Access to injectable biologic medications by medicare beneficiaries: geographic distribution of US dermatologist prescribers

Abstract Purpose: Injectable biologics (IB) are important in dermatology and we sought to examine the distribution of US IB-prescribing dermatologists. Materials and methods: We used Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Part D for 2013–2015. The density of dermatologists who prescribe IB (etanercept, adalimumab, ustekinumab, secukinumab) in each US county, represented as number of dermatologists per 100,000 Medicare Part D beneficiaries, was calculated. Results: 2,992 dermatologists (26.3% of dermatologists) prescribed IB in this study. The national density of IB-prescribing dermatologists was 7.22. Only 778 counties (24.8%) have at least one IB-prescribing dermatologist. The densities of IB-prescribing dermatologists in metropolitan counties were 8.07–8.12. The densities of IB-prescribing dermatologists were 4.55 and 6.51 for urban populations of greater than 20,000 people adjacent and non-adjacent to metropolitan areas, respectively. Urban counties with populations between 2,500–19,999 and adjacent to a metropolitan area had a density of 2.03 and urban counties with the same population and not adjacent to a metropolitan area had a density of 2.84. Completely rural or urban counties with populations under 2,500 people had densities between 2.31–2.35. Conclusions: There are disparities in the availability of IB-prescribing dermatologists across urban-rural geographic settings in the US.

[1]  M. Gilliet,et al.  Psoriasis: from Pathogenesis to Targeted Therapies , 2018, Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology.

[2]  A. Pink,et al.  Biologics for psoriasis: more drugs, new patient categories, but fresh challenges for clinical dermatologists , 2017, The British journal of dermatology.

[3]  N. Shear,et al.  Biologics in patients with skin diseases , 2017, The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology.

[4]  L. Naldi,et al.  Inequalities in access to biological treatments for psoriasis: results from the Italian Psocare registry , 2017, The British journal of dermatology.

[5]  A. Gottlieb,et al.  From the Medical Board of the National Psoriasis Foundation: Treatment targets for plaque psoriasis , 2017, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[6]  R. Althin,et al.  Regional Differences in the Prescription of Biologics for Psoriasis in Sweden: A Register-Based Study of 4168 Patients , 2017, BioDrugs.

[7]  A. Armstrong,et al.  Under-Treatment of Patients with Moderate to Severe Psoriasis in the United States: Analysis of Medication Usage with Health Plan Data , 2016, Dermatology and Therapy.

[8]  Chris Fellner More Biologic Therapies Expected To Treat Advanced Plaque Psoriasis. , 2016, P & T : a peer-reviewed journal for formulary management.

[9]  M. Lebwohl,et al.  US Perspectives in the Management of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis: Patient and Physician Results from the Population-Based Multinational Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (MAPP) Survey , 2015, American Journal of Clinical Dermatology.

[10]  J. Doshi,et al.  Psoriasis in the U.S. Medicare population: prevalence, treatment, and factors associated with biologic use , 2015, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[11]  D. D. Ingram,et al.  NCHS urban-rural classification scheme for counties. , 2012, Vital and health statistics. Series 2, Data evaluation and methods research.