Evaluating the effects of Quebec's private-public drug insurance system

The impact of prescription drug insurance on cost related non-adherence to medications in Canada: A Heckman sample selection approach

Unlike some other high-income counties, Canada does not provide universal prescription drug coverage. The various extent of coverage may left some Canadians vulnerable to cost-related non-adherence (CRNA) to medications. Using data from the 2015 national cycle of the Canadian Community Health Survey, we examine the impact of having private and public drug coverage on mitigating the risk of CRNA with a logit model and a Heckman selection model. CRNA was only observed in respondents who had prescriptions to fill, and respondents did not randomly make decisions on whether to get a prescription. This results in a classic sample selection problem. We found a higher estimated probability of reporting CRNA for uninsured respondents from the Heckman selection model than from the logit model. Respondents with government coverage only had a slightly higher probability of reporting CRNA relative to respondents with private coverage. These findings suggest that, without accounting for sample selection, the risk of not having drug insurance coverage is likely to be underestimated. Moreover, despite covering a less healthy cohort of respondents, the government insurance plans reduce risk of CRNA to a comparable level with private insurance.

Race and Ethnicity With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes Within a Universal Health Care System: Insights From the CARTaGENE Study

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether racial and ethnic disparities for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) persist within universal health care systems. We aimed to explore long-term ASCVD outcomes within a single-payer health care system with extensive drug coverage in Québec, Canada.

METHODS

CARTaGENE (CaG) is a population-based prospective cohort study of individuals aged 40 to 69 years. We included only participants without previous ASCVD. The primary composite endpoint was time to the first ASCVD event (cardiovascular death, acute coronary syndrome, ischemic stroke-transient ischemic attack, or peripheral arterial vascular event).

RESULTS

The study cohort included 18,880 participants followed for a median of 6.6 years (2009 to 2016). The mean age was 52 years, and 52.4% were female. After further adjustment for socioeconomic and cardiovascular factors, the increase in ASCVD risk for South Asians (SAs) was attenuated (hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75, 2.67), whereas Black participants' risk was lower (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.29, 0.95) compared with White participants. After similar adjustments, there were no significant differences in ASCVD outcomes among the Middle Eastern, Hispanic, East-Southeast Asian, Indigenous, and mixed race-ethnicities participants and the White participants.

CONCLUSIONS

After adjustment for CV risk factors, the risk of ASCVD was attenuated in the SA CaG participants. Intensive risk-factor modification may mitigate the ASCVD risk of the SAs. Within a universal health care context and comprehensive drug coverage, the ASCVD risk was lower among Black compared with White CaG participants. Future studies are needed to confirm whether universal and liberal access to health care and medications can reduce the rates of ASCVD among the Black population.

Emergency contraception subsidy in Canada: a comparative policy analysis

BACKGROUND

In Canada, cost prohibits access to emergency contraception (EC) which may assist to prevent unintended pregnancy. The drug, ulipristal acetate (UPA-EC), is more clinically effective and cost-effective than the prior standard levonorgestrel (LNG-EC). We analyzed provincial EC subsidization policies and examined underlying decision-making processes.

METHODS

We undertook documentary analysis of provincial EC subsidization policies in publicly available drug formularies. We conducted semi-structured interviews with key informants to explore the processes underlying current policies.

RESULTS

Quebec is the only province to subsidize UPA-EC, whilst all ten provinces subsidize LNG-EC. As such, provincial EC subsidization policies do not align with the latest UPA-EC evidence. Interviews revealed that evidence was valued in the policymaking process and formulary decisions were made through interdisciplinary consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

We identify a gap between EC subsidization policies and the latest evidence. Institutional structures affect policies reflecting evolving evidence. Increasing interdisciplinary mechanisms may encourage evidence-based policies.

Inequity in insurance coverage for prescription drugs in New Brunswick, Canada

OBJECTIVES

To describe the extent to which New Brunswick residents reported having drug insurance coverage supplementary to Canadian Medicare; to examine associations between socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, health status, language identity, and having reported such coverage; and to document any changes in coverage associated with the introduction of the New Brunswick Drug Plan in 2014.

