Effects of Real-time Prescription Benefit Recommendations on Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Impact of cost on prescribing diabetes medications for older adults with type 2 diabetes in the outpatient setting

BACKGROUND

Newer diabetes medications have cardiorenal benefits beyond blood sugar lowering that make them a preferred treatment option in many patients. Despite this, studies have shown that prescribing of these medications remains suboptimal with medication costs being hypothesized as a reason for underutilization.

OBJECTIVE

To understand clinicians' decision-making processes for prescribing diabetes medications in older adults, focusing on higher cost medications.

METHODS

Observations of patient encounters and semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians from primary care, endocrinology, and geriatrics to elucidate themes into diabetes medication prescribing. A qualitative descriptive approach was used to analyze the data from interviews using an inductive coding scheme with themes derived from the data.

RESULTS

Twenty-one interviews were conducted. Five themes were identified: 1) out-of-pocket costs drive prescribing decisions 2) out-of-pocket costs can be variable due to changing insurance plans or changing coverage 3) clinicians have difficulty with determining patient-specific out-of-pocket costs 4) clinicians manage the tradeoffs existing between cost, efficacy, and safety and 5) clinicians can use cost-modifying strategies such as patient assistance.

CONCLUSION

Addressing the challenges that medication costs pose to prescribing evidence-based medications for type 2 diabetes is necessary to optimize diabetes care for older adults.

Price transparency at the point of prescribing with real-time prescription benefits

PURPOSE

Real-time prescription benefits (RTPB) shows prescribers patient-, medication-, and pharmacy-specific information on medication pricing, prior authorization requirements, and lower-cost alternatives. RTPB is intended to improve patient satisfaction and prescription fill rates by decreasing out-of-pocket costs for prescriptions. Therefore, we evaluated how RTPB affects prescribing patterns by examining acceptance and subsequent fill rates for RTPB alternative suggestions.

METHODS

RTPB was implemented in February 2022 using external vendor interfaces. Prescribing data from March 2022 to March 2023 were analyzed. RTPB displayed alerts for medications requiring prior authorization or when alternative medications would result in cost savings. Patients were included if their prescription received an RTPB response and they had a subsequent encounter with pharmacy fill data. Primary outcomes were alert acceptance rates and prescription fill rates across RTPB alert groups, with a secondary outcome of monthly copay savings for accepted alerts.

RESULTS

RTPB requests received a response for 88% of prescriptions, with price estimates provided for 77.9% of them. Lower-cost alternatives accounted for 67.2% of alerts, while prior authorization requirements represented 15% of alerts. Prescribers selected a lower-cost alternative 32% of the time. For those with an RTPB alert, patients filled prescriptions 68% of the time when an alternative was chosen, compared to 59% of the time when the original prescription was retained (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-1.6; P < 0.001). Patients saved an average of $27.77 per month on copay costs when alternatives were selected.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of RTPB was found to result in significant improvements in prescription fill rates and decrease patient copay costs, despite low alert acceptance rates.

Pharmacy Assistance Programs for Oral Anticancer Drugs: A Narrative Review

Oral anticancer medications (OAMs) are high priced with a significant cost-sharing burden to patients, which can lead to catastrophic financial, psychosocial, and clinical repercussions. Cost-conscious prescribing and inclusion of low-cost alternatives can help mitigate this burden, but cost transparency at the point of prescribing remains a major barrier to doing so. Pharmacy assistance programs, including co-payment cards and patient assistance programs administered by manufacturers and foundation-based grants, remain an essential resource for patients facing prohibitive co-payments for OAMs. However, access to these programs is fraught with complexities, including lack of trained financial navigators, limited transparency on eligibility criteria, onerous documentation burdens, and limits in available funding. Despite these drawbacks and the potential for such programs to incentivize manufacturers to keep list prices high, assistance programs have been demonstrated to improve financial well-being for patients with cancer. The increasing development of integrated specialty pharmacies with dedicated, trained pharmacy staff can help improve and standardize access to such programs, but these services are disproportionately available to patients seen at tertiary care centers. Multistakeholder interventions are needed to mitigate the burden of cost sharing for OAMs, including increased clinician knowledge of financial resources and novel assistance mechanisms, investment of institutions in trained financial navigation services and centralized platforms to identify assistance programs, and policies to cap out-of-pocket spending and improve transparency of rates charged by pharmacy benefit managers to a health plan.

Availability and Cost of Expensive and Common Generic Prescription Drugs: A Cross-sectional Analysis of Direct-to-Consumer Pharmacies

BACKGROUND

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) pharmacies sell generic prescription drugs, often at lower prices than traditional retail pharmacies; however, not all drugs are available, and prices vary.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the availability and cost of generic drugs at DTC pharmacies.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Five national DTC pharmacies in April and May 2023.

