Cost savings associated with filling a 3-month supply of prescription medicines

Atonu Rabbani, George Caleb Alexander

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Many patients are burdened by prescription costs, and patients, providers and policy makers may attempt to reduce these costs by substituting 3-month for 1-month supplies of medicines. Objectives: To measure the difference in out-of-pocket and total costs among patients receiving different quantities of the same prescription drug used to treat a chronic condition, and to examine patient and health system characteristics associated with the use of a 3-month supply. Methods: Data were pooled from the 2000?5 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a nationally representative survey of the US non-institutionalized civilian population, to compare prescription drug expenditures for medicines dispensed as both 3-month and 1-month supplies. Logistic regression was used to model correlates associated with 3-month use. The main outcome measures were the mean monthly out-of-pocket and total costs expressed in year 2005 values. Results: Forty-four percent of prescriptions examined were dispensed as 3-month supplies. The average (95% CI) monthly total and out-of-pocket costs for a 1-month supply were $US42.72 (42.01, 43.42) and $US20.44 (19.99, 20.89), respectively, while the corresponding monthly costs for a 3-month supply were $US37.95 (37.26, 38.64) and $US15.10 (14.68, 15.53). After adjustment for potential confounders, this represented a 29% decrease in out-of-pocket costs and an 18% decrease in total prescription costs through the use of a 3-month rather than a 1-month supply. Eighty percent of patients achieved some cost savings from a 3-month supply and there was considerable variation in the amount saved. There were no marked differences in the characteristics of individuals using 3-month versus 1-month supplies. Conclusions: Although such opportunities are not universally available, these findings quantify the cost savings that patients in the US can achieve through filling larger quantities of a prescription for a chronic condition.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)255-264
Number of pages10
JournalApplied Health Economics and Health Policy
Volume7
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Cost Savings
Health Expenditures
Prescriptions
Costs and Cost Analysis
Prescription Drugs
Administrative Personnel
Cost savings
Prescription
Costs
Logistic Models
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Health
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Economics and Econometrics
  • Health Policy

Cite this

Cost savings associated with filling a 3-month supply of prescription medicines. / Rabbani, Atonu; Alexander, George Caleb.

In: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Vol. 7, No. 4, 2009, p. 255-264.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{512a4a79411442fe9a6d22bf9465ae61,
title = "Cost savings associated with filling a 3-month supply of prescription medicines",
abstract = "Background: Many patients are burdened by prescription costs, and patients, providers and policy makers may attempt to reduce these costs by substituting 3-month for 1-month supplies of medicines. Objectives: To measure the difference in out-of-pocket and total costs among patients receiving different quantities of the same prescription drug used to treat a chronic condition, and to examine patient and health system characteristics associated with the use of a 3-month supply. Methods: Data were pooled from the 2000?5 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a nationally representative survey of the US non-institutionalized civilian population, to compare prescription drug expenditures for medicines dispensed as both 3-month and 1-month supplies. Logistic regression was used to model correlates associated with 3-month use. The main outcome measures were the mean monthly out-of-pocket and total costs expressed in year 2005 values. Results: Forty-four percent of prescriptions examined were dispensed as 3-month supplies. The average (95{\%} CI) monthly total and out-of-pocket costs for a 1-month supply were $US42.72 (42.01, 43.42) and $US20.44 (19.99, 20.89), respectively, while the corresponding monthly costs for a 3-month supply were $US37.95 (37.26, 38.64) and $US15.10 (14.68, 15.53). After adjustment for potential confounders, this represented a 29{\%} decrease in out-of-pocket costs and an 18{\%} decrease in total prescription costs through the use of a 3-month rather than a 1-month supply. Eighty percent of patients achieved some cost savings from a 3-month supply and there was considerable variation in the amount saved. There were no marked differences in the characteristics of individuals using 3-month versus 1-month supplies. Conclusions: Although such opportunities are not universally available, these findings quantify the cost savings that patients in the US can achieve through filling larger quantities of a prescription for a chronic condition.",
author = "Atonu Rabbani and Alexander, {George Caleb}",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.2165/11313610-000000000-00000",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "7",
pages = "255--264",
journal = "Applied Health Economics and Health Policy",
issn = "1175-5652",
publisher = "Adis International Ltd",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost savings associated with filling a 3-month supply of prescription medicines

