Policy Recommendations for Public Health Plans to Stem the Escalating Costs of Prescription Drugs: A Position Paper From the American College of Physicians

Medicare Part D plan-selection experience: qualitative findings from a national cross-sectional survey

Background

A variety of services exit to assist eligible beneficiaries select Medicare Part D insurance plans; however, selecting an optimal plan remains a challenge. While patients would benefit from evaluating and switching their Medicare Part D plan on a yearly basis, few choose to do so.

Objective

The objective of this study was to describe the Medicare Part D plan selection experience across all US states.

Methods

This was a qualitative analysis using data from a cross-sectional Qualtrics panel survey administered in January 2022. Descriptive statistics were generated for demographic and patient-specific items for individuals who provided open-ended survey item responses. Open-coding and content analysis were used to analyze responses to the open-ended survey item.

Results

Overall, 540 responses were received, with the largest number of responses from Florida (11%, 61). A total of 101 respondents (18.7%) of survey respondents provided open-ended comments. Qualitative analysis identified four response categories: Benefit design, Plan information and selection assistance, Plan Switching, and Plan-selection experience.

Conclusions

Overall, participants expressed frustrations with high costs and plan restrictions. Many participants needed plan-selection assistance, with some individuals switching plans each year. Recent legislation may address difficulties related to medication costs; however, additional focus on resources and educational interventions may improve the Medicare Part D experience.

Financial Profit in Medicine: A Position Paper From the American College of Physicians

The steady growth of corporate interest and influence in the health care sector over the past few decades has created a more business-oriented health care system in the United States, helping to spur for-profit and private equity investment. Proponents say that this trend makes the health care system more efficient, encourages innovation, and provides financial stability to ensure access and improve care. Critics counter that such moves favor profit over care and erode the patient-physician relationship. American College of Physicians (ACP) underscores that physicians are permitted to earn a reasonable income as long as they are fulfilling their fiduciary responsibility to provide high-quality, appropriate care within the guardrails of medical professionalism and ethics. In this position paper, ACP considers the effect of mergers, integration, private equity investment, nonprofit hospital requirements, and conversions from nonprofit to for-profit status on patients, physicians, and the health care system.

Priceless Knowledge: Attitudes and Awareness Around Drug Pricing Among US Medical Students

High US drug costs have garnered increasing attention, with multiple proposed reforms. While physicians are key stakeholders, medical education about drug pricing is not described, and medical students' understanding and attitudes are poorly understood. To assess students' awareness of drug pricing and its determinants, the authors conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey of US medical students. Survey items included attitudes and knowledge around drug pricing and relevant education received (e.g., importance, quantity/quality of instruction). A composite knowledge score summed correct responses to 10 knowledge items. Descriptive statistics and t tests were used to evaluate associations. Among 815 viewers of the survey invitation, 361 visited the survey and 240 completed it (view rate 44%; participation rate 77%; completion rate 87%). Most participants were white (62%), in MD programs (82%), and female (53%). Nearly all (> 99%) said it was somewhat or very important to understand factors influencing drug pricing; over 90% were interested in learning more. Among year 3-4 students (n = 108), 59% reported receiving medical school instruction on pricing; few rated the quantity as adequate (7%) or the quality as excellent (3%) or good (8%). Among 10 knowledge questions, the median correct score was 6. Fewer than half (44%) knew that prices are uncorrelated with research/development costs. Knowledge was associated with year in school (p = 0.011) but not reported instructional quality or quantity. In sum, medical students report interest in drug pricing but inadequate instruction, and their knowledge is incomplete. Enhanced education is needed to equip future doctors to advocate effectively for patients around drug prices.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-020-01190-x.

Policy Recommendations to Promote Prescription Drug Competition: A Position Paper From the American College of Physicians

The prescription drug market in the United States relies on competition to keep prices reasonable. Although many policies have been implemented to spur competition and decrease costs for patients, these policies may be outdated and should be redesigned and updated to achieve success in the current prescription drug market. In this paper, the American College of Physicians (ACP) proposes that new policies should be implemented to prevent market manipulation, help lower-cost alternatives make it to the market faster, and ensure a robust and competitive market for generic and biosimilar drugs. The ACP believes these changes will have a meaningful effect on patients without shifting costs to other areas of the health care system.

Closing the Part D Coverage Gap and Out-of-Pocket Costs for Multiple Sclerosis Drugs

Objective

To determine whether closing the Part D coverage gap (donut hole) between 2010 and 2019 lowered patients' out-of-pocket costs for disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for multiple sclerosis (MS).

Methods

Using nationwide Medicare Formulary and Drug Pricing Files, we analyzed Part D drug benefit design and DMT prices in 2010, 2016, and 2019. We calculated average monthly list prices for DMTs available in each year (4 DMTs in 2010, 11 DMTs in 2016, and 14 DMTs in 2019). We projected patients' annual out-of-pocket cost for each DMT alone under a standard Part D plan in that year. We estimated potential savings attributable to closing the coverage gap between 2010 and 2019 (beneficiaries' cost sharing dropped from 100% to 25%) under 3 scenarios: no increase in price, an inflation-indexed price increase (3% annually), and the observed price increase.

Results

Median monthly DMT prices rose from $2,804 to $5,987 to $7,009 over the years 2010, 2016, and 2019, respectively. Median projected annual out-of-pocket costs rose from $5,916 to $6,229 to $6,618. With unchanged or inflation-indexed DMT price changes, closing the coverage gap would have reduced annual out-of-pocket costs by $2,260 (38% reduction) and $1,744 (29% reduction), respectively. Despite having the lowest monthly price, generic glatiramer acetate had among the highest out-of-pocket costs ($6,731 to $6,939 a year) in 2019.

Conclusions

Medicare Part D beneficiaries can pay thousands of dollars yearly out of pocket for DMTs. Closing the Part D coverage gap did not reduce out-of-pocket costs for patients because of simultaneous increases in DMT prices.