Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31880225›Full record

ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2020

The Financial Effect of Medicare Coverage Design and Safety Net Options for Cancer Care.

Stephanie S Bethay, Matthew J Travis, Stephen K Batt, Samantha H Bochenek, Philip A Schwieterman

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Stephanie S BethayPGY-2 Health-System Pharmacy Administration Resident.
Matthew J TravisUniversity of Kentucky College of Pharmacy, Lexington.
Stephen K BattSpecialty Pharmacy Infusion Services.
Samantha H BochenekInfusion Pharmacy Services.
Philip A SchwietermanMarkey Cancer Center and Kentucky Children's Hospital, UK HealthCare, Lexington, Kentucky.
Infusion (South Africa) · ZAUniversity of Kentucky · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNational spending on specialty medications accounted for approximately $193 billion in 2016. The coverage design for Medicare Parts B and D has shifted medication costs to patients, which may prohibit patients from starting or maintaining therapy due to affordability. As a result, patients have enrolled in safety net financial options, such as patient assistance and foundation programs. Safety net options may provide savings not otherwise realized by Medicare; however, they may have a negative financial effect on health systems and pharmaceutical manufacturers.

objectivesTo (a) quantify financial savings to Medicare as a result of patient enrollment in patient assistance programs and (b) quantify the financial effect of safety net options for patients, manufacturers, and the academic medical center that participated in this study.

methodsA single-center, nonrandomized, retrospective pilot study of Medicare beneficiaries was conducted. Patients who were prescribed hematology/oncology specialty medications and enrolled in safety net options between July 2015 and June 2017 were included. Investigators collected data related to fill history, drug cost, and prescription coverage. The primary outcome was the overall cost savings to Medicare as a result of patient enrollment in patient assistance programs. Secondary outcomes included total patient out-of-pocket savings as a result of foundation copayment support, financial effect on manufacturers as a result of patient assistance programs, and health system revenue impact as a result of safety net options. Descriptive statistics were used.

resultsThis study included 114 patients. Medicare saved $5,083,816.83 over 2 years as a result of patient assistance programs. Eight foundations provided $240,350.04 in patient insurance copayments. Nine manufacturers provided 2,243 free drug doses, valued at $3,379,032.34. The participating medical center missed the opportunity for $6,481,543.55 in revenue due to patient assistance programs.

conclusionsThe participating medical center's efforts to improve access to oncology care took considerable time and resources. These activities, as well as unreimbursed infusion services, were costs to the medical center that may not be recognized by Medicare. Manufacturers also supported patient access through their sponsored patient assistance programs. The use of these services and safety net options resulted in cost savings to Medicare and their beneficiaries. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. The authors have nothing to disclose. Findings from this study were part of a podium research presentation at the Great Lakes Pharmacy Residency Conference; April 25, 2018; West Lafayette, IN.

Indexed as

Health Care CostsAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisCost SavingsDrug CostsFemaleHematologyHospital CostsHumansInsurance CoverageMaleMedical OncologyMedicarePilot ProjectsPolicy MakingReimbursement Mechanisms

Identifiers

PMID31880225
PMCPMC10391109
OpenAlexW2996829183

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.