METHODS

We used repeated cross-sectional data for New Brunswick from eight cycles of the Canadian Community Health Survey from 2007 to 2017 and undertook logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

We found statistically significant, substantial and policy-relevant socioeconomic differences in the reporting of prescription drug insurance coverage among those 25-64 years and those ≥ 65 years of age, and an increasing reliance on private drug insurance over time. We found that individuals in the second decile of household income were particularly vulnerable to reporting neither public nor private drug coverage. The introduction of the New Brunswick Drug Plan in 2014 does not appear to have led to increased public drug coverage; however, from 2014, the decreasing trend in public drug coverage appears to have ceased. Those who reported lower health status usually had lower odds of reporting private drug coverage but higher odds of reporting public drug coverage. Driven by differences in private coverage, we found that relative to anglophones, francophones were less likely to report any drug coverage.

CONCLUSION

Our findings emphasize the shortcomings of drug insurance systems such as that introduced in New Brunswick and substantiate calls for a universal drug program. New Brunswick's increasing reliance on private drug insurance is of concern and warrants additional research.

Pharmaceutical policies: effects of regulating drug insurance schemes

BACKGROUND

Drug insurance schemes are systems that provide access to medicines on a prepaid basis and could potentially improve access to essential medicines and reduce out-of-pocket payments for vulnerable populations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects on drug use, drug expenditure, healthcare utilisation and healthcare outcomes of alternative policies for regulating drug insurance schemes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, nine other databases, and two trials registers between November 2014 and September 2020, including a citation search for included studies on 15 September 2021 using Web of Science. We screened reference lists of all the relevant reports that we retrieved and reports from the Background section. Authors of relevant papers, relevant organisations, and discussion lists were contacted to identify additional studies, including unpublished and ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomised trials, non-randomised trials, interrupted time-series studies (including controlled ITS [CITS] and repeated measures [RM] studies), and controlled before-after (CBA) studies. Two review authors independently assessed the search results and reference lists of relevant reports, retrieved the full text of potentially relevant references and independently applied the inclusion criteria to those studies. We resolved disagreements by discussion, and when necessary by including a third review author. We excluded studies of the following pharmaceutical policies covered in other Cochrane Reviews: those that determined how decisions were made about which conditions or drugs were covered; those that placed restrictions on reimbursement for drugs that were covered; and those that regulated out-of-pocket payments for drugs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies and assessed risk of bias for each study, with disagreements being resolved by consensus. We used the criteria suggested by  Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC)  to assess the risk of bias of included studies. For randomised trials, non-randomised trials and controlled before-after studies, we planned to report relative effects. For dichotomous outcomes, we reported the risk ratio (RR) when possible and adjusted for baseline differences in the outcome measures. For interrupted time series and controlled interrupted time-series studies, we computed changes along two dimensions: change in level; and change in slope. We undertook a structured synthesis following the EPOC guidance on this topic, describing the range of effects found in the studies for each category of outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 58 studies that met the inclusion criteria (25 interrupted time-series studies and 33 controlled before-after studies). Most of the studies (54) assessed a single policy implemented in the United States (US) healthcare system: Medicare Part D. The other four assessed other drug insurance schemes from Canada and the US, but only one of them provided analysable data for inclusion in the quantitative synthesis. The introduction of drug insurance schemes may increase prescription drug use (low-certainty evidence). On the other hand, Medicare Part D may decrease drug expenditure measured as both out-of-pocket spending and total drug spending (low-certainty evidence). Regarding healthcare utilisation, drug insurance policies (such as Medicare Part D) may lead to a small increase in visits to the emergency department. However, it is uncertain whether this type of policy increases or decreases hospital admissions or outpatient visits by beneficiaries of the scheme because the certainty of the evidence was very low. Likewise, it is uncertain if the policy increases or reduces health outcomes such as mortality because the certainty of the evidence was very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of drug insurance schemes such as Medicare Part D in the US health system may increase prescription drug use and may decrease out-of-pocket payments by the beneficiaries of the scheme and total drug expenditures. It may also lead to a small increase in visits to the emergency department by the beneficiaries of the policy. Its effects on other healthcare utilisation outcomes and on health outcomes are uncertain because of the very low certainty of the evidence. The applicability of this evidence to settings outside US healthcare is limited.

Not All Canadian Cancer Patients Are Equal—Disparities in Public Cancer Drug Funding across Canada

Canada lacks a national drug insurance plan. The home province or territory of a patient determines which cancer drugs are available on the public formulary, who is eligible for public coverage and what portion of the financial burden of cancer care falls to the individual. This narrative review describes the current interprovincial disparities in access to cancer drugs across Canada. Health technology assessment (HTA) of drugs at a provincial and territory level is a closed process, does not necessarily follow the recommendations of national HTA and leads to further delays in drug access. The public coverage of take-home cancer drugs (THCDs) in Ontario and the Atlantic provinces is often fragmented, unnecessarily complex and a barrier to cancer drug access. Policy solutions to address inter-provincial formulary variation and poor access to THCDs are discussed.

A systematic umbrella review of the association of prescription drug insurance and cost-sharing with drug use, health services use, and health

BACKGROUND

Increasing spending and use of prescription drugs pose an important challenge to governments that seek to expand health insurance coverage to improve population health while controlling public expenditures. Patient cost-sharing such as deductibles and coinsurance is widely used with aim to control healthcare expenditures without adversely affecting health.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic umbrella review with a quality assessment of included studies to examine the association of prescription drug insurance and cost-sharing with drug use, health services use, and health. We searched five electronic bibliographic databases, hand-searched eight specialty journals and two working paper repositories, and examined references of relevant reviews. At least two reviewers independently screened the articles, extracted the characteristics, methods, and main results, and assessed the quality of each included study.

RESULTS

We identified 38 reviews. We found consistent evidence that having drug insurance and lower cost-sharing among the insured were associated with increased drug use while the lack or loss of drug insurance and higher drug cost-sharing were associated with decreased drug use. We also found consistent evidence that the poor, the chronically ill, seniors and children were similarly responsive to changes in insurance and cost-sharing. We found that drug insurance and lower drug cost-sharing were associated with lower healthcare services utilization including emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and outpatient visits. We did not find consistent evidence of an association between drug insurance or cost-sharing and health. Lastly, we did not find any evidence that the association between drug insurance or cost-sharing and drug use, health services use or health differed by socioeconomic status, health status, age or sex.

CONCLUSIONS

Given that the poor or near-poor often report substantially lower drug insurance coverage, universal pharmacare would likely increase drug use among lower-income populations relative to higher-income populations. On net, it is probable that health services use could decrease with universal pharmacare among those who gain drug insurance. Such cross-price effects of extending drug coverage should be included in costing simulations.

It's Time to Finally Kill the Zombies Comment on "Universal Pharmacare in Canada"

The movement for a national pharmacare plan in Canada is growing, but at the same time the multinational pharmaceutical companies and their supporters are critical of such a move. The three major arguments that they make are that all that is needed is to "fill in the gaps," ie, cover those who currently are uninsured or underinsured, that private drug plans are superior to public ones because they cover a larger number of drugs and that Canada cannot afford pharmacare. This commentary examines each of these arguments and makes the case that none of them is valid and that it is time to get on with implementing pharmacare.

Prescription drug coverage in Canada: a review of the economic, policy and political considerations for universal pharmacare

BACKGROUND

Canadians have long been proud of their universal health insurance system, which publicly funds the cost of physician visits and hospitalizations at the point of care. Prescription drugs however, have been subject to a patchwork of public and private coverage which is frequently inefficient and creates access barriers to necessary medicine for many Canadians.

METHODS

A narrative review was undertaken to understand the important economic, policy and political considerations regarding implementation of universal prescription drug access in Canada (pan-Canadian pharmacare). PubMed, SCOPUS and google scholar were searched for relevant citations. Citation trails were followed for additional information sources. Published books, public reports, press releases, policy papers, government webpages and other forms of gray literature were collected from iterative internet searches to provide a complete view of the current state on this topic.

MAIN FINDINGS

Regarding health economics, all five of the reviewed pharmacare simulation models have shown reductions in annual prescription drug expenditure. However, differing policy and cost assumptions have resulted in a wide range of cost-saving estimates between models. In terms of policy, a single-payer, 'first-dollar' coverage model, using a minimum national formulary, is the model most frequently advocated by the academic community, healthcare professions and many public and patient groups. In contrast, a multi-payer, catastrophic 'last-dollar' coverage model, more similar to the current "patchwork" state of public and private coverage, is preferred by industry drug manufacturers and private health insurance companies. Primary concerns from the detractors of universal, single-payer, 'first-dollar' coverage are the financing required for its implementation and the access barriers that may be created for certain patient populations that are not majorly present in the current public-private payer mix.

CONCLUSION

Canada patiently awaits to see how the issue of prescription drug coverage will be resolved through the work of the Advisory Council on the Implementation of National Pharmacare. The overarching and ongoing discourse on policy and program implementation may be construed as a political debate informed by divergent public and private interests.