, Volume 35, Issue 5, pp 493–500 | Cite as

Pharmacy Benefit Management Companies: Do They Create Value in the US Healthcare System?

  • Alan LylesEmail author
Current Opinion


Pharmacy benefit management companies (PBMs) perform functions in the US market-based healthcare system that may be performed by public agencies or quasi-public institutions in other nations. By aggregating lives covered under their many individual contracts with payers, PBMs have formidable negotiating power. They influence pharmaceutical insurance coverage, design the terms of coverage in a plan’s drug benefit, and create competition among providers for inclusion in a plan’s network. PBMs have, through intermediation, the potential to secure lower drug prices and to improve rational prescribing. Whether these potential outcomes are realized within the relevant budget is a function of the healthcare system and the interaction of benefit design and clinical processes—not just individually vetted components. Efficiencies and values achieved in price discounts and cost sharing can be nullified if there is irrational prescribing (over-utilization, under-utilization and mis-utilization), variable patient adherence to medication regimens, ineffective formulary processes, or fraud, waste and abuse. Rising prescription drug costs and the increasing prevalence of ‘high deductible health plans’, which require much greater patient out-of-pocket costs, is creating a crisis for PBM efforts towards an affordable pharmacy benefit. Since PBM rebate and incentive contracts are opaque to the public, whether they add value by restraining higher drug prices or benefit from them is debatable.


Compliance with Ethical Standards


No sources of funding were used to conduct this study or prepare this manuscript.

Conflict of interest

Alan Lyles has no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this article.


