Drug discount contracts harm health and cost money instead of saving
28.07.2010 18:10
The Federal Association of Drug Manufacturers publishes the results of a study on the effects of discount agreements on patient health
Drug discount agreements are intended to help health insurance companies save money. In fact, they put a strain on their budget with additional doctor and hospital costs: Discount contracts lead to frequent changes in medication, which often leads to health problems and thus follow-up costs. In this way, the supposed savings instrument becomes a cost driver.
Against the background of the current debate about the financing of statutory health insurance companies, the Federal Association of Drug Manufacturers (BAH) is publishing the results of a study commissioned by IMS Health on the effects of discount contracts on patient health and the resulting follow-up costs (see www.bah -bonn.de).
The evaluation of the data from around three million patients in the therapeutic areas of simvastatin, antidepressants and human insulin shows that the drug changes resulting from discount contracts lead to an impairment of therapy adherence and a significantly increased number of therapy discontinuations. When treating with simvastatin alone, an additional 18,000 patients discontinue their therapy every year due to the change due to the discount agreement.
The discontinuation of therapy leads to an increase in hospital admissions, doctor visits and additional referrals to specialists. For an antidepressant patient who has changed medication due to a discount agreement, the risk of hospitalization increases by around 20% compared to patients who have not switched. The additional hospital admissions of antidepressant patients alone burden the statutory health insurance with additional costs of 20 million euros per year. In addition, there are economic costs, for example through lost productivity and lost work hours, which amount to 3.5 million euros per year.
The problem demonstrated by the study data is also confirmed by an accompanying physician survey conducted by IMS Health: The vast majority of physicians often perceive uncertainty, revenue errors and the resulting poorer effectiveness of the therapy among patients in connection with discount contracts. Against this background, the BAH continues to call on politicians to consistently abolish the discount agreements. However, the federal government plans to address the clearly recognized problem with a so-called additional cost regulation. Afterwards, patients should continue to have the opportunity to receive their usual preparation for an additional fee. However, from the BAH's point of view, the specific design of the new regulation is complicated and bureaucratic, so that patients will likely be deterred from choosing a non-discounted drug. The study results show that problems with discount contract drugs and corresponding changes are not isolated cases, but rather the rule. A legal regulation must therefore take into account not the individual case, but the general case and must not represent a financial or practical hurdle for patients. Under these conditions, the additional cost regulation must apply uniformly to all health insurance companies and be plannable, transparent and easy for the patient to implement.