Payer-Specific Negotiated Prices for Prescription Drugs at Top-Performing US Hospitals.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Feldman WB
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8576628 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Payer-Specific Negotiated Prices for Prescription Drugs at Top-Performing US Hospitals.
Feldman William B WB Rome Benjamin N BN Brown Beatrice L BL Kesselheim Aaron S AS
JAMA internal medicine 20220101 1
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8278265 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIn Germany, all new, innovative medicines are subject to an early benefit assessment by the German Federal Joint Committee with subsequent price negotiation and optional arbitration. The purpose of this study was to identify drivers of negotiated (including arbitrated) prices of new, non-orphan innovative medicines in Germany.MethodsThe analysis considered all non-orphan drugs that underwent a benefit appraisal between January 2011 and June 2016, and displayed a reimbursement price in the German Drug Directory (Lauer-Taxe®) in November 2017. Negotiated annual treatment costs were analyzed with respect to 11 explanatory variables in regression models.ResultsThe total sample included 106 non-orphan drugs. The analysis showed a significant and positive association of log-transformed negotiated annual treatment cost of new medicines with log-transformed annual treatment cost of its comparator(s), extent of added benefit, and log-transformed size of the target population. Analyzing the effects of specific endpoints instead of the overall added benefit revealed that the single endpoint with the largest impact on price is adverse events (AEs). Surprisingly, an increase in AEs significantly increased the price. Various subgroup and sensitivity analyses demonstrated the robustness of the results. The adjusted R squared for all models was above 80%.ConclusionsThe analysis was able to confirm that variables whose consideration is mandated by law are, in fact, the key drivers of negotiated prices. Somewhat puzzling, the analysis also found an increase in AEs to move prices significantly upward.
| S-EPMC7423852 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9295022 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10918506 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceHigh and continually increasing pharmaceutical drug spending is a major health and health policy concern in the United States.ObjectiveTo demonstrate trends in prices among popular brand-name prescription drugs.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation of drug prices focuses on 49 top-selling brand-name medications in the United States. Pharmacy claims data from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2017, were obtained from Blue Cross Blue Shield Axis, a database that includes data from more than 35 million individuals with private pharmaceutical insurance. Drugs that exceeded $500 million in US sales or $1 billion in worldwide sales were examined.Main outcomes and measuresThe median sum of out-of-pocket and insurance costs paid by patients or insurers for common prescriptions, presented annually and monthly, was the primary outcome.ResultsIn total, 132 brand-name prescription drugs were identified in 2017 that met the inclusion criteria. Of this total, the study focused on 49 top-selling drugs that exceeded 100 000 pharmacy claims. Substantial cost increases among these drugs was near universal, with a 76% median cost increase from January 2012 through December 2017, and almost all drugs (48 [98%]) displaying regular annual or biannual price increases. Of the 36 drugs that have been available since 2012, 28 (78%) have seen an increase in insurer and out-of-pocket costs by more than 50%, and 16 (44%) have more than doubled in price. Insulins (ie, Novolog, Humalog, and Lantus) and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (ie, Humira and Enbrel) demonstrated highly correlated price increases, coinciding with some of the largest growth in drug costs. Relative price changes did not differ between drugs that entered the market in the past 3 to 6 years and those that have been on the market longer (number of drugs, 13 vs 36; median, 29% increase from January 2015 through December 2017; P = .81) nor between drugs with or without a Food and Drug Administration-approved therapeutic equivalent (number of drugs, 17 vs 32; median, 79% vs 73%; P = .21). Changes in prices paid were highly correlated with third-party estimates of changes in drug net prices (ρ = 0.55; P = 3.8 × 10-5), suggesting that the current rebate system, which incentivizes high list prices and greater reliance on rebates, increases overall costs.Conclusions and relevanceThe growth of drug spending in the United States associated with government-protected market exclusivity is likely to continue; greater price transparency is warranted.
