Design, implementation, and first-year outcomes of a value-based drug formulary

Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 269-275

  Sullivan, Sean D ^a,b   Yeung, Kai ^a   Vogeler, Carol ^c   Ramsey, Scott D ^a,b   Wong, Edward ^c   Murphy, Chad O ^c   Danielson, Dan ^c   Veenstra, David L ^a   Garrison, Louis P ^a   Burke, Wylie ^a   Watkins, John B ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

^c Premera Blue Cross   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADALIMUMAB; ANTIDIABETIC AGENT; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT; ANTILIPEMIC AGENT; ETANERCEPT; INFLIXIMAB; METHOTREXATE; TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR ALPHA INHIBITOR;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIABETES MELLITUS; DRUG COST; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG FORMULARY; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG STRUCTURE; DRUG USE; DYSLIPIDEMIA; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; HYPERLIPIDEMIA; HYPERTENSION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL SERVICE; MEDICATION COMPLIANCE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHARMACY BENEFIT MANAGER; PROCESS DESIGN; VALUE BASED DRUG FORMULARY; BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY; PROCEDURES; PURCHASING; TRENDS; DRUG DESIGN; EMPLOYEE; HEALTH CARE COST; MIDDLE AGED; PHARMACY; YOUNG ADULT;

BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD INSURANCE PLANS; CHEMISTRY, PHARMACEUTICAL; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG COSTS; DRUG UTILIZATION REVIEW; HUMANS; INSURANCE, PHARMACEUTICAL SERVICES; VALUE-BASED PURCHASING;

