Search

Background: In Canada, many patients face substantial out-of-pocket costs for prescription medication, which may affect their ability to take their medications as prescribed. We sought to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the burden and predictors of cost-related nonadherence in Canada. Methods: Using pooled data from the 2015, 2016, 2018, 2019, and 2020 iterations of the Canadian Community Health Survey, we calculated weighted population estimates of the burden of cost-related nonadherence in the preceding 12 months and used logistic regression models to measure the association of 15 demographic, health, and health system predictors of cost-related nonadherence overall and stratified by sex. Results: We included 223 085 respondents. We found that 4.9% of respondents aged 12 years or older reported cost-related nonadherence. Those who self-identified as female, belonging to a racial or ethnic minority group, or bisexual, pansexual, or questioning were more likely to report cost-related nonadherence. Younger age, higher disease burden, poorer health, non-employer prescription drug coverage, and not living in the province of Quebec were associated with cost-related nonadherence. Interpretation: Our nationally representative findings reveal inequities that disproportionally affect marginalized people at the intersections of sex, race, age, and disability, and vary by province. This foundational understanding of the state of cost-related nonadherence may be used to inform potential expansion of public drug coverage eligibility, premiums, and cost-sharing policies that address financial barriers to medication adherence., Prescription medications are necessary for disease prevention and management, particularly for people with chronic conditions; however, they are not always taken as prescribed. The costs of long-term medication use may [...]

Background: Rates of gestational diabetes are reported to be increasing in many jurisdictions, but the reasons for this are poorly understood. We sought to evaluate the relative contribution of screening practices for gestational diabetes (including completion and methods of screening) and population characteristics to risk of gestational diabetes in British Columbia, Canada, from 2005 to 2019. Methods: We used a population-based cohort from a provincial registry of perinatal data, linked to laboratory billing records. We used data on screening completion, screening method (1-step 75-g glucose test or 2-step approach of 50-g glucose screening test, followed by a diagnostic test for patients who screen positive) and demographic risk factors. We modelled predicted annual risk for gestational diabetes, sequentially adjusted for screening completion, screening method and risk factors. Results: We included 551 457 pregnancies in the study cohort. The incidence of gestational diabetes more than doubled over the study period, from 7.2% in 2005 to 14.7% in 2019. Screening completion increased from 87.2% in 2005 to 95.5% in 2019. Use of 1-step screening methods increased from 0.0% in 2005 to 39.5% in 2019 among those who were screened. Unadjusted models estimated a 2.04 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.94-2.13) increased risk of gestational diabetes in 2019 (v. 2005). This increase was 1.89 (95% CI 1.81-1.98) after accounting for the rise in screening completion and 1.34 (95% CI 1.28-1.40) after accounting for changes in screening methods. Further accounting for demographic risk factors (e.g., age, body mass index, prenatal care) had a small impact (increase of 1.25, 95% CI 1.19-1.31). Interpretation: Most of the observed increase in the incidence of gestational diabetes was attributable to changes in screening practices (primarily changes in screening methods) rather than changing population factors. Our findings highlight the importance of understanding variation in screening practices when monitoring incidence rates for gestational diabetes., Rates of gestational diabetes are reported to be increasing worldwide. (1) In Canada, the rate of gestational diabetes increased from 4.0% of deliveries in 2004 to 7.0% in 2014. (2) [...]

Les agents biologiques representent un segment important des depenses en medicaments au Canada : alors qu'ils ne constituaient que 1,5% du volume des ordonnances, les agents biologiques ont genere 27,3% [...]

Biologics represent a large segment of drug spending in Canada: although they constituted just 1.5% of prescription volumes, biologics accounted for 27.3% of expenditures in 2018. (1) As of 2018, [...]

BACKGROUND: In all Canadian provinces, physicians can decide to either bill the provincial public system (opt in) or work privately and bill patients directly (opt out). We hypothesized that 2 policy events were associated with an increase in physicians opting out in Quebec. METHODS: The 2 policy events of interest were the 2005 Supreme Court of Canada ruling on Chaoulli v. Quebec and a regulatory clampdown forbidding double billing that was implemented by Quebec's government in 2017. We used interrupted time-series analyses of the Quebec government's yearly list of physicians who chose to opt out from 1994 to 2019 to analyze the relation between these events and physician billing status. RESULTS: The number of family physicians who opted out increased from 9 in 1994 to 347 in 2019. Opting out increased after the Chaoulli ruling, and our analysis suggested that between 2005 and 2019, 284 more family physicians opted out than if pre-Chaoulli trends had continued. The number of specialist physicians who opted out rose from 23 in 1994 to 150 in 2019. Our analysis suggested that an additional 69 specialist physicians opted out after the 2017 clampdown on double billing than previous trends would have predicted. INTERPRETATION: We found that the number of physicians who opted out increased in Quebec, and increases after 2 policy actions suggest an association with these policy interventions. Opting out decisions are likely important inputs into decision-making by physicians, which, in turn may influence the provision of publicly funded health care., In all Canadian provinces, most physicians work as part of a private business. Whether they are solo practitioners or part of larger group practices, physicians can bill the provincial public [...]

BACKGROUND: Brand discount cards have become a popular way for patients to reduce out-of-pocket spending on drugs; however, controversy exists over their potential to increase insurers' costs. We estimated the impact of brand discount cards on Canadian drug expenditures. METHODS: Using national claims-level pharmacy adjudication data, we performed a retrospective comparison of prescriptions filled using a brand discount card matched to equivalent generic prescriptions between September 2014 and September 2017. We investigated the impact on expenditures for 3 groups of prescriptions: those paid only through private insurance, those paid only through public insurance and those paid only out of pocket. RESULTS: We studied 2.82 million prescriptions for 89 different medications for which brand discount cards were used. Use of discount cards resulted in 46% higher private insurance expenditures than comparable generic prescriptions (+$23.09 per prescription, 95% confidence interval [CI] $22.97 to $23.21). Public insurance expenditures were only slightly higher with cards: an increase of 1.3% or $0.37 per prescription (95% CI $0.33 to $0.41). Finally, out-of-pocket transactions using a card resulted in mean patient savings of 7% or $3.49 per prescription (95% CI -$3.55 to -$3.43). The impact varied widely among medicines across all 3 analyses. INTERPRETATION: The use of brand discount cards increased costs to private insurers, had little impact on public insurers and resulted in mixed impacts for patients. These effects likely resulted from private insurers reimbursing brand drug prices even when generics were available and from discount cards being adjudicated after claims were sent to other insurers in most cases. Patients and their clinicians should recognize that discount cards have mixed impacts on out-of-pocket costs., Over the past decade, many popular drugs have lost their patent protection and have become available as generics. (1) As the prices of brand name medications are typically greater than [...]

Byline: Rajesh. Fogla, Prateek. Gujar, Michael. Law The COVID-19 pandemic has brought a radical change in safety measures in outpatient clinics. The use of face masks by patients and healthcare [...]

BACKGROUND: Knowing when physicians retire and how they practise in the pre-retirement years is important information for health human resource planning. We identified patterns of retirement for physicians in British Columbia and the determinants of when and how physicians retire. METHODS: For this population-based retrospective cohort study, we used administrative data to examine activity levels and to identify retirements among BC's practising physicians. We included all physicians who were at least 50 years of age as of March 2006 and who had received payments for clinical services in at least 1 year between 2005/06 and 2011/12. We defined retirement as a permanent drop in monthly payments to less than $1667/month ($20000/yr). We examined the patterns and timing of retirement by age, sex, specialty and location using linear and logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of the 4572 physicians who met the inclusion criteria, 1717 (37.6%) retired during the study period. The average age at retirement was 65.1 (standard deviation 7.8) years. Controlling for other demographic and practice characteristics, we found that women and physicians working in rural areas retired earlier, by 4.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] -4.9 to -3.2) years and 2.3 (95% CI -3.4 to -1.1) years, respectively. We found no difference in retirement age by specialty. We identified 4 patterns of pre-retirement activity: slow decline, rapid decline, maintenance and increasing activity. About 40% of physicians (440/1107) reduced their activity levels by at least 10% in the 3 years preceding retirement. INTERPRETATION: During the study period, physicians in BC--particularly women and those in rural areas--retired earlier than indicated by licensure and survey data. Many physicians reduced their practice activity in the pre-retirement years. These trends indicate that forecasts relying on licensure 'head counts' are likely overestimating current and future physician supply., Physician supply is a perennial preoccupation in Canada. Effective and accurate physician workforce planning requires data on how many physicians are being trained and in what specialties, combined with information [...]

BACKGROUND: Income-based deductibles are present in several provincial public drug plans in Canada and have been the subject of extensive debate. We studied the impact of such deductibles in British Columbia's Fair PharmaCare plan on drug and health care utilization among older adults. METHODS: We used a quasi-experimental regression discontinuity design to compare the impact of deductibles in BC's PharmaCare plan between older community-dwelling adults registered for the plan who were born in 1928 through 1939 (no deductible) and those born in 1940 through 1951 (deductible equivalent to 2% of household income). We used 1.2 million person-years of data between 2003 and 2015 to study public drug plan expenditures, overall drug use, and physician and hospital resource utilization in these 2 groups. RESULTS: The income-based deductible led to a 28.6% decrease in person-years in which public drug plan benefits were received (95% confidence interval [CI] -29.7% to -27.5%) and to a reduction in the per capita extent of annual benefits by $205.59 (95% CI -$247.81 to -$163.37). Despite this difference in public subsidy, we found no difference in the number of drugs received or in total drug spending once privately paid amounts were accounted for (p = 0.4 and 0.8, respectively). Further, we found only small or nonexistent changes in health care resource utilization at the 1939 threshold. INTERPRETATION: A modest income-based deductible had a considerable impact on the extent of public subsidy for prescription drugs. However, it had only a trivial impact on overall access to medicines and use of other health services. Unlike copayments, modest income-based deductibles may safely reduce public spending on drugs for some population groups., Although every Canadian province provides universal coverage for hospital and physician services, drug coverage varies widely. (1) Several provinces, including British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Newfoundland and Labrador, have universal [...]

Background: In 2007, the province of British Columbia implemented incentive payments to primary care physicians for the provision of comprehensive, continuous, guideline-informed care for patients with 2 or more chronic conditions. We examined the impact of this program on primary care access and continuity, rates of hospital admission and costs. Methods: We analyzed all BC patients who qualified for the incentive based on their diagnostic profile. We tracked primary care contacts and continuity, hospital admissions (total, via the emergency department and for targeted conditions), and cost of physician services, hospital care and pharmaceuticals, for 24 months before and 24 months after the intervention. Results: Of 155 754 eligible patients, 63.7% had at least 1 incentive payment billed. Incentive payments had no impact on primary care contacts (change in contacts per patient per month: 0.016, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.047 to 0.078) or continuity of care (mean monthly change: 0.012, 95% CI-0.001 to 0.024) and were associated with increased total rates of hospital admission (change in hospital admissions per 1000 patients per month: 1.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.89), relative to preintervention trends. Annual costs per patient did not decline (mean change: $455.81, 95% CI -$2.44 to $914.08). Interpretation: British Columbia's $240-million investment in this program improved compensation for physicians doing the important work of caring for complex patients, but did not appear to improve primary care access or continuity, or constrain resource use elsewhere in the health care system. Policymakers should consider other strategies to improve care for this patient population., Patients with multiple chronic conditions drive growing demand for health care, (1,2) but their needs may be poorly met by systems oriented toward acute care and management of single diseases. [...]

Background: With the exception of Canada, all countries with universal health insurance systems provide universal coverage of prescription drugs. Progress toward universal public drug coverage in Canada has been slow, in part because of concerns about the potential costs. We sought to estimate the cost of implementing universal public coverage of prescription drugs in Canada. Methods: We used published data on prescribing patterns and costs by drug type, as well as source of funding (i.e., private drug plans, public drug plans and out-of-pocket expenses), in each province to estimate the cost of universal public coverage of prescription drugs from the perspectives of government, private payers and society as a whole. We estimated the cost of universal public drug coverage based on its anticipated effects on the volume of prescriptions filled, products selected and prices paid. We selected these parameters based on current policies and practices seen either in a Canadian province or in an international comparator. Results: Universal public drug coverage would reduce total spending on prescription drugs in Canada by $7.3 billion (worst-case scenario $4.2 billion, best-case scenario $9.4 billion). The private sector would save $8.2 billion (worst-case scenario $6.6 billion, best-case scenario $9.6 billion), whereas costs to government would increase by about $1.0 billion (worst-case scenario $5.4 billion net increase, best-case scenario $2.9 billion net savings). Most of the projected increase in government costs would arise from a small number of drug classes. Interpretation: The long-term barrier to the implementation of universal pharmacare owing to its perceived costs appears to be unjustified. Universal public drug coverage would likely yield substantial savings to the private sector with comparatively little increase in costs to government., Universal health care coverage encourages access to necessary care and protects patients from financial hardship, and the World Health Organization has declared that governments are obligated to promote universal coverage [...]

Although most health care in Canada is paid for publicly, private health insurance plays a major supporting role, particularly for prescription drugs, dental services and eye care. (1) Expenditures from [...]

The price of generic drugs has generated much debate over the past several years. The latest development came at a meeting of all Canadian premiers, who called for a national [...]

Background: Many patients do not adhere to treatment because they cannot afford their prescription medications, putting them at increased risk of adverse health outcomes. We determined the prevalence of cost-related nonadherence and investigated its associated characteristics, including whether a person has drug insurance. Methods: Using data from the 2007 Canada Community Health Survey, we analyzed the responses of 5732 people who answered questions about cost-related nonadherence to treatment. We determined the national prevalence of cost-related nonadherence and used logistic regression to evaluate the association between cost-related nonadherence and a series of demographic and socioeconomic variables, including province of residence, age, sex, household income, health status and having drug insurance. Results: Cost-related nonadherence was reported by 9.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.5%-10.6%) of Canadians who had received a prescription in the past year. In our adjusted model, we found that people in poor health (odds ratio [OR] 2.64, 95% CI 1.77-3.94), those with lower income (OR 3.29, 95% CI 2.03-5.33), those without drug insurance (OR 4.52, 95% CI 3.29-6.20) and those who live in British Columbia (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.49-4.42) were more likely to report cost-related nonadherence. Predicted rates of cost-related nonadherence ranged from 3.6% (95% CI 2.4-4.5) among people with insurance and high household incomes to 35.6% (95% CI 26.1%-44.9%) among people with no insurance and low household incomes. Interpretation: About 1 in 10 Canadians who receive a prescription report cost-related nonadherence. The variability in insurance coverage for prescription medications appears to be a key reason behind this phenomenon., Over half of the total spending on prescription drugs in Canada is for medications intended for long-term use, such as drugs to manage cardiovascular risk factors. (1,2) Suboptimal adherence to [...]

In response to 'No more dithering on e-health: let's keep patients safe instead,' (1) Dr. Majumdar argues that the jury is still out on electronic health records (EHRs). (2) Based [...]

Previously published at www.cmaj.ca Canada has invested $1.6 billion--and counting--in federal funds to develop integrated electronic health records that will, among other things, help provide seamless and timely care to [...]