ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2010
Impact of reimbursement changes on statin use among patients with diabetes in Austria.
Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- The impact of regional co-payment and national reimbursement criteria on statins use in Italy: an interrupted time-series analysis.BMC health services research · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStatins have evolved as cornerstones of cardiovascular prevention in patients with diabetes. They are effective and can be cost-effective therapies, but increased use imposes a sizeable short-term burden on payors of health care. These have used various instruments to steer appropriate use of such treatment. It was the purpose of this study to examine the effect of two reimbursement policy changes of statin therapy in patients with diabetes in Austria.
methodsRetrospective cohort study; time-series analysis. From Austrian sickness funds claims, we identified a closed cohort of 68,953 patients receiving treatment for diabetes in the first quarter of 2004. From April 2004 - December 2005, we ascertained use of statins for each monthly interval. Patients were censored at death. We used pseudo-experimental time-series regression to evaluate the effect of two policy changes on statin use and cost overall, as well as on the use of preferred versus non-preferred statins.
resultsStatin use among Austrian patients with diabetes increased from 20.6% to 24.9% during the time period. A policy change essentially expanding reimbursement for statins from secondary to primary prevention among patients with diabetes had no discernible effect on the observed trends in statin use. Another policy change that imposed random chart review for appropriateness of prescription of non-preferred statins including atorvastatin 10 mg yielded a marked drop in use of atorvastatin 10 mg and increase in the use of preferred statins, while leaving overall trends in statin use unaffected.
conclusionsQuantitative evaluation of new policies can provide important insights into the effectiveness und utility of such changes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20213375What 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.