The impact of reference pricing on switching behaviour and healthcare utilisation: the case of statins in Germany

Abstract

This paper analyses (1) the impact of the inclusion of statins in the German reference pricing scheme in 2005 on the statin market, and (2) the effect of switching behaviour subsequent to the policy change on healthcare utilisation and costs. Patients with prescriptions for statins in 2004 were observed for 1 year before and 1 year after the policy change, which went into effect on 1 January 2005. Data on outpatient and inpatient visits, pharmaceutical consumption, and cost to the sickness fund were collected from a sickness fund with more than 5.8 million insured members in 2005. Compared to patients who were not affected by the policy change, patients treated previously with atorvastatin experienced higher non-adherence and increased discontinuation of treatment (P < 0.0001). Compared to patients who continued treatment with atorvastatin (non-switchers), patients who switched to another statin were hospitalised more often (P = 0.0439). However, difference-in-differences in hospitalisation due to coronary heart disease (P = 0.8751) and emergency visits (P = 0.5624) did not differ significantly between the two groups. Patients who switched more than once experienced a significant increase in hospital visits (P = 0.0061) and hospital visits due to cardiovascular disease (P = 0.0096) compared to non-switchers. Difference-in-differences in outpatient healthcare utilisation did not differ between non-switchers and switchers. Total savings resulting from the policy change ranged from € 94.4 million to € 108.7 million. Although manufacturers usually comply with reference pricing by reducing their retail prices to the reference price, regulators have to be aware of the consequences in cases where manufacturers react as in this situation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. 1.

    Puig-Junoy, J.: What is required to evaluate the impact of pharmaceutical reference pricing. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 4(2), 87–98 (2005). doi:10.2165/00148365-200504020-00003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Kaló, Z., Muszbek, N., Bodrogi, J., Bidló, J.: Does therapeutic reference pricing always result in cost-containment? The Hungarian evidence. Health Policy 80(3), 402–412 (2007). doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2006.04.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    McArthur, W.: Patient outcomes and public health consequences of reference pricing. In: López-Casasnovas, G., Jönsson, B. (eds.) Reference Pricing and Pharmaceutical Policy, pp. 145–160. Springer, Barcelona (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Grootendorst, P., Stewart, D.: A re-examination of the impact of reference pricing on anti-hypertensive drug plan expenditures in British Columbia. Health Econ. 15(7), 735–742 (2006). doi:10.1002/hec.1103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Schneeweiss, S., Soumerai, S., Maclure, M., Dormuth, C., Walker, A., Glynn, R.: Clinical and economic consequences of reference pricing for dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 74(4), 388–400 (2003). doi:10.1016/S0009-9236(03)00227-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Schneeweiss, S., Walker, A., Glynn, R., Maclure, M., Dormuth, C., Soumerai, S.: Outcomes of reference pricing for angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors. N. Engl. J. Med. 346(11), 822–829 (2002). doi:10.1056/NEJMsa003087

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Grootendorst, P., Marshall, J., Holbrook, A., Dolovich, L., O’Brien, B., Levy, A.: The impact of reference pricing of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents on the use and costs of analgesic drugs. Health Serv. Res. 40(5), 1297–1317 (2005). doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00420.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Stargardt, T., Schreyögg, J., Busse, R.: Arzneimittelfestbeträge: Gruppenbildung, Preisberechnung mittels Regressionsverfahren und Wirkungen. Gesundheitswesen 67(7), 468–477 (2005). doi:10.1055/s-2005-858485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Schneeweiss, S., Soumerai, S., Glynn, R., Maclure, M., Dormuth, C., Walker, A.: Impact of reference-based pricing for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors on drug utilization. CMAJ 166(6), 737–745 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Federal Joint Committee. Explanatory statements on the grouping of statins. Germany, Federal Joint Committee (2004)

  11. 11.

    IQWIG: Nutzenbewertung der Statine unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Atorvastatin. Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care [IQWIG], Köln (2005)

  12. 12.

