ArticleBMC health services research2022
Determinants of drug expenditure in the Swiss healthcare market in 2006.
Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral measures are in force in Switzerland to control the cost of drugs, but are not effective enough. There are many determinants influencing these expenditures, related to treatments, markets, physicians, patients and regions, but their impact on costs is not clear.
methodsWe applied a Bayesian multilevel model with five levels to adjust for patients, drugs' market, and physicians 'characteristics, treatment type, and district (i.e. Swiss canton). We used data of the Swiss drugs' market in 2006, offering real choices for doctors and patients (multiple products for similar active substances), with a neutral position of pharmacists (no financial incentives).
resultsVariance partitioning of yearly drugs' cost per insured showed that market level (delivered substance) contributed to 76% of the variance, treatment level (delivered product) to 20%, whereas patients' and physicians' levels accounted for only 2% each, without significant differences between Swiss cantons. After adjusting for covariables at each level, the model explained about 51% of the variation at the market and 20% at the treatment levels. We found that older but substitutable drugs, generics, larger size of the market and physician's specialty were associated with lower expenditure, whereas drugs requiring a physician's prescription, the number of prescribers per patient, patient' age, male gender, and comorbidities increased expenditure. Our results show that for a specific medication the yearly cost of recently released drugs was 36 CHF higher than for similar and substitutable drugs introduced 15 years earlier, corresponding to one third of the average annual treatment cost observed in our dataset. Competition did not seem to be effective to reduce expenditure on the drug market.
conclusionThe main finding of this study is that recentness of drugs was associated with an increase in drug expenditure in 2006, even after adjustment for all non-controllable determinants. Further research is recommended to confirm those results with updated data.
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.