New
Service for TodaysSeniorsNetwork.com
readers...roll mouse over, click on
highlighted links in stories to review items
from Amazon
Now, keep up to date
with daily feeds of newly posted stories
about America's Seniors...click on the box
to the left
First
rigorous analysis defines impact of Medicare
Part D
Newswise — The most
thorough study to date of the impact of the
Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit (Part D)
found that this benefit led to a 13.1
percent decrease in out-of-pocket expenses
for patients and a 5.9 percent increase in
prescription use.
Researchers from the
University of Chicago Medical Center,
Harvard University and Virginia Commonwealth
University used data from more than 117,000
patients to assess the impact of the new
prescription benefit plan.
They compare
out-of-pocket costs and the number of pills
purchased by those who were eligible for
Part D with comparable patients who were
not.
They also compared Part
D enrollees to patients who were eligible
for, but did not enroll in, Part D.
The article, released
early online at the Web site of the Annals
of Internal Medicine (http://www.annals.org)
will appear in the Feb. 5, 2008, print
edition of the journal.
"Despite extensive
debate, it was not clear to what extent Part
D would save people money or allow them to
obtain drugs they might not otherwise be
able to afford," said study author G. Caleb
Alexander, assistant professor of medicine
at the University of Chicago Medical Center.
"We found that it had a
modest but significant effect on both
savings and drug use."
In January 2006, the
federal government began to implement the
Medicare Modernization Act. Part D, the
largest change to Medicare since the program
began, was created to improve access to
prescription medicines.
Prior to and soon after
implementation, researchers tried to
estimate the impact of Part D. These early
attempts had to rely on limited data.
For this study, the
researchers were able to capture data from
tens of thousands of customers who filled at
least one prescription in both the 2005 and
the 2006 calendar years at any retail or
mail-order member of the Chicago-based
Walgreens pharmacy chain.
They compared the
purchases of 117,648 patients aged 66-79,
who were covered by Part D, with "near
elderly" control subjects aged 60-63, who
were not yet eligible for the benefit.
The data were adjusted
for individual characteristics,
socio-economics based on the subjects'
residential zip codes, and secular trends in
drug consumption.
They found that the
program saved people who enrolled before the
May 15, 2006, deadline about $6 a month and
gave them, on average, an extra three to
four days worth of one medicine per month.
After the enrollment
deadline, average savings among all eligible
seniors in the study increased to about $9 a
month and 14 extra days of medicine per
month.
Although their sample
may not be nationally representative of all
beneficiaries, "our report represents one of
the first analyses of the impact of Part D,"
said co-author Wesley Yin, PhD, an assistant
professor in the Harris School of Public
Policy at the University of Chicago and a
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Scholar at
Harvard.
"It reflects the
experiences of millions of Americans
accounting for approximately 15 percent the
market share in the United States."
Furthermore, this study
differentiated between the period when
subjects could enroll without penalty and
enrollment in Part D plans was increasing,
and the subsequent period when enrollment
was stable.
Analysis from
this stable period, the authors said, better
represents the steady-state impact of Part D
on utilization and expenditures.
The authors also found
that patients who enrolled early in the Part
D program had higher rates of utilization
and out-of-pocket costs prior to the Part D
period and stood to benefit most from
enrollment.
They conclude that
Medicare Part D has, indeed, led to savings
and increases in prescription drug use by
older people. "More research is needed to
see whether these effects have any influence
on people’s health," Alexander said.
The other authors of
the paper are: Anirban Basu, Atonu Rabbani
and David Meltzer of the University of
Chicago Medical Center; and James Zhang of
Virginia Commonwealth University.