    Sikka, R., Xia, F., Aubert, R.: Estimating medication persistency using administrative claims data. Am. J. Manag. Care 11(7), 449–457 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Gibson, T., Mark, T., McGuigan, K.A., Axelsen, K., Wang, S.: The effects of prescription drug copayments on statin adherence. Am. J. Manag. Care 12(9), 509–517 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Avorn, J., Monette, J., Lacour, A., Bohn, R., Monane, M., Mogun, H., LeLorier, J.: Persistence of use of lipid-lowering medications. JAMA 279(18), 1458–1462 (1998). doi:10.1001/jama.279.18.1458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Schneeweiss, S., Patrick, A., Maclure, M., Dormuth, C., Glynn, R.: Adherence to statin therapy under drug cost sharing in patients with and without acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 115(16), 2128–2135 (2007). doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.665992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., Mullainathan, S.: How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? Q. J. Econ. 119(1), 249–275 (2004). doi:10.1162/003355304772839588

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Motheral, B., Fairman, K.: The use of claims databases for outcomes research: rationale, challenges, and strategies. Clin. Ther. 19(2), 346–366 (1997). doi:10.1016/S0149-2918(97)80122-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Schneeweiss, S., Maclure, M., Walker, A., Grootendorst, P., Soumerai, S.: On the evaluation of drug benefits policy changes with longitudinal claims data: the policy maker’s versus the clinician’s perspective. Health Policy 55(2), 97–109 (2001). doi:10.1016/S0168-8510(00)00120-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Aldrich, J., Nelson, F.: Linear Probability, Logit, and Probit Models. SAGE, Beverly Hills (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Liao, T.: Interpreting Probability Models, Logit, Probit and Other Generalized Linear Models. SAGE, Thousand Oaks, CA (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Hoetker, G.: The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: critical issues. Strateg. Manage. J. 28331–28343 (2007)

  22. 22.

    Busse, R., Riesberg, A.: Health Care System in Transition—Germany. European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, Copenhagen (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Nink, K., Schröder, H.: Ergänzende statistische Übersicht. In: Schwabe, U., Paffrath, D. (eds.) Arzneiverordnungsreport 2005, pp. 1053–1156. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Motheral, B., Fairman, K.: Effect of a three-tier prescription copay on pharmaceutical and other medical utilization. Med. Care 39(12), 1293–1304 (2001). doi:10.1097/00005650-200112000-00005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Gibson, T., McLaughin, C., Smith, D.: A copayment increase for prescription drugs: the long-term and short-term effects on use and expenditures. Inquiry 42(3), 293–310 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Nair, K., Valuck, R., Allen, R., Lewis, S.: Impact of increased copayments on the discontinuation/switching rates of nonformulary medications. J. Pharm. Technol. 21(3), 137–143 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Danzon, P.M.: Reference pricing: theory and evidence. In: López-Casasnovas, G., Jönsson, B. (eds.) Reference Pricing and Pharmaceutical Policy, pp. 86–126. Barcelona: Springer, (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Busse, R., Schreyögg, J., Henke, K.-D.: Pharmaceutical Regulation in Germany: improving efficiency and controlling expenditures. Int. J. Health Plann. Manage. 20(4), 329–349 (2005). doi:10.1002/hpm.818

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Steiner, J., Prochazka, A.: The asessment of refill compliance using pharmacy records: methods, validity, and applications. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 50(1), 105–116 (1997). doi:10.1016/S0895-4356(96)00268-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Nink, K., Schröder, H.: Ergänzende statistische Übersicht. In: Schwabe, U., Paffrath, D. (eds.) Arzneiverordnungsreport 2006, pp. 981–1082. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the Techniker Krankenkasse for granting access to the sickness fund databases. In particular, the author is very grateful to Dr. Frank Verheyen and Anke Höhn for their helpful comments and their assistance with data extraction.

Conflict of interest statement

None.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tom Stargardt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stargardt, T. The impact of reference pricing on switching behaviour and healthcare utilisation: the case of statins in Germany. Eur J Health Econ 11, 267–277 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-009-0172-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Reference pricing
  • Pharmaceutical care
  • Reimbursement
  • Statins
  • Germany

JEL Classification

  • I11
  • I18