IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v45y1997i4p511-521.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Managed care pharmacy, socioeconomic assessments and drug adoption decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Lyles, Alan
  • Luce, Bryan R.
  • Rentz, Anne M.

Abstract

A telephone survey of a representative national sample of 51 large managed care organizations in the U.S. ( > 50,000 enrollees) was undertaken (1) to understand the role of socioeconomic assessments on drug adoption decisions; (2) to determine the sources of these assessments and the reliance of managed care pharmacy on each; and (3) to determine the resources for internally versus externally performed drug assessments. Socioeconomic assessments (clinical effectiveness, safety, cost of treatment, cost-effectiveness, and quality of life) are often tied to formulary decisions. Plans differ in their use of externally available socioeconomic assessments and in their ratings of the importance to decision making of drug assessments from the various sources. Those using a specific source of drug assessment information rated them in the following order of importance: PBM assessments, other HMOs, peer reviewed literature, evaluations performed by industry, articles in non-peer reviewed publications and, lastly, government reports. Timeliness and comprehensiveness are important components of the overall utility of information. A high percentage of plans reported using some of the various types of assessments, with clinical effectiveness most common, and cost-effectiveness second. The percentage of new drugs that undergo assessments in each of the plans covers a broad range, with 57% of the plans evaluating at least half of all new drugs. All but one surveyed managed care plan reported having either implemented or plans to implement a disease management program. Eighty percent of those surveyed are more concerned about drug assessments than in the past and 88% anticipate greater future use. Although 38 plans (75%) have a person in the organization responsible for drug assessments, this is the primary job in only 14 plans (37%). With greater reliance on drug assessments in the future, there are substantial opportunities for integrating drug assessments, formularies and disease management programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Lyles, Alan & Luce, Bryan R. & Rentz, Anne M., 1997. "Managed care pharmacy, socioeconomic assessments and drug adoption decisions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 511-521, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:45:y:1997:i:4:p:511-521
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(96)00392-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Al, Maiwenn J. & Feenstra, Talitha & Brouwer, Werner B. F., 2004. "Decision makers' views on health care objectives and budget constraints: results from a pilot study," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 33-48, October.
    2. Eddama, Oya & Coast, Joanna, 2008. "A systematic review of the use of economic evaluation in local decision-making," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(2-3), pages 129-141, May.
    3. Williams, Iestyn & Bryan, Stirling, 2007. "Understanding the limited impact of economic evaluation in health care resource allocation: A conceptual framework," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 135-143, January.
    4. Lin, Shu-Jou & Jan, Kuan-An & Kao, Jen-Tse, 2011. "Colleague interactions and new drug prescribing behavior: The case of the initial prescription of antidepressants in Taiwanese medical centers," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(8), pages 1208-1213.
    5. Williams, Iestyn P. & Bryan, Stirling, 2007. "Cost-effectiveness analysis and formulary decision making in England: Findings from research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(10), pages 2116-2129, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:45:y:1997:i:4:p:511-521. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.