Dataset Information

Differences in Diabetic Prescription Drug Utilization and Costs Among Patients With Diabetes Enrolled in Colorado Marketplace and Medicaid Plans, 2014-2015.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Increasing prices of antidiabetic medications in the US have raised substantial concerns about the effects of drug affordability on diabetes care. There has been little rigorous evidence comparing the experiences of patients with diabetes across different types of insurance coverage.

Objective

To compare the utilization patterns and costs of prescription drugs to treat diabetes among low-income adults with Medicaid vs those with Marketplace insurance in Colorado during 2014 and 2015.

Design, setting, and participants

This cross-sectional study included diabetic patients enrolled in Colorado Medicaid and Marketplace plans who were aged 19 to 64 years and had incomes between 75% and 200% of the federal poverty level during 2014 and 2015. Data analysis was conducted from September 2020 to April 2021.

Exposures

Health insurance through Colorado Medicaid or Colorado's state-based Marketplace.

Main outcomes and measures

Primary outcomes were drug utilization (prescription drug fills) and drug costs (total costs and out-of-pocket costs). The secondary outcome was months with an active prescription for noninsulin antidiabetic medications. An all payer claims database was combined with income data, and linear models were used to adjust for clinical and demographic confounders.

Results

Of 22 788 diabetic patients included in the study, 20 245 were enrolled in Medicaid and 2543 in a Marketplace plan. Marketplace-eligible individuals were older (mean [SD] age, 52.12 [10.60] vs 47.70 [11.33] years), and Medicaid-eligible individuals were more likely to be female (12 429 [61.4%] vs 1413 [55.6%]). Medicaid-eligible patients were significantly more likely than Marketplace-eligible patients to fill prescriptions for dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (adjusted difference, -3.7%; 95% CI, -5.3 to -2.1; P < .001) and sulfonylureas (adjusted difference, -6.6%; 95% CI, -8.9 to -4.3; P < .001). Overall rates of insulin use were similar in the 2 groups (adjusted difference, -2.3%; -5.1 to 0.5; P = .11). Out-of-pocket costs for noninsulin medications were 84.4% to 95.2% lower and total costs were 9.4% to 54.2% lower in Medicaid than in Marketplace plans. Out-of-pocket costs for insulin were 76.7% to 94.7% lower in Medicaid than in Marketplace plans, whereas differences in total insulin costs were mixed. The percentage of months of apparent active medication coverage was similar between the 2 groups for 4 of 5 drug classes examined, with Marketplace-eligible patients having a greater percentage of months than Medicaid-eligible patients for sulfonylureas (adjusted difference, 5.3%; 95% CI, 0.3%-10.4%; P = .04).

Conclusions and relevance

In this cross-sectional study, drug utilization across multiple drug classes was higher and drug costs were significantly lower for adults with diabetes enrolled in Medicaid than for those with subsidized Marketplace plans. Patients with Marketplace coverage had a similar percentage of months with an active prescription as patients with Medicaid coverage.

SUBMITTER: Khorrami P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8760612 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionDifferences in healthcare utilization and medical expenditures associated with perinatal depression are estimated.MethodsUsing the MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid Database, the analytic cohort included individuals aged 15-44 years who had an inpatient live birth delivery hospitalization between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018. Multivariable negative binomial regression models were used to estimate the differences in utilization associated with perinatal depression, and multivariable generalized linear models were used to estimate the differences in expenditures associated with perinatal depression. Analyses were conducted in 2021.ResultsThe cohort included 330,593 individuals. Nearly 17% had perinatal depression. Compared with individuals without perinatal depression individuals with perinatal depression had a larger number of inpatient admissions (0.19, 95% CI=0.18, 0.20), total inpatient days (0.95, 95% CI=0.92, 0.97), outpatient visits (14.02, 95% CI=13.81, 14.22), emergency department visits (1.70, 95% CI=1.66, 1.74), and weeks of drug therapy covered by a prescription (28.70, 95% CI=28.12, 29.28) and larger total expenditures ($5,078, 95% CI=$4,816, $5,340). Non-Hispanic Black individuals had larger differences in utilization and expenditures for inpatient services and outpatient visits but smaller differences in utilization for pharmaceutical services associated with perinatal depression than non-Hispanic White individuals. Hispanic individuals had larger differences in utilization for outpatient visits but smaller differences in utilization for pharmaceutical services associated with perinatal depression than non-Hispanic White individuals.ConclusionsIndividuals with perinatal depression had more healthcare utilization and medical expenditures than individuals without perinatal depression, and differences varied by race/ethnicity. The findings highlight the need to ensure comprehensive and equitable mental health care to address perinatal depression.

Project description:BackgroundA lack of gold standard treatment for autism spectrum disorders (ASD), no clear ASD management guidelines, and lack of evidence-based pharmacological interventions other than aripiprazole and risperidone elevate the risk of off-label prescribing and adverse effects among individuals with ASD, more so among adults.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to identify and compare the types of prescription drug use, rates of polypharmacy, and characteristics associated with polypharmacy among adults with and without ASD in a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of a three-state Medicaid Analytic eXtract database (2000-2008).MethodsAdults aged 22-64 years with ASD (ICD9-CM code: 299.xx) were propensity score-matched to 'no ASD' controls by age, sex, and race. General polypharmacy (≥6 unique classes of prescription drugs in a year) and psychotropic polypharmacy (≥3 unique prescription drug classes of psychotropic medications within a 90-day period) were the main study outcomes. Chi-square tests for rates, t tests for mean number of claims, and multivariate logistic regressions for likelihood of prescription drug use and polypharmacy were run.ResultsAnnually, almost 75% of adults with ASD had >20 prescription drug claims compared with 33% of adults without ASD. Around 85% of adults with ASD used at least one psychotropic drug class compared with 42% of adults without ASD. Highly common psychotropics were antipsychotics (66%ASD vs 20%noASD), anticonvulsants (59%ASD vs 20%noASD), and anxiolytics/hypnotics/sedatives (21%ASD vs 11%noASD). Other than psychotropics, many adults with ASD used medical prescription drugs such as antimicrobials (47%), dermatologic agents (48%), respiratory agents (38%), gastrointestinal agents (31%), alternative medications (25%), antiparkinsonian agents (22.6%), antihyperlipidemics/statins (7.3%), and immunologics (2.0%). Rates of general (48%ASD vs 32%noASD) and psychotropic polypharmacy (19%ASD vs 6%noASD) were significantly higher in the ASD group.ConclusionPrescription drug use and polypharmacy rates among adults with ASD are substantially higher than those in an age-, sex-, and race-matched cohort of adults without ASD. Adults with ASD frequently use therapeutic treatments other than psychotropics. Healthcare providers, who usually report low confidence in treating patients with ASD, should play an active role in constant monitoring of prescription drug use patterns and patient response to interventions. Prescribers and caregivers are encouraged to make decisions after weighing the benefits and risks associated with a pharmacological treatment. Further investigations into the common use of any alternative treatments that can affect a patient's response to core treatments should also be conducted.