PARTICIPANTS

Each qualifying form of 100 generic drugs with the highest cost-per-patient (expensive) and the 50 generic drugs with the highest number of patients (common) in Medicare Part D in 2020 MAIN MEASURES: Availability of these drugs and the lowest DTC pharmacy price for a standardized drug strength and supply (e.g., 30 pills), compared to GoodRx retail pharmacy prices.

KEY RESULTS

Of the 118 expensive generic dosage forms, 94 (80%) were available at 1 or more DTC pharmacies; out of 52 common generic dosage forms, 51 (98%) were available (p < 0.001). Of the 88 expensive generics available in comparable quantities and strengths across pharmacies, 42 (47%) had the lowest cost at Amazon, 23 (26%) at Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company, 13 (14%) at Health Warehouse, and 12 (13%) at Costco; for 51 common generic formulations, 16 (31%) had the lowest cost at Costco, 14 (27%) at Amazon, 10 (20%) at Walmart, 6 (12%) at Health Warehouse, and 5 (10%) at Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company. For the 77 expensive generics with available GoodRx retail pharmacy prices, the median cost savings at DTC pharmacies were $231 (95% CI, $129-$792) or 76% (IQR, 53-91%); for 51 common generics, savings were $19 (95% CI, $10-$34) or 75% (IQR, 67-83%).

CONCLUSIONS

Many of the most expensive generic drugs are unavailable at direct-to-consumer pharmacies. Meanwhile, less expensive, commonly used generics are widely available, but drug prices vary by pharmacy and savings are modest, requiring patients to shop around for the lowest cost.

Mitigating the Burden of Medication Costs

This essay discusses medication cost−lowering strategies that clinicians can use in routine clinical and inpatient care to assist patients in affording and adhering to expensive therapy regimens.

Eliminating Health Disparities in Atrial Fibrillation, Heart Failure, and Dyslipidemia: A Path Toward Achieving Pharmacoequity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pharmacoequity refers to the goal of ensuring that all patients have access to high-quality medications, regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, or other characteristics. The goal of this article is to review current evidence on disparities in access to cardiovascular drug therapies across sociodemographic subgroups, with a focus on heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and dyslipidemia.

RECENT FINDINGS

Considerable and consistent disparities to life-prolonging heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and dyslipidemia medications exist in clinical trial representation, access to specialist care, prescription of guideline-based therapy, drug affordability, and pharmacy accessibility across racial, ethnic, gender, and other sociodemographic subgroups. Researchers, health systems, and policy makers can take steps to improve pharmacoequity by diversifying clinical trial enrollment, increasing access to inpatient and outpatient cardiology care, nudging clinicians to increase prescription of guideline-directed medical therapy, and pursuing system-level reforms to improve drug access and affordability.

Quality of Medication Cost Conversations and Interest in Future Cost Conversations Among Older Adults

BACKGROUND

Medication cost conversations occur less frequently than patients prefer, and it is unclear whether patients have positive experiences with them when they do occur.

OBJECTIVE

To describe patients' experiences discussing their medication costs with their health care team.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Nationally representative survey fielded in the United States in 2022 (response rate = 48.5%).

PATIENTS

1020 adults over age 65.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary measures were adapted from Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers Survey visit survey v4.0 and captured patients' experiences of medication cost conversations. Additional measures captured patients' interest in future cost conversations, the type of clinicians with whom they would be comfortable discussing costs, and sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 1020 respondents who discussed medication prices with their health care team, 39.3% were 75 or older and 78.6% were non-Hispanic White. Forty-three percent of respondents indicated that their prior medication cost conversation was not easy to understand; 3% indicated their health care team was not respectful and 26% indicated their health care team was somewhat respectful during their last conversation; 48% indicated that there was not enough time. Those reporting that their prior discussion was not easy to understand or that their clinician was not definitely respectful were less likely to be interested in future discussions. Only 6% and 10% of respondents indicated being comfortable discussing medication prices with financial counselors or social workers, respectively. Few differences in responses were observed by survey participant characteristics.

LIMITATIONS

This cross-sectional survey of prior experiences may be subject to recall bias.

CONCLUSION

Among older adults who engaged in prior medication cost conversations, many report that these conversations are not easy to understand and that almost one-third of clinicians were somewhat or not respectful. Efforts to increase the frequency of medication cost conversations should consider parallel interventions to ensure the discussions are effective at informing prescribing decisions and reducing cost-related medication nonadherence.

Associations between the use of a real-time benefit tool and measures related to prescription obtainment found in order type subgroups

BACKGROUND

The use of real-time benefit tool (RTBT) may help increase transparency of patients' out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, thereby reducing patients' OOP spend and increasing prescription obtainment.

OBJECTIVE

We have previously reported on the potential benefit of RTBT in electronic health records at a large health system. We explore the benefit of RTBT by subgroups of prescriptions (i.e., order types).