AU - Rabbani, Atonu

AU - Alexander, George Caleb

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Background: Many patients are burdened by prescription costs, and patients, providers and policy makers may attempt to reduce these costs by substituting 3-month for 1-month supplies of medicines. Objectives: To measure the difference in out-of-pocket and total costs among patients receiving different quantities of the same prescription drug used to treat a chronic condition, and to examine patient and health system characteristics associated with the use of a 3-month supply. Methods: Data were pooled from the 2000?5 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a nationally representative survey of the US non-institutionalized civilian population, to compare prescription drug expenditures for medicines dispensed as both 3-month and 1-month supplies. Logistic regression was used to model correlates associated with 3-month use. The main outcome measures were the mean monthly out-of-pocket and total costs expressed in year 2005 values. Results: Forty-four percent of prescriptions examined were dispensed as 3-month supplies. The average (95% CI) monthly total and out-of-pocket costs for a 1-month supply were $US42.72 (42.01, 43.42) and $US20.44 (19.99, 20.89), respectively, while the corresponding monthly costs for a 3-month supply were $US37.95 (37.26, 38.64) and $US15.10 (14.68, 15.53). After adjustment for potential confounders, this represented a 29% decrease in out-of-pocket costs and an 18% decrease in total prescription costs through the use of a 3-month rather than a 1-month supply. Eighty percent of patients achieved some cost savings from a 3-month supply and there was considerable variation in the amount saved. There were no marked differences in the characteristics of individuals using 3-month versus 1-month supplies. Conclusions: Although such opportunities are not universally available, these findings quantify the cost savings that patients in the US can achieve through filling larger quantities of a prescription for a chronic condition.

AB - Background: Many patients are burdened by prescription costs, and patients, providers and policy makers may attempt to reduce these costs by substituting 3-month for 1-month supplies of medicines. Objectives: To measure the difference in out-of-pocket and total costs among patients receiving different quantities of the same prescription drug used to treat a chronic condition, and to examine patient and health system characteristics associated with the use of a 3-month supply. Methods: Data were pooled from the 2000?5 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a nationally representative survey of the US non-institutionalized civilian population, to compare prescription drug expenditures for medicines dispensed as both 3-month and 1-month supplies. Logistic regression was used to model correlates associated with 3-month use. The main outcome measures were the mean monthly out-of-pocket and total costs expressed in year 2005 values. Results: Forty-four percent of prescriptions examined were dispensed as 3-month supplies. The average (95% CI) monthly total and out-of-pocket costs for a 1-month supply were $US42.72 (42.01, 43.42) and $US20.44 (19.99, 20.89), respectively, while the corresponding monthly costs for a 3-month supply were $US37.95 (37.26, 38.64) and $US15.10 (14.68, 15.53). After adjustment for potential confounders, this represented a 29% decrease in out-of-pocket costs and an 18% decrease in total prescription costs through the use of a 3-month rather than a 1-month supply. Eighty percent of patients achieved some cost savings from a 3-month supply and there was considerable variation in the amount saved. There were no marked differences in the characteristics of individuals using 3-month versus 1-month supplies. Conclusions: Although such opportunities are not universally available, these findings quantify the cost savings that patients in the US can achieve through filling larger quantities of a prescription for a chronic condition.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=73549092491&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=73549092491&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2165/11313610-000000000-00000

DO - 10.2165/11313610-000000000-00000

M3 - Article

C2 - 19905039

AN - SCOPUS:73549092491

VL - 7

SP - 255

EP - 264

JO - Applied Health Economics and Health Policy

JF - Applied Health Economics and Health Policy

SN - 1175-5652

IS - 4

ER -