Poorer people are being prescribed more expensive branded drugs. Is that bad? According to a new investigation it is. And it is costing the taxpayers a shovel-load of money. Furthermore, it’s unnecessary.
Poorer people are being prescribed more expensive branded drugs. Is that bad? According to a new investigation it is. And it is costing the taxpayers a shovel-load of money. Furthermore, it’s unnecessary.
The failure of the government to track doctors who prescribe cheaper generics for their patients in low-income neighborhoods racks up Medicare waste by billions of dollars that is spent on prescribing name-brand drugs instead, reports the latest investigation on Medicare Part D by ProPublica Communication.
The failure to track doctors who shun cheaper generics in favor of the branded drugs for their patients is a burden and hugely costly for taxpayers in Medicare Part D, which fills one of every four US prescriptions.
In the ProPublica investigation the prescribing habits of 1.6 million practitioners nationwide were analyzed and though the number may be tiny, they are having a huge impact on spending in Medicare’s drug program.
Just 913 doctors could have saved taxpayers $300 million in 2011 by prescribing more generics like their peers.
Plus, there’s the implication (though not proven) that these doctors could be influenced by the drug companies to prescribe their costly Brand. Nearly half of the big name-brand prescribers have accepted thousands of dollars in promotional or consulting fees from drug makers in recent years.
The culprit
So what’s behind all of this? A well-meaning benefit written into the drug program, known as Part D which allows low-income patients to pay less than $7 per prescription regardless of a medication’s cost. The unintended consequence is that doctors can dole out name brands with little fear of pushback from patients about price, which in turn exacerbates waste.
Should Medicare then do away with the low-income subsidy to people who need it? But isn’t that punishing the wrong party? Why not round up the 913 suspected doctors, instead?
Over all, the program has received favorable points. While lawmakers may bitterly disagree about the Affordable Care Act, the Medicare’s drug program has gotten high marks and has been held up as a success for government health care. In addition, it has come in below cost estimates while providing access to needed medicines for 36 million seniors and the disabled.
Taxpayers spent $62 billion last year on Part D - more than a third of it on this low-income subsidy.
The report points to what they believe is the more effective program for the U.S. military, the VA and some private insurance plans, which put limits on name-brand prescribing. Medicare still hasn’t.
Johnson & Johnson Seeks FDA Approval for Subcutaneous Tremfya Regimen for Ulcerative Colitis
November 22nd 2024Johnson & Johnson has submitted a supplemental Biologics License Application to the FDA for a subcutaneous induction regimen of Tremfya for adults with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis based on positive Phase III ASTRO trial results.
Key Findings of the NIAGARA and HIMALAYA Trials
November 8th 2024In this episode of the Pharmaceutical Executive podcast, Shubh Goel, head of immuno-oncology, gastrointestinal tumors, US oncology business unit, AstraZeneca, discusses the findings of the NIAGARA trial in bladder cancer and the significance of the five-year overall survival data from the HIMALAYA trial, particularly the long-term efficacy of the STRIDE regimen for unresectable liver cancer.
Fake Weight Loss Drugs: Growing Threat to Consumer Health
October 25th 2024In this episode of the Pharmaceutical Executive podcast, UpScriptHealth's Peter Ax, Founder and CEO, and George Jones, Chief Operations Officer, discuss the issue of counterfeit weight loss drugs, the potential health risks associated with them, increasing access to legitimate weight loss medications and more.