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort, we reviewed orders generated with and without RTBT use. We compared the 2 groups on key metrics related to prescription obtainment (fill rate, modification rate, cancellation rate, time to ready, time to sold, abandonment rate, and cancellation and transfer rate). Subgroup analysis included orders without over-the-counter (OTC) medications, orders without specialty medications, and orders without OTC and specialty medications.

RESULTS

Fill rate, cancellation rate, time to ready, time to sold, abandonment rate, and cancellation and transfer rate were statistically significantly different between the RTBT and non-RTBT groups, favoring the RTBT group (all, P < 0.01). Differences in modification rates were not statistically significant between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

RTBTs have the potential to increase prescription obtainment. A consistent difference in key outcome measures between the RTBT and the non-RTBT groups was apparent among prescription orders regardless of whether OTC and specialty medications were included in the analysis.

Patients want to talk about their out-of-pocket costs-Can real-time benefit tools help?

This editorial comments on the article by Mattingly et al.

Where Do Real-Time Prescription Benefit Tools Fit in the Landscape of High US Prescription Medication Costs? A Narrative Review

The problem of unaffordable prescription medications in the United States is complex and can result in poor patient adherence to therapy, worse clinical outcomes, and high costs to the healthcare system. While providers are aware of the financial burden of healthcare for patients, there is a lack of actionable price transparency at the point of prescribing. Real-time prescription benefit (RTPB) tools are new electronic clinical decision support tools that retrieve patient- and medication-specific out-of-pocket cost information and display it to clinicians at the point of prescribing. The rise in US healthcare costs has been a major driver for efforts to increase medication price transparency, and mandates from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for Medicare Part D sponsors to adopt RTPB tools may spur integration of such tools into electronic health records. Although multiple factors affect the implementation of RTPB tools, there is limited evidence on outcomes. Further research will be needed to understand the impact of RTPB tools on end results such as prescribing behavior, out-of-pocket medication costs for patients, and adherence to pharmacologic treatment. We review the terminology and concepts essential in understanding the landscape of RTPB tools, implementation considerations, barriers to adoption, and directions for future research that will be important to patients, prescribers, health systems, and insurers.

Formulary & benefit and real-time pharmacy Benefit: Electronic standards delivering value to prescribers and pharmacists

The use of standard transactions in the electronic sharing of prescription-related information among payers, prescribers and pharmacists aids in the delivery of effective, safe, and affordable medication therapy to patients. Integral to electronic medication management (eMM) in this environment is the availability of data to aid in the determination of the most appropriate medication for a patient considering benefits coverage restrictions, therapeutic effectiveness, and cost. Key elements of this formulary decision support are the National Council for Prescription Drug Programs Formulary & Benefit (F&B) standard and the related Real-time Pharmacy Benefit (RTPB) standard. In this article, we review the foundational role of F&B in the electronic prescribing of medications, the value it delivers to prescribers, and dispensing pharmacists. The combination of F&B and RTPB to enhance the quality of information available in eMM is also discussed with evidence presented on how these standards help to minimize manual tasks and rework in the pharmacy, optimize time to therapy, lower patient out-of-pocket costs, and result in the dispensing of prescriptions less likely to be abandoned. We conclude with a view of the future of F&B to support new eMM requirements.

"Worth it if you could afford it": Patient perspectives on integrating real-time benefit tools into drug cost conversations

BACKGROUND

Medication costs can lead to financial burdens for patients, creating barriers to effective medication use. Health care provider use of real-time benefit tools (RTBTs) may facilitate cost conversations with patients. We sought to explicate patient views on how RTBTs could be used to improve cost considerations in prescribing decisions.

METHODS

We conducted focus groups to characterize patient perspectives on holding cost conversations with their physicians and to identify factors that would influence the value of RTBTs. We focused on adults aged 50+ who reported trouble paying for their prescriptions. Three groups included patients with conditions requiring high-cost treatments and one group included lower-income patients independent of their medical conditions. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed, coded, and categorized to salient themes employing inductive and deductive approaches using the Health Equity Implementation Framework.

RESULTS

Focus groups were conducted from 09/2020-12/2020 including 18 participants representing cancer (n = 6), diabetes (n = 6), rheumatoid arthritis (n = 3), and lower income (n = 3). Participants were between 50-74, eight self-identified as Black, 10 as White, and eight reported earning <$50,000/year. We identified five themes regarding cost conversations (medication cost importance, past experiences with cost/cost conversations, perception of physician's role and knowledge, knowledge of existing resources, and influence on decision-making) and four RTBT-use-specific themes (advantages/disadvantages, perceived relevance, data quality concerns, and implementation considerations).

CONCLUSION

Approaches that envision RTBTs as one-size-fits-all technological interventions may underestimate the complexity of incorporating price information into prescribing decisions. Nevertheless, patients highlighted the potential value of accurate, real-time information on medication costs to inform decision-making.