Effect of a Therapeutic Maximum Allowable Cost (MAC) Program on the Cost and Utilization of Proton Pump Inhibitors in an Employer-Sponsored Drug Plan in Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Therapeutic maximum allowable cost (MAC) is a managed care intervention that uses reference pricing in a therapeutic class or category of drugs or an indication (e.g., heartburn). Therapeutic MAC has not been studied in Canada or the United States. The proton pump inhibitor (PPI) rabeprazole was used as the reference drug in this therapeutic MAC program based on prices for PPIs in the province of Ontario. No PPI is available over the counter in Canada. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utilization and anticipated drug cost savings for PPIs in an employer-sponsored drug plan in Canada that implemented a therapeutic MAC program for PPIs. METHODS: An employer group with an average of 6,300 covered members, which adopted the MAC program for PPIs in June 2003, was compared with a comparison group comprising the book of business throughout Canada (approximately 5 million lives) without a PPI MAC program (non-MAC group). Pharmacy claims for PPIs were identified using the first 6 characters of the generic product identifier (GPI 492700) for a 36-month period from June 1, 2002, through May 31, 2005. The primary comparison was the year prior to the intervention (from June 1, 2002, through May 31, 2003) and the first full year following the intervention (June 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005). Drug utilization was evaluated by comparing the market share of each of the PPIs for the 2 time periods and by the days of PPI therapy per patient per year (PPPY) and days of therapy per prescription (Rx). Drug cost was defined as the cost of the drug (ingredient cost), including allowable provincial pharmacy markup but excluding pharmacy dispense fee. Cost savings were calculated from the allowed drug cost per claim, allowed cost per day, and allowed cost PPPY. RESULTS: (All amounts are in Canadian dollars.) The MAC intervention group experienced an 11.7% reduction in the average cost per day of PPI drug therapy, from 2.14 US dollars in the preperiod to 1.89 US dollars in the postperiod, compared with a 3.7% reduction in the comparison group (2.16 US dollars vs. 2.08 US dollars). Utilization dropped by 11.9% in the intervention group, from 166.7 days of PPI drug therapy PPPY to 146.9 days PPPY, compared with an increase of 7.9% in the comparison group, from 136.1 days to 146.8 days PPPY. The combined effect of the decrease in drug cost per day and utilization was a 22.1% reduction in allowed drug cost PPPY in the intervention (MAC) group (from 357 US dollars to 278 US dollars PPPY) versus a 4.1% increase in the comparison group (from 293 US dollars to 305 US dollars PPPY). CONCLUSION: A MAC program for PPIs for one employer in Canada was associated with savings for the drug plan sponsor of approximately 8% in actual drug cost per day of therapy compared with the comparison group. Total savings after consideration of utilization was approximately 26% for the intervention group versus the comparison group.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».