The Effect of a Large Regional Health Plan’s Value-based Insurance Design Program on Statin Use

Background:Cost-sharing requirements employed by health insurers to discourage the unnecessary use of medications may lead to underutilization of recommended treatment regimens and suboptimal quality of care. Value-based insurance design (VBID) programs seek to address these problems by lowering copayments to promote adherence to “high-value” medications that have been proven to be clinically beneficial. VBID evaluations to date have focused on programs implemented by self-insured employers. This study is among the first to assess the VBID program of a health plan. Methods:We examined a VBID program for statins implemented by a large regional health plan in 2008 and assessed its effect on medication adherence. Copayments on VBID brand statins were reduced by 42.9% for employer-sponsored plans (the treatment group) and increased by 16.7% for state-sponsored plans (the control group) between the preintervention and postintervention periods. Propensity score weights were used to balance the treatment and control groups on observed characteristics. We evaluated the impact of the VBID program on adherence using an econometric model with a difference-in-difference design. Results:Medication adherence increased 2.7 percentage points (P=0.033) among VBID brand statin users in the treatment group relative to the control group. With a baseline adherence rate of 77.6%, nonadherence was reduced by 11.9%. Conclusions:Copayment reductions on selected statin medications contributed to improvements in adherence. As one of the first studies to evaluate a health plan’s VBID program, our findings demonstrate that insurer-based VBID programs may yield results similar to those achieved by employer-based programs.

[1]  At Pitney Bowes, value-based insurance design cut copayments and increased drug adherence. , 2010, Health affairs.

[2]  S. Ross,et al.  Clinical outcomes in statin treatment trials: a meta-analysis. , 1999, Archives of internal medicine.

[3]  Anirban Basu,et al.  Generalized Modeling Approaches to Risk Adjustment of Skewed Outcomes Data , 2003, Journal of health economics.

[4]  T. Mcguire,et al.  Predictability and predictiveness in health care spending. , 2007, Journal of health economics.

[5]  Dana P Goldman,et al.  Prescription drug cost sharing: associations with medication and medical utilization and spending and health. , 2007, JAMA.

[6]  C. Ai,et al.  Interaction terms in logit and probit models , 2003 .

[7]  J. Mahoney,et al.  Value-based insurance plus disease management increased medication use and produced savings. , 2011, Health affairs.

[8]  D. Salkever,et al.  "Generic Entry and the Pricing of Pharmaceuticals" , 1995 .

[9]  D. Rubin Using Propensity Scores to Help Design Observational Studies: Application to the Tobacco Litigation , 2001, Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology.

[10]  A. Fendrick,et al.  Value-based insurance design: a "clinically sensitive" approach to preserve quality of care and contain costs. , 2006, The American journal of managed care.

[11]  John C Parker,et al.  Copayment reductions generate greater medication adherence in targeted patients. , 2010, Health affairs.

[12]  J. Newhouse Reconsidering the moral hazard-risk avoidance tradeoff. , 2006, Journal of health economics.

[13]  M. Rosenthal,et al.  Assessing the evidence for value-based insurance design. , 2010, Health affairs.

[14]  Candace Brown,et al.  A value-based insurance design program at a large company boosted medication adherence for employees with chronic illnesses. , 2011, Health affairs.

[15]  Melinda Beeuwkes Buntin,et al.  Too much ado about two-part models and transformation? Comparing methods of modeling Medicare expenditures. , 2004, Journal of health economics.

[16]  Ben Vollaard,et al.  The Elasticity of Demand for Health Care: A Review of the Literature and Its Application to the Military Health System , 2002 .