Publication:

Cost-Related Medication Nonadherence and Spending on Basic Needs Following Implementation of Medicare Part D

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2008

Published Version

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

American Medical Association (AMA)
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Madden, Jeanne M. 2008. “Cost-Related Medication Nonadherence and Spending on Basic Needs Following Implementation of Medicare Part D.” JAMA 299 (16) (April 23): 1922. doi:10.1001/jama.299.16.1922.

Abstract

Context Cost-related medication nonadherence (CRN) has been a persistent problem for individuals who are elderly and disabled in the United States. The impact of Medicare prescription drug coverage (Part D) on CRN is unknown.

Objective To estimate changes in CRN and forgoing basic needs to pay for drugs following Part D implementation.

Design, Setting, and Participants In a population-level study design, changes in study outcomes between 2005 and 2006 before and after Medicare Part D implementation were compared with historical changes between 2004 and 2005. The community-dwelling sample of the nationally representative Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (unweighted unique n = 24 234; response rate, 72.3%) was used, and logistic regression analyses were controlled for demographic characteristics, health status, and historical trends.

Main Outcome Measures Self-reports of CRN (skipping or reducing doses, not obtaining prescriptions) and spending less on basic needs to afford medicines.

Results The unadjusted, weighted prevalence of CRN was 15.2% in 2004, 14.1% in 2005, and 11.5% after Part D implementation in 2006. The prevalence of spending less on basic needs was 10.6% in 2004, 11.1% in 2005, and 7.6% in 2006. Adjusted analyses comparing 2006 with 2005 and controlling for historical changes (2005 vs 2004) demonstrated significant decreases in the odds of CRN (ratio of odds ratios [ORs], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.98; P = .03) and spending less on basic needs (ratio of ORs, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.48-0.72; P < .001). No significant changes in CRN were observed among beneficiaries with fair to poor health (ratio of ORs, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.82-1.21; P = .97), despite high baseline CRN prevalence for this group (22.2% in 2005) and significant decreases among beneficiaries with good to excellent health (ratio of ORs, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63-0.95; P = .02). However, significant reductions in spending less on basic needs were observed in both groups (fair to poor health: ratio of ORs, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47-0.75; P < .001; and good to excellent health: ratio of ORs, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.44-0.75; P < .001).

Conclusions In this survey population, there was evidence for a small but significant overall decrease in CRN and forgoing basic needs following Part D implementation. However, no net decrease in CRN after Part D was observed among the sickest beneficiaries, who continued to experience higher rates of CRN.

Description

Other Available Sources

Research Data

Keywords

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Related Stories