Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39883462›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Procedural Prescription Denials and Risk of Acute Care Utilization and Spending Among Medicaid Patients.

Bhairavi Muralidharan, Sanjay Basu, Jeffrey Tingen, Sadiq Y Patel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Bhairavi MuralidharanClinical Product Development, Waymark, San Francisco, California.
Sanjay BasuClinical Product Development, Waymark, San Francisco, California.
Jeffrey TingenClinical Product Development, Waymark, San Francisco, California.
Sadiq Y PatelClinical Product Development, Waymark, San Francisco, California.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Rising prescription medication costs under Medicaid have led to increased procedural prescription denials by health plans. The effect of unresolved denials on chronic condition exacerbation and subsequent acute care utilization remains unclear. Objective: To examine whether procedural prescription denials are associated with increased net spending through downstream acute care utilization among Medicaid patients not obtaining prescribed medication following a denial. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used Medicaid claims data from 2022 to 2023 for patients at inpatient, outpatient, and pharmacy sites of care across 2 states (Virginia and Washington) and 2 independent health plans. Patients with at least 1 prescription denial in the study period (January 1 through July 31, 2023) were matched to those without denials in a given medication class, based on demographics, health plan data, chronic condition history, and health care utilization. Rates of and spending for physiologically related acute care visits in the 60 days following a medication fill or denial were compared for the study period. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were all-cause acute care utilization and total medical spending (in 2023 US dollars per member per year [PMPY]) for principal diagnoses physiologically related to each medication class, in the 60 days following a medication fill or denial. Sensitivity analyses were performed to check for spurious associations or unmeasured confounders. Results: The 19 725 patients in this study had a median age of 41 (IQR, 29-55) years, and most (60.7%) were female. Patients had a mean (SD) of 3.3 (16.1) comorbidities, 1.0 (2.6) all-cause acute care visits, and 5.6 (7.8) primary care visits during the baseline period. Patients experiencing specific procedural prescription denials had a higher risk of physiologically related emergency department visits and hospitalizations compared with those without a denial in the subsequent 60 days (adjusted odds ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.03-1.88] minimum vs 1.75 [95% CI, 1.39-2.20] maximum for exposure and control groups across the 7 medication classes with significant differences). Denials in 6 medication classes were associated with net total medical spending increases, ranging from $624 (95% CI, $435-$813) to $3016 (95% CI, $1483-$4550) in additional expense PMPY after accounting for both prescription and medical costs attributed to denials. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that although procedural prescription denials aimed to curb immediate drug costs, some denials prompted heightened acute care utilization and costs that outweighed the short-term prescription budget savings. Health plans should incorporate this potential unintended consequence when shaping prescription coverage policies. Future research should systematically review all medication classes across plans nationally.

Indexed as

Health ExpendituresMedicaidPatient Acceptance of Health CareAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39883462
PMCPMC11783194

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.