This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Background and Objectives To determine the association between Medicare Part D plan disease-modifying therapy (DMT) restrictiveness and adherence and outcomes among people with multiple sclerosis (MS).
Methods We used Medicare claims data from 2010 to 2014 to identify individuals with a full year enrollment (Parts A, B, and D), an MS diagnosis, and 1 or more self-administered DMT prescription. Plans were considered restrictive if all available DMTs required a prior authorization or step therapy restriction; otherwise they were considered permissive. We compared DMT adherence, defined as a medication possession ratio ≥80%, MS-related emergency department or inpatient admissions, and outpatient visits by Part D plan restrictiveness. We used multivariate regression models to control for patient demographics and comorbidities.
Results There were 37,713 Medicare beneficiaries with MS who were enrolled in either restrictive (n = 29,901) or permissive (n = 7812) Part D plans during the study period. Patients enrolled in restrictive plans were older (60 vs 58 years; p < 0.001), more likely to live in the south (38% vs 23%; p < 0.001), eligible through disability (67% vs 60%; p < 0.001), and more likely to have several chronic comorbid conditions. Patients enrolled in restrictive plans were less likely to be adherent to their DMT (54% vs 57%; p < 0.001; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88–0.98) and had a higher rate of MS-related outpatient visits (1.7 vs 1.4 per year; p < 0.001; aRR 1.27, 95% CI 1.23–1.31).
Discussion Medicare beneficiaries with MS enrolled in restrictive Part D plans were less adherent to their DMT and had higher rates of MS-related outpatient visits.
Footnotes
Funding information and disclosures are provided at the end of the article. Full disclosure form information provided by the authors is available with the full text of this article at Neurology.org/cp.
- Received September 29, 2020.
- Accepted June 23, 2021.
- © 2021 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
The Nerve!: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.