Out-of-pocket and total costs of fixed-dose combination antihypertensives and their components

Atonu Rabbani, George Caleb Alexander

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Many patients are burdened by prescription costs, yet it is not clear whether brand-named fixed-dose combination medicines are less expensive than the sum of the cost of their generic components. Methods: We used the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a rigorously conducted, nationally representative, population-based survey, to examine the out-of-pocket and third party costs associated with the most commonly prescribed, brand-named fixed-dose combination antihypertensive drugs. We compared the out-of-pocket and third party cost for a 30-day supply of each of these combination drugs with the sum of these costs for their individual generic components. Results: Twenty-seven combination antihypertensive medicines were examined. Overall, combination products had higher out-of-pocket costs and lower total costs than did the sum of the costs of their components. For example, the out-of-pocket costs were greater for 24 of 27 combination drugs examined, and the mean increase in monthly out-of-pocket costs associated with combination therapy was $13.38 (95% confidence interval, $12.27-14.50). In contrast, the total cost was lower for 23 of the 27 combination drugs examined, and the mean decrease in monthly total costs was $20.89 (95% confidence interval, $20.10-21.68). Conclusions: Given patient burden and nonadherence from out-of-pocket prescription costs, the clinical benefits of brand-named fixed-dose combination antihypertensive therapy should be balanced with their greater out-of-pocket costs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)509-513
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Hypertension
Volume21
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Health Expenditures
Antihypertensive Agents
Costs and Cost Analysis
Drug Combinations
Prescriptions
Confidence Intervals
Patient Compliance
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Out-of-pocket and total costs of fixed-dose combination antihypertensives and their components. / Rabbani, Atonu; Alexander, George Caleb.

In: American Journal of Hypertension, Vol. 21, No. 5, 05.2008, p. 509-513.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b414077b6fd54219b5c05421a6c0779e,
title = "Out-of-pocket and total costs of fixed-dose combination antihypertensives and their components",
abstract = "Background: Many patients are burdened by prescription costs, yet it is not clear whether brand-named fixed-dose combination medicines are less expensive than the sum of the cost of their generic components. Methods: We used the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a rigorously conducted, nationally representative, population-based survey, to examine the out-of-pocket and third party costs associated with the most commonly prescribed, brand-named fixed-dose combination antihypertensive drugs. We compared the out-of-pocket and third party cost for a 30-day supply of each of these combination drugs with the sum of these costs for their individual generic components. Results: Twenty-seven combination antihypertensive medicines were examined. Overall, combination products had higher out-of-pocket costs and lower total costs than did the sum of the costs of their components. For example, the out-of-pocket costs were greater for 24 of 27 combination drugs examined, and the mean increase in monthly out-of-pocket costs associated with combination therapy was $13.38 (95{\%} confidence interval, $12.27-14.50). In contrast, the total cost was lower for 23 of the 27 combination drugs examined, and the mean decrease in monthly total costs was $20.89 (95{\%} confidence interval, $20.10-21.68). Conclusions: Given patient burden and nonadherence from out-of-pocket prescription costs, the clinical benefits of brand-named fixed-dose combination antihypertensive therapy should be balanced with their greater out-of-pocket costs.",
author = "Atonu Rabbani and Alexander, {George Caleb}",
year = "2008",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1038/ajh.2008.31",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "509--513",
journal = "Journal of clinical hypertension",
issn = "0895-7061",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Out-of-pocket and total costs of fixed-dose combination antihypertensives and their components

AU - Rabbani, Atonu

AU - Alexander, George Caleb

PY - 2008/5

Y1 - 2008/5

N2 - Background: Many patients are burdened by prescription costs, yet it is not clear whether brand-named fixed-dose combination medicines are less expensive than the sum of the cost of their generic components. Methods: We used the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a rigorously conducted, nationally representative, population-based survey, to examine the out-of-pocket and third party costs associated with the most commonly prescribed, brand-named fixed-dose combination antihypertensive drugs. We compared the out-of-pocket and third party cost for a 30-day supply of each of these combination drugs with the sum of these costs for their individual generic components. Results: Twenty-seven combination antihypertensive medicines were examined. Overall, combination products had higher out-of-pocket costs and lower total costs than did the sum of the costs of their components. For example, the out-of-pocket costs were greater for 24 of 27 combination drugs examined, and the mean increase in monthly out-of-pocket costs associated with combination therapy was $13.38 (95% confidence interval, $12.27-14.50). In contrast, the total cost was lower for 23 of the 27 combination drugs examined, and the mean decrease in monthly total costs was $20.89 (95% confidence interval, $20.10-21.68). Conclusions: Given patient burden and nonadherence from out-of-pocket prescription costs, the clinical benefits of brand-named fixed-dose combination antihypertensive therapy should be balanced with their greater out-of-pocket costs.

AB - Background: Many patients are burdened by prescription costs, yet it is not clear whether brand-named fixed-dose combination medicines are less expensive than the sum of the cost of their generic components. Methods: We used the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a rigorously conducted, nationally representative, population-based survey, to examine the out-of-pocket and third party costs associated with the most commonly prescribed, brand-named fixed-dose combination antihypertensive drugs. We compared the out-of-pocket and third party cost for a 30-day supply of each of these combination drugs with the sum of these costs for their individual generic components. Results: Twenty-seven combination antihypertensive medicines were examined. Overall, combination products had higher out-of-pocket costs and lower total costs than did the sum of the costs of their components. For example, the out-of-pocket costs were greater for 24 of 27 combination drugs examined, and the mean increase in monthly out-of-pocket costs associated with combination therapy was $13.38 (95% confidence interval, $12.27-14.50). In contrast, the total cost was lower for 23 of the 27 combination drugs examined, and the mean decrease in monthly total costs was $20.89 (95% confidence interval, $20.10-21.68). Conclusions: Given patient burden and nonadherence from out-of-pocket prescription costs, the clinical benefits of brand-named fixed-dose combination antihypertensive therapy should be balanced with their greater out-of-pocket costs.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=42549137097&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=42549137097&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1038/ajh.2008.31

DO - 10.1038/ajh.2008.31

M3 - Article

C2 - 18437141

AN - SCOPUS:42549137097

VL - 21

SP - 509

EP - 513

JO - Journal of clinical hypertension

JF - Journal of clinical hypertension

SN - 0895-7061

IS - 5

ER -