Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20863336›Full record

SynthesisJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2010

Changes in drug use and out-of-pocket costs associated with Medicare Part D implementation: a systematic review.

Jennifer M Polinski, Elaine Kilabuk, Sebastian Schneeweiss, Troyen Brennan, William H Shrank

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pharmaceutical policies: effects of regulating drug insurance schemes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. How Did Medicare Part D Affect Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Drug Coverage?The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2016
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Demand for prescription drugs under non-linear pricing in Medicare Part D.International journal of health care finance and economics · 2014
    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

5 authors.

Jennifer M PolinskiDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. jpolinski@partners.org
Elaine Kilabuk
Sebastian Schneeweiss
Troyen Brennan
William H Shrank

Funding

TRAINING PROGRAM IN EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH ON AGINGT32AG000158 · NIA · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI GAZIANO, J. MICHAEL · 1988 to 2015
$2.1M
Impact of Medicare Drug Coverage on Antidepressant Quality and OutcomesU01MH079175 · NIMH · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI SCHNEEWEISS, SEBASTIAN G. · 2007 to 2010
$1.6M
An intervention to improve rational prescribing in cardiovascular diseaseK23HL090505 · NHLBI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI SHRANK, WILLIAM · 2007 to 2010
$650k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL090505NIA NIH HHS T32 AG000158NIMH NIH HHS U01 MH079175
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Medicare Part D was implemented 4 years ago. Despite the fact that public-use Part D data were unavailable until late 2008, researchers have used alternate data to examine the effect of Part D on drug use and out-of-pocket costs. In a systematic review of Medline from 2006 to October 2009, the literature about drug use and costs after implementation and during the transition period and coverage gap was summarized. Studies presenting original results regarding drug use and costs after Part D implementation were included. Case reports and series and simulation studies were excluded. Of 552 originally identified articles, 26 met selection criteria: 13 regarding the overall effect of Part D in the year(s) after implementation, seven describing the Part D transition period, and six concerning the coverage gap. Part D implementation was associated with a 6% to 13% increase in drug use and a 13% to 18% decrease in patient costs. The transition period was associated with no significant changes in use or costs for elderly dual-eligible beneficiaries, but effects in other populations were mixed. Entry into the coverage gap was associated with a 9% to 16% decrease in drug use and increases in costs of up to 89%. In summary, studies examining disparate data regarding the implementation of Part D found consistent positive effects on drug use and costs but revealed unfavorable trends in the coverage gap. The effect of the Part D transition period remains unclear. Although public-use data will validate these results, policymakers can use the existing evidence to inform changes and enhancements to Part D immediately.

Indexed as

Cost of IllnessDrug CostsDrug PrescriptionsDrug UtilizationHumansInsurance CoverageMedicare Part DUnited States

Identifiers

PMID20863336
PMCPMC2946375

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.