Cargando…

Impact of removing prescription co-payments on the use of costly health services: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether exempting people (with high health needs and living in areas of high deprivation) from a $5 prescription charge reduces hospital use. DESIGN: Two-group parallel prospective randomised controlled trial. SETTING: People living in the community in various regions of New...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Norris, Pauline, Cousins, Kim, Horsburgh, Simon, Keown, Shirley, Churchward, Marianna, Samaranayaka, Ariyapala, Smith, Alesha, Marra, Carlo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9839957/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36641460
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-09011-0
_version_ 1784869548049039360
author Norris, Pauline
Cousins, Kim
Horsburgh, Simon
Keown, Shirley
Churchward, Marianna
Samaranayaka, Ariyapala
Smith, Alesha
Marra, Carlo
author_facet Norris, Pauline
Cousins, Kim
Horsburgh, Simon
Keown, Shirley
Churchward, Marianna
Samaranayaka, Ariyapala
Smith, Alesha
Marra, Carlo
author_sort Norris, Pauline
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To determine whether exempting people (with high health needs and living in areas of high deprivation) from a $5 prescription charge reduces hospital use. DESIGN: Two-group parallel prospective randomised controlled trial. SETTING: People living in the community in various regions of New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: One thousand sixty one people who lived in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation, and either took medicines for diabetes, took antipsychotic medicines, or had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Of the 1053 who completed the study, just under half (49%) were Māori. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were individually randomized (1–1 ratio) to either be exempted from the standard $5 charge per prescription item for one year (2020-2021) (n = 591) or usual care (n = 469). Those in the intervention group did not pay the standard NZ$5 charge, and pharmacies billed the study for these. Participants continued to pay any other costs for prescription medicines. Those in the control group continued to pay all prescription charges for the year although they may have received one-off assistance from other agencies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was length of stay (hospital bed-days). Secondary outcomes presented in this paper included: all-cause hospitalisations, hospitalisations for diabetes/mental health problems/COPD, deaths, and emergency department visits. RESULTS: The trial was under-powered because the recruitment target was not met. There was no statistically significant reduction in the primary outcome, hospital bed-days (IRR = 0.68, CI: 0.54 to 1.05). Participants in the intervention group were significantly less likely to be hospitalised during the study year than those in the control group (OR = 0.70, CI: 0.54 to 0.90). There were statistically significant reductions in the number of hospital admissions for mental health problems (IRR = 0.39, CI: 0.17 to 0.92), the number of admissions for COPD (IRR = 0.37, CI: 0.16 to 0.85), and length of stay for COPD (IRR 0.20, CI: 0.07 to 0.60). Apart from all-cause mortality and diabetes length of stay, all measures were better for the intervention group than the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Eliminating a small co-payment appears to have had a substantial effect on patients’ risk of being hospitalised. Given the small amount of revenue gathered from the charges, and the comparative large costs of hospitalisations, the results suggest that these charges are likely to increase the overall cost of healthcare, as well as exacerbate ethnic inequalities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12618001486213 registered on 04/09/2018. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-09011-0.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9839957
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98399572023-01-15 Impact of removing prescription co-payments on the use of costly health services: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial Norris, Pauline Cousins, Kim Horsburgh, Simon Keown, Shirley Churchward, Marianna Samaranayaka, Ariyapala Smith, Alesha Marra, Carlo BMC Health Serv Res Research OBJECTIVES: To determine whether exempting people (with high health needs and living in areas of high deprivation) from a $5 prescription charge reduces hospital use. DESIGN: Two-group parallel prospective randomised controlled trial. SETTING: People living in the community in various regions of New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: One thousand sixty one people who lived in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation, and either took medicines for diabetes, took antipsychotic medicines, or had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Of the 1053 who completed the study, just under half (49%) were Māori. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were individually randomized (1–1 ratio) to either be exempted from the standard $5 charge per prescription item for one year (2020-2021) (n = 591) or usual care (n = 469). Those in the intervention group did not pay the standard NZ$5 charge, and pharmacies billed the study for these. Participants continued to pay any other costs for prescription medicines. Those in the control group continued to pay all prescription charges for the year although they may have received one-off assistance from other agencies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was length of stay (hospital bed-days). Secondary outcomes presented in this paper included: all-cause hospitalisations, hospitalisations for diabetes/mental health problems/COPD, deaths, and emergency department visits. RESULTS: The trial was under-powered because the recruitment target was not met. There was no statistically significant reduction in the primary outcome, hospital bed-days (IRR = 0.68, CI: 0.54 to 1.05). Participants in the intervention group were significantly less likely to be hospitalised during the study year than those in the control group (OR = 0.70, CI: 0.54 to 0.90). There were statistically significant reductions in the number of hospital admissions for mental health problems (IRR = 0.39, CI: 0.17 to 0.92), the number of admissions for COPD (IRR = 0.37, CI: 0.16 to 0.85), and length of stay for COPD (IRR 0.20, CI: 0.07 to 0.60). Apart from all-cause mortality and diabetes length of stay, all measures were better for the intervention group than the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Eliminating a small co-payment appears to have had a substantial effect on patients’ risk of being hospitalised. Given the small amount of revenue gathered from the charges, and the comparative large costs of hospitalisations, the results suggest that these charges are likely to increase the overall cost of healthcare, as well as exacerbate ethnic inequalities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12618001486213 registered on 04/09/2018. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-09011-0. BioMed Central 2023-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9839957/ /pubmed/36641460 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-09011-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2023, corrected publication 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Norris, Pauline
Cousins, Kim
Horsburgh, Simon
Keown, Shirley
Churchward, Marianna
Samaranayaka, Ariyapala
Smith, Alesha
Marra, Carlo
Impact of removing prescription co-payments on the use of costly health services: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial
title Impact of removing prescription co-payments on the use of costly health services: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial
title_full Impact of removing prescription co-payments on the use of costly health services: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Impact of removing prescription co-payments on the use of costly health services: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Impact of removing prescription co-payments on the use of costly health services: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial
title_short Impact of removing prescription co-payments on the use of costly health services: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial
title_sort impact of removing prescription co-payments on the use of costly health services: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9839957/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36641460
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-09011-0
work_keys_str_mv AT norrispauline impactofremovingprescriptioncopaymentsontheuseofcostlyhealthservicesapragmaticrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT cousinskim impactofremovingprescriptioncopaymentsontheuseofcostlyhealthservicesapragmaticrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT horsburghsimon impactofremovingprescriptioncopaymentsontheuseofcostlyhealthservicesapragmaticrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT keownshirley impactofremovingprescriptioncopaymentsontheuseofcostlyhealthservicesapragmaticrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT churchwardmarianna impactofremovingprescriptioncopaymentsontheuseofcostlyhealthservicesapragmaticrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT samaranayakaariyapala impactofremovingprescriptioncopaymentsontheuseofcostlyhealthservicesapragmaticrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT smithalesha impactofremovingprescriptioncopaymentsontheuseofcostlyhealthservicesapragmaticrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT marracarlo impactofremovingprescriptioncopaymentsontheuseofcostlyhealthservicesapragmaticrandomisedcontrolledtrial