  1. 1.
    Dodd P. Content is nothing without context. Financial Times. 2014:1. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  2. 2.
    The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. 2016 Employer health benefits survey. Washington, DC; 2016. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  3. 3.
    US Department of Health and Human Services. ASPE issue brief: observations on trends in prescription drug spending. 2016. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  4. 4.
    Martin AB, Hartman M, Benson J, Catlin A, National Health Expenditure Accounts Team. National health spending in 2014: faster growth driven by coverage expansion and prescription drug spending. Health Aff (Millwood). 2016;35(1):150–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blue Cross Blue Shield Blue Health Intelligence. The health of America report. The growth in specialty drug spending from 2013 to 2014. 2016. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  6. 6.
    McRae J, Vogenberg RF, Beaty SW, Mearns E, Varga S, Pizzi L. A review of US drug costs relevant to medicare, medicaid, and commercial insurers post-affordable care act enactment, 2010–2016. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35(2):215–23. doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0458-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cox C, Damico A, Claxton G, Levitt L. Examining high prescription drug spending for people with employer sponsored health insurance. Peterson-Kaiser Health System Tracker; 2016. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  8. 8.
    Claxton G, Rae M, Panchal N. Issue brief: consumer assets and patient cost sharing. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation; 2015. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  9. 9.
    Hamel L, Norton M, Pollitz K, Levitt L, Claxton G, Brodie M; Kaiser Family Foundation. The burden of Medical Debt: results from the Kaiser Family Foundation/New York Times Medical Bills Survey. Menlo Park: The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation; 2016. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  10. 10.
    Brennan T, Shrank W. New expensive treatments for hepatitis C infection. JAMA. 2014;312(6):593–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy. Managed care terms. PBM-Pharmacy Benefit Management Companies. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  12. 12.
    Navarro RP, Becker AW, Francis W, Tadlock C, Zimmerman A. Pharmacy benefit management companies. In: Navarro RP, editor. Managed care pharmacy. 2nd ed. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett; 2009.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Japsen B. PBMs quietly gain leverage as drug makers stumble on price hikes. Forbes. 2016. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  14. 14.
    Express Scripts. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    UnitedHealth Group OPTUMRx. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  18. 18.
    Levinson DR. Medicaid drug price comparisons: average manufacturer price to published prices. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. OEI-05-05-00240. 2005. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  19. 19.
    McGlynn E, Asch AM, Adams J, Keesey J, Hicks J, DeCristifaro A, Kerr EA. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2635–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice. Dartmouth Atlas of Healthcare. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  21. 21.
    Zhang Y, Baicker K, Newhouse JP. Geographic variation in medicare drug spending does not offset variation in other medical spending. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(5):405–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    James B. Quality improvement opportunities in health care—making it easy to do it right. J Manag Care Pharm. 2002;8(5):394–9.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cohen P, Wohletz MC. Managed care pharmacy and pharmacy benefit management. In: Fulda TR, Lyles A, Wertheimer A, editors. Pharmaceutical Public Policy. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2016.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Michigan. Medicare home: how do drug tiers work? Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  25. 25.
    Neumann PJ. Evidence-based and value-based formulary guidelines. Health Aff. 2004;23(1):124–34. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.23.1.124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Choudhry NK, Fischer MA, Smith BF, Brill G, Girdish C, Matlin OS, Brennan TA, Avorn J, Shrank WH. Five features of value-based insurance design plans were associated with higher rates of medication adherence. Health Aff (Millwood). 2014;33(3):493–501. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2013.0060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lu CY, Law MR, Soumerai SB, Graves AJ, LeCates RF, Zhang F, Ross-Degnan D, Adams AS. Impact of prior authorization on the use and costs of lipid-lowering medications among Michigan and Indiana dual enrollees in medicaid and medicare: results of a longitudinal, population-based study. Clin Ther. 2011;33(1):135–44. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2011.01.012.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Watanabe JH, Kazerooni R, Bounthavong M. Association of copayment with likelihood and level of adherence in new users of statins: a retrospective cohort study. J Manag Care Pharm. 2014;20(1):43–50.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Angalakuditi M, Gomes J. Retrospective drug utilization review: impact of pharmacist interventions on physician prescribing. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2011;3:105–8. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S21789.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vogenberg FR. Pharmacy benefits: plan design and management. International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans, Inc.; 2011.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Express Scripts. The Lab. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  32. 32.
    CVS Health Research Institute. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  33. 33.
    UnitedHealth Group. OPTUM Lab. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  34. 34.
    Alpert B. Pharmacy-benefit managers under pressure. BARRON’S; 2016. p. 17–19. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  35. 35.
    Pharmacy Benefit Management Institute. 2015–2016 Prescription drug benefit and plan design report. USD/TAK/15/0022. 2015. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  36. 36.
    Thomas K. Rival of EpiPen readies for return to the Shelves. NY Times. 2016;27:B7.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    US House of Representatives Oversight and Government Reform. [Hearing] Reviewing the rising price of EpiPens. Washington, DC; 2016. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  38. 38.
    Howard DH. Drug Companies’ patient-assistance programs—helping patients or profits? N Engl J Med. 2014;371:97–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General Supplemental Special Advisory Bulletin: Independent Charity Patient Assistance Programs, 79 Fed. Reg. 31120 (May 30, 2014) [Notice].Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Dafny LS, Ody CJ, Schmitt MA. Undermining value-based purchasing—lessons from the pharmaceutical industry. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(21):2013–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, 42 U.S.C. § 18001 et seq. (2010).Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fein AJ. Surprise PSAO Consolidation: H.D. Smith and AAP Form fourth-largest pharmacy-PBM negotiating group. 2016. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  43. 43.
    Congress of the United States, Congressional Budget Office. Issues in designing a prescription drug benefit for Medicare. 2002. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  44. 44.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Viral hepatitis—hepatitis C information. Hepatitis C FAQs for Health Professionals. Last updated 8 January 2016. Accessed 14 Jan 2016.
  45. 45.
    Gilead Sciences. US Food and Drug Administration approves Gilead’s Sovaldi™ (Sofosbuvir) for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C [media release]. 2013. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  46. 46.
    Pollack A. Harvoni, a hepatitis C drug from Gilead, wins FDA approval. NY Times. 2014. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  47. 47.
    abbvie. AbbVie receives US FDA approval of VIEKIRA PAK™ (ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir tablets; dasabuvir tablets) for the treatment of chronic genotype 1 hepatitis C [media release]. 2014. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  48. 48.
    Walker J. CVS gives preferred status to Gilead’s hepatitis C drugs. Wall Street J. 2015. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  49. 49.
    Humer C. Reuters. Express scripts drops Gilead hep C drugs for cheaper AbbVie rival. Reuters Health News. 2014. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  50. 50.
    Reuters. Merck expects delay for a hepatitis C therapy. NY Times. 2015. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.
  51. 51.
    Grant C. The market is missing the upside on Merck. Wall Street J. 2016;26:C14. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Henry A. Rosenberg Professor of Government, Business, and Nonprofit Partnerships, College of Public AffairsUniversity of BaltimoreBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations