PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16892660

Would elimination of copayments for phototherapy decrease the cost of treating psoriasis with systemic biologics? A cost analysis.

Abstract

Phototherapy is a proven treatment method for the treatment of psoriasis, yet is typically underutilized because of the frequency of physician visits and copayments required for each session (typically 2-5 treatments/wk). Injectable biologic therapies are effective but costly. The objective of this study was to explore how changes in copayment strategies for phototherapy may affect biologic usage. Published estimates of the cost of phototherapy and biologic treatment were used to determine the costs of these treatments to patients and insurers. With an estimated patient copayment of $30 per office visit and a pharmacy copayment of $50 per month, the $1,800 annual patient expense for phototherapy far exceeds the estimated out-of-pocket expenses for etanercept, alefacept, and efalizumab ($840, $405, and $780, respectively). The estimated annual costs to MCOs ranged from $3,008 for phototherapy, to $20,300 for etanercept. Copayments for phototherapy may be shifting patients toward biologic treatment, which is more convenient but more costly to managed care plans.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jason F Simpson, Christopher B Yelverton, Rajesh Balkrishnan, Alan Fleischer, William Lide, Steven R Feldman. 2006. Would elimination of copayments for phototherapy decrease the cost of treating psoriasis with systemic biologics? A cost analysis.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16892660/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Vaccination versus "wait and treat": how to subsidize them?

In this paper we discuss the application of different co-payment rates to alternative medical strategies. Two such strategies are considered: a "vaccination strategy", in which patients apply preventive measures before knowing if they have the disease, and a "wait and treat" strategy, in which patients are treated later only if they contract the disease. We show the second approach should be more generously subsidized by the regulator. This is, at least at first sight, a surprising result.

Cost Sharing↗

Tracking health care costs: continued stability but at high rates in 2005.

Health care spending per privately insured person increased 7.4 percent in 2005, marking the third year that the cost trend hovered between 7 and 8 percent following double-digit trends in 2001 and 2002. Data for the first quarter of 2006 suggest continued stability. The trend for 2005 reflected increased growth in spending for hospital and physician care, offsetting a sharp drop in spending growth for prescription drugs. Hospital utilization trends accelerated, while price trends decelerated in 2005. In contrast to stable spending trends in 2005, premium trends continued to decline in 2006, likely reflecting the lagged effects of earlier years' slowing in cost trends and perhaps signaling a turn in the insurance underwriting cycle.

Cost Sharing↗