-payment polices can reduce drug use and save plan drug expenditures. However, although insufficient data on health outcomes were available, substantial reductions in the use of life-sustaining drugs or drugs that are important in treating chronic conditions may have adverse effects on health, and as a result increase the use of healthcare services and overall expenditures. Direct payments are less likely to cause harm if only non-essential drugs are included or exemptions are built in to ensure that patients receive needed medical care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.