Impact of 3-tier formularies on drug treatment of attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder in children

Archives of General Psychiatry

Volumn 62, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 435-441

  Huskamp, Haiden A ^a   Deverka, Patricia A ^b,f   Epstein, Arnold M ^b,c,d   Epstein, Robert S ^b,c,d   McGuigan, Kimberly A ^b,g   Muriel, Anna C ^a,e   Frank, Richard G ^a  

^a HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b Medco Health Solutions   (United States)

^c HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^d BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^f DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g PFIZER INC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMPHETAMINE; DEXAMPHETAMINE; DEXMETHYLPHENIDATE; METHYLIN ER; METHYLPHENIDATE; PEMOLINE MAGNESIUM;

ARTICLE; ATTENTION DEFICIT DISORDER; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST OF ILLNESS; DRUG FORMULARY; FAMILY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PHARMACY BENEFIT MANAGER; SCHOOL CHILD; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADOLESCENT; ATTENTION DEFICIT DISORDER WITH HYPERACTIVITY; CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM STIMULANTS; CHILD; COST SHARING; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG COSTS; DRUG UTILIZATION REVIEW; DRUGS, GENERIC; FEMALE; FORMULARIES; HEALTH BENEFIT PLANS, EMPLOYEE; HUMANS; INSURANCE, PHARMACEUTICAL SERVICES; MALE; MANAGED CARE PROGRAMS; METHYLPHENIDATE; PRESCRIPTION FEES; PRESCRIPTIONS, DRUG; REIMBURSEMENT, INCENTIVE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 16344364878     PISSN: 0003990X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.62.4.435     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. American Academy of Pediatrics. Clinical practice guideline: treatment of the school-aged child with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Pediatrics. 2001;108: 1033-1044.
2. Biederman J. Practical considerations in stimulant drug selection for the attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder patient-efficacy, potency and titration. Today's Therapeutic Trends. 2002;20:311-328.
3. Medco Health Solutions Inc. 2004 Drug Trend Report: Navigating the New Health Economy. Franklin Lakes, NJ: Medco Health Solutions Inc; 2004:5-27.
4. Frank R. Prescription drug prices: why do some pay more than others do? Health Aff (Millwood). 2001;20:115-128.
5. Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research and Educational Trust. Employer Health Benefits 2004 Annual Report. Available at: http://www.kff.org/ insurance/7148/index.cfm. Accessed February 1, 2005.
6. Huskamp HA, Deverka PA, Epstein AM, Epstein RS, McGuigan KA, Frank RG. The effect of incentive-based formularies on prescription drug utilization and spending. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2224-2232.
7. Motheral B, Fairman KA. Effect of a three-tier prescription copay on pharmaceutical and other medical utilization. Med Care. 2001;39:1293-1304.
8. Rector TS, Finch MD, Danzon PM, Pauly MV, Manda BS. Effect of tiered prescription copayments on the use of preferred brand medications. Med Care. 2003; 41:398-406.
9. Nair KV, Wolfe P, Valuck RJ, McCollum MM, Ganther JM, Lewis SJ. Effects of a three-tier pharmacy benefit design on the prescription purchasing behavior of individuals with chronic disease. J Manag Care Pharm. 2003;9:123-133.
10. Joyce GF, Escarce JJ, Solomon MD, Goldman DP. Employer drug benefit plans and spending on prescription drugs. JAMA. 2002;288:1733-1774.
11. Kamal-Bahl S, Briesacher B. How do incentive-based formularies influence drug selection and spending for hypertension? Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;23:227-236.
12. Goldman DP, Joyce GF, Escarce JJ, Pace JE, Solomon MD, Laouri M, Landsman PB, Teutsch SM. Pharmacy benefits and the use of drugs by the chronically ill. JAMA. 2004;291:2344-2350.
13. D'Agostino RB. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med. 1998;17:2265-2281.
14. Cook TD, Campbell DT. Quasi-experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Chicago, III: Rand McNally College Publishing Co; 1979.
15. Manning WG, Newhouse JP, Duan N, Keeler EB, Leibowitz A, Marquis MS. Health insurance and the demand for medical care: evidence from a randomized experiment. Am Econ Rev. 1987;77:251-277.
16. Huber PJ. The behavior of maximum likelihood estimates under non-standard conditions. In: Proceedings of the Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1967:221-233.
17. White H. A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica. 1980;48:817-838.
18. Duan N, Manning WG, Morris CM, Newhouse JP. A comparison of alternative models for the demand for medical care. J Business Econ Stat. 1983;1:115-126.