| S-EPMC6547085 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRapid response teams (RRTs) are foundational to hospital response to deteriorating conditions of patients. However, little is known about differences in RRT organization and function across top-performing and non-top-performing hospitals for in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) care.ObjectiveTo evaluate differences in design and implementation of RRTs at top-performing and non-top-performing sites for survival of IHCA, which is known to be associated with hospital performance on IHCA incidence.Design, setting, and participantsA qualitative analysis was performed of data from semistructured interviews of 158 hospital staff members (nurses, physicians, administrators, and staff) during site visits to 9 hospitals participating in the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation program and consistently ranked in the top, middle, and bottom quartiles for IHCA survival during 2012-2014. Site visits were conducted from April 19, 2016, to July 27, 2017. Data analysis was completed in January 2019.Main outcomes and measuresSemistructured in-depth interviews were performed and thematic analysis was conducted on strategies for IHCA prevention, including RRT roles and responsibilities.ResultsOf the 158 participants, 72 were nurses (45.6%), 27 physicians (17.1%), 27 clinical staff (17.1%), and 32 administrators (20.3%). Between 12 and 30 people at each hospital participated in interviews. Differences in RRTs at top-performing and non-top-performing sites were found in the following 4 domains: team design and composition, RRT engagement in surveillance of at-risk patients, empowerment of bedside nurses to activate the RRT, and collaboration with bedside nurses during and after a rapid response. At top-performing hospitals, RRTs were typically staffed with dedicated team members without competing clinical responsibilities, who provided expertise to bedside nurses in managing patients who were at risk for deterioration, and collaborated with nurses during and after a rapid response. Bedside nurses were empowered to activate RRTs based on their judgment and experience without fear of reprisal from physicians or hospital staff. In contrast, RRT members at non-top-performing hospitals had competing clinical responsibilities and were generally less engaged with bedside nurses. Nurses at non-top-performing hospitals reported concerns about potential consequences from activating the RRT.Conclusions and relevanceThis qualitative study's findings suggest that top-performing hospitals feature RRTs with dedicated staff without competing clinical responsibilities, that work collaboratively with bedside nurses, and that can be activated without fear of reprisal. These findings provide unique insights into RRTs at hospitals with better IHCA outcomes.
| S-EPMC6664378 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMortality rates for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) vary substantially across hospitals, even when adjusted for patient severity; however, little is known about hospital factors that may influence this variation.ObjectiveTo identify factors that may be related to better performance in AMI care, as measured by risk-standardized mortality rates.DesignQualitative study that used site visits and in-depth interviews.SettingEleven U.S. hospitals that ranked in either the top or the bottom 5% in risk-standardized mortality rates for 2 recent years of data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (2005 to 2006 and 2006 to 2007), with diversity among hospitals in key characteristics.Participants158 members of hospital staff, all of whom were involved with AMI care at the 11 hospitals.MeasurementsSite visits and in-depth interviews conducted with hospital staff during 2009. A multidisciplinary team performed analyses by using the constant comparative method.ResultsHospitals in the high-performing and low-performing groups differed substantially in the domains of organizational values and goals, senior management involvement, broad staff presence and expertise in AMI care, communication and coordination among groups, and problem solving and learning. Participants described diverse protocols or processes for AMI care (such as rapid response teams, clinical guidelines, use of hospitalists, and medication reconciliation); however, these did not systematically differentiate high-performing from low-performing hospitals.LimitationThe qualitative design informed the generation of hypotheses, and statistical associations could not be assessed.ConclusionHigh-performing hospitals were characterized by an organizational culture that supported efforts to improve AMI care across the hospital. Evidence-based protocols and processes, although important, may not be sufficient for achieving high hospital performance in care for patients with AMI.Primary funding sourceAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality, United Health Foundation, and the Commonwealth Fund.