EID: 84930162863     PISSN: 10834087     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.4.269     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Ryu AJ, Gibson TB, McKellar MR, Chernew ME. The slowdown in health care spending in 2009-11 reflected factors other than the weak economy and thus may persist. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32(5):835-40.
2. Fendrick AM, Smith DG, Chernew ME, Shah SN. A benefit-based copay for prescription drugs: patient contribution based on total benefits, not drug acquisition cost. Am J Manag Care. 2001;7(9):861-67.
3. Campbell JD, Allen-Ramey F, Sajjan SG, Maiese EM, Sullivan SD. Increasing pharmaceutical copayments: impact on asthma medication utilization and outcomes. Am J Manag Care. 2011;17(10):703-10.
4. Heisler M, Choi H, Rosen AB, et al. Hospitalizations and deaths among adults with cardiovascular disease who underuse medications because of cost: a longitudinal analysis. Med Care. 2010;48(2):87-94.
5. Sokol MC, McGuigan KA, Verbrugge RR, Epstein RS. Impact of medication adherence on hospitalization risk and healthcare cost. Med Care. 2005;43(6):521-30.
6. Roebuck MC, Liberman JN, Gemmill-Toyama M, Brennan TA. Medication adherence leads to lower health care use and costs despite increased drug spending. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30(1):91-99.
7. Kim YA, Loucks A, Yokoyama G, Lightwood J, Rascati K, Serxner SA. Evaluation of value-based insurance design with a large retail employer. Am J Manag Care. 2011;17(10):682-90.
8. Choudhry NK, Fischer MA, Avorn J, et al. At Pitney Bowes, value-based insurance design cut copayments and increased drug adherence. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(11):1995-2001.
9. Maciejewski ML, Farley JF, Parker J, Wansink D. Copayment reductions generate greater medication adherence in targeted patients. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(11):2002-08.
10. Gibson TB, Wang S, Kelly E, et al. A value-based insurance design program at a large company boosted medication adherence for employees with chronic illnesses. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30(1):109-17.
11. Chernew ME, Shah MR, Wegh A, et al. Impact of decreasing copayments on medication adherence within a disease management environment. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(1):103-12.
12. Zeng F, An JJ, Scully R, Barrington C, Patel BV, Nichol MB. The impact of value-based benefit design on adherence to diabetes medications: a propensity score-weighted difference in difference evaluation. Value Health. 2010;13(6):846-52.
13. Maciejewski ML, Wansink D, Lindquist JH, Parker JC, Farley JF. Valuebased insurance design program in North Carolina increased medication adherence but was not cost neutral. Health Aff (Millwood). 2014;33(2):300-08.
14. Fendrick AM, Smith DG, Chernew ME. Applying value-based insurance design to low-value health services. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(11):2017-21.
15. Davidoff A, Lopert R, Stuart B, Shaffer T, Lloyd JT, Shoemaker JS. Simulated value-based insurance design applied to statin use by Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes. Value Health. 2012;15(3):404-11.
16. Ginsburg M. Value-based insurance design: consumers' views on paying more for high-cost, low-value care. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(11):2022-26.
17. Weinstein MC, Torrance G, McGuire A. QALYs: the basics. Value Health. 2009;12(Suppl 1):S5-9.
18. Kind P, Lafata JE, Matuszewski K, Raisch D. The use of QALYs in clinical and patient decision-making: issues and prospects. Value Health. 2009;12(Suppl 1):S27-30.
19. Nord E, Daniels N, Kamlet M. QALYs: some challenges. Value Health. 2009;12(Suppl 1):S10-15.
20. Drummond M, Brixner D, Gold M, Kind P, McGuire A, Nord E. Toward a consensus on the QALY. Value Health. 2009;12(Suppl 1):S31-35.
21. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.
22. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC, eds. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.
23. Phelps CE. Health Economics. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2012.
24. Kaplan RM, Bush JW. Health-related quality of life measurement for evaluation research and policy analysis. Health Psychol. 1982;1(1):61-80.
25. Devlin N, Parkin D. Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis. Health Econ. 2004;13(5):437-52.
26. George B, Harris A, Mitchell A. Cost-effectiveness analysis and the consistency of decision making: evidence from pharmaceutical reimbursement in Australia (1991 to 1996). Pharmacoeconomics. 2001;19(11):1103-09.
27. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, Tugwell PX. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. CMAJ. 1992;146(4):473-81.
28. Newhouse JP. US and UK health economics: two disciplines separated by a common language? Health Econ. 1998;7(Suppl 1):S79-92.
29. Nadler E, Eckert B, Neumann PJ. Do oncologists believe new cancer drugs offer good value? Oncologist. 2006;11(2):90-95.
30. Watkins JB, Choudhury SR, Wong E, Sullivan SD. Managing biotechnology in a network-model health plan: a U.S. private payer perspective. Health Aff (Millwood). 2006;25(5):1347-52.
31. FMCP Format Executive Committee. The AMCP format for formulary submissions version 3.0. J Manag Care Pharm. 2010;16(1 Suppl A):1-30. Available at: http://www.amcp.org/data/jmcp/1007_121%2019%2009(3).pdf.
32. Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry. Available at: https://research.tufts-nemc.org/cear/default. aspx. Accessed February 16, 2015.
33. The Cochrane Library. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Available at: http://community.cochrane.org/editorial-and-publishing-policyresource/cochrane-database-systematic-reviews-cdsr. Accessed March 3, 2015.
34. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Find guidance. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp?action=find. Accessed February 16, 2015.
35. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Common drug review. Available at: http://www.cadth.ca/en/products/cdr. Accessed February 16, 2015.
36. Weinstein MC, O'Brien B, Hornberger J, et al. Principles of good practice for decision analytic modeling in health-care evaluation: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices-Modeling Studies. Value Health. 2003;6(1):9-17.
37. Young A, Dixey J, Cox N, et al. How does functional disability in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affect patients and their lives? Results of 5 years of follow-up in 732 patients from the Early RA Study (ERAS). Rheumatology (Oxford). 2000;39(6):603-11.
38. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Regulatory information. Full text of Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997. Available at:http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Legislation/FederalFoodDrug andCosmeticActFDCAct/SignificantAmendmentstotheFDCAct/FDAMA/FullTextofFDAMAlaw/default.htm#SEC. Accessed February 16, 2015.