Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36255428›Full record

ArticleJAMA2022

Prescription Drug Spending in Fee-for-Service Medicare, 2008-2019.

Stacie B Dusetzina, Haiden A Huskamp, Xuanzi Qin, Nancy L Keating

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Incorporating Added Therapeutic Benefit and Domestic Reference Pricing Into Medicare Payment for Expensive Part B Drugs.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Stacie B DusetzinaDepartment of Health Policy, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee.
Haiden A HuskampDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Xuanzi QinDepartment of Health Policy, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee.
Nancy L KeatingDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Harvard University · USVanderbilt-Ingram Cancer CenterVanderbilt University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Prescription drug spending is a topic of increased interest to the public and policymakers. However, prior assessments have been limited by focusing on retail spending (Part D-covered drugs), omitting clinician-administered (Part B-covered) drug spending, or focusing on all fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries, regardless of their enrollment into prescription drug coverage. Objective: To estimate the proportion of health care spending contributed by prescription drugs and to assess spending for retail and clinician-administered prescriptions. Design, Setting, and Participants: Descriptive, serial, cross-sectional analysis of a 20% random sample of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries in the United States from 2008 to 2019 who were continuously enrolled in Parts A (hospital), B (medical), and D (prescription drug) benefits, and not in Medicare Advantage. Exposure: Calendar year. Main Outcomes and Measures: Net spending on retail (Part D-covered) and clinician-administered (Part B-covered) prescription drugs; prescription drug spending (spending on Part B-covered and Part D-covered drugs) as a percentage of total per-capita health care spending. Measures were adjusted for inflation and for postsale rebates (for Part D-covered drugs). Results: There were 3 201 284 beneficiaries enrolled in Parts A, B, and D in 2008 and 4 502 718 in 2019. In 2019, beneficiaries had a mean (SD) age of 71.7 (12.0) years, documented sex was female for 57.7%, and 69.5% had no low-income subsidies. Total per-capita spending was $16 345 in 2008 and $20 117 in 2019. Comparing 2008 with 2019, per-capita Part A spending was $7106 (95% CI, $7084-$7128) vs $7120 (95% CI, $7098-$7141), Part B drug spending was $720 (95% CI, $713-$728) vs $1641 (95% CI, $1629-$1653), Part B nondrug spending was $5113 (95% CI, $5105-$5122) vs $6702 (95% CI, $6692-$6712), and Part D net spending was $3122 (95% CI, $3117-$3127) vs $3477 (95% CI, $3466-$3489). The proportion of total annual spending attributed to prescription drugs increased from 24.0% in 2008 to 27.2% in 2019, net of estimated rebates and discounts. Conclusions and Relevance: In 2019, spending on prescription drugs represented approximately 27% of total spending among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Part D, even after accounting for postsale rebates.

Indexed as

Fee-for-Service PlansHealth ExpendituresMedicarePrescription DrugsAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMedicare Part AMedicare Part BMedicare Part DMiddle AgedUnited StatesPrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID36255428
PMCPMC9579917
OpenAlexW4306732185

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.