| S-EPMC4735872 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCommercial payer-negotiated rates for cleft lip and palate surgery have not been evaluated on a national scale. The aim of this study was to characterize commercial rates for cleft care, both in terms of nationwide variation and in relation to Medicaid rates.MethodsA cross-sectional analysis was performed of 2021 hospital pricing data from Turquoise Health, a data service platform that aggregates hospital price disclosures. The data were queried by CPT code to identify 20 cleft surgical services. Within- and across-hospital ratios were calculated per CPT code to quantify commercial rate variation. Generalized linear models were used to assess the relationship between median commercial rate and facility-level variables and between commercial and Medicaid rates.ResultsThere were 80,710 unique commercial rates from 792 hospitals. Within-hospital ratios for commercial rates ranged from 2.0 to 2.9 and across-hospital ratios ranged from 5.4 to 13.7. Median commercial rates per facility were higher than Medicaid rates for primary cleft lip and palate repair ($5492.20 versus $1739.00), secondary cleft lip and palate repair ($5429.10 versus $1917.00), and cleft rhinoplasty ($6001.00 versus $1917.00; P < 0.001). Lower commercial rates were associated with hospitals that were smaller ( P < 0.001), safety-net ( P < 0.001), and nonprofit ( P < 0.001). Medicaid rate was positively associated with commercial rate ( P < 0.001).ConclusionsCommercial rates for cleft surgical care demonstrated marked variation within and across hospitals, and were lower for small, safety-net, or nonprofit hospitals. Lower Medicaid rates were not associated with higher commercial rates, suggesting that hospitals did not use cost-shifting to compensate for budget shortfalls resulting from poor Medicaid reimbursement.
| S-EPMC11240862 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHigh prices of anticancer medicines have increased the economic burden for both patients and health insurance systems. Since 2017, China has implemented national price negotiations for medicines, relying on evidence from health technology assessments. We aim to assess the relation between negotiated price and value of anticancer medicines listed in China's National Reimbursement Drug List (NRDL).MethodsFor all price-negotiated anticancer medicines and corresponding indications listed in the latest NRDL between 2017 and 2020, we collected their clinical outcomes data, including overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), in supporting trials. Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated to estimate the association between the daily cost and clinical benefit of each indication.ResultsIn total, 75 indications of 46 branded anticancer medicines were included for analysis. The median daily costs for the anticancer therapies that had gone through negotiation in 2017-2020 were US$87.6, US$71.8, US$58.9, and US$39.7, respectively. For indications supported by randomized trials, no correlation between daily costs and OS and PFS benefit of the price-negotiated cancer therapies was observed (N = 41, r = -0.05, and N = 49, r = 0.04, respectively). For cancer indications newly listed in NRDL in 2020, the association between their daily cost and OS benefit was -0.78 (N = 4, p = 0.221) and 0.01 (N = 8, p = 0.986) before and after the price negotiation.ConclusionThough the negotiation policy decreased prices of anticancer medicines in China, no statistically significant correlation was observed between their daily costs and clinical benefits. A more transparent and credible pricing approach needs to be established to promote value-based anticancer medicines and healthcare system efficiency.
| S-EPMC9270265 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) is common, and outcomes vary substantially across US hospitals, but reasons for these differences are largely unknown. We set out to better understand how top-performing hospitals organize their resuscitation teams to achieve high survival rates for IHCA.MethodsWe calculated risk-standardized IHCA survival to discharge rates across American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry hospitals between 2012 and 2014. We identified geographically and academically diverse hospitals in the top, middle, and bottom quartiles of survival for IHCA and performed a qualitative study that included site visits with in-depth interviews of clinical and administrative staff at 9 hospitals. With the use of thematic analysis, data were analyzed to identify salient themes of perceived performance by informants.ResultsAcross 9 hospitals, we interviewed 158 individuals from multiple disciplines including physicians (17.1%), nurses (45.6%), other clinical staff (17.1%), and administration (20.3%). We identified 4 broad themes related to resuscitation teams: (1) team design, (2) team composition and roles, (3) communication and leadership during IHCA, and (4) training and education. Resuscitation teams at top-performing hospitals demonstrated the following features: dedicated or designated resuscitation teams; participation of diverse disciplines as team members during IHCA; clear roles and responsibilities of team members; better communication and leadership during IHCA; and in-depth mock codes.ConclusionsResuscitation teams at hospitals with high IHCA survival differ from non-top-performing hospitals. Our findings suggest core elements of successful resuscitation teams that are associated with better outcomes and form the basis for future work to improve IHCA.
| S-EPMC6245659 | biostudies-literature