Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1993 Aug;4(2):92-103.
doi: 10.2165/00019053-199304020-00004.

Economic impact of cost-containment strategies in third party programmes in the US (part I)

Affiliations

Economic impact of cost-containment strategies in third party programmes in the US (part I)

C E Reeder et al. Pharmacoeconomics. 1993 Aug.

Abstract

The rising cost of healthcare has strained the resources of governments, private third parties and individuals with responsibility to pay for it. Various strategies have been used in an attempt to control costs. This article examines the economic impact of 4 such strategies: (a) cost sharing; (b) prescription limits; (c) rebates; and (d) cost limits. Cost sharing has been successful at reducing utilisation of prescription drugs, although the effects have not been uniform across therapeutic categories. However, the long term effect on cost and utilisation of other medical services, and the impact on overall health status, remain largely unknown. Some evidence suggests that utilisation of other services may increase. The available data regarding drug rebate programmes have been descriptive in nature. However, the designs employed in this research do not establish a direct causal relationship between rebate programmes and changes in Medicaid drug expenditure. Furthermore, still unknown is the degree of cost shifting and the effect of the rebate programme on other large public and private drug purchasers. The Maximum Allowable Cost programme led to direct savings in drug costs, but the size of these savings was variable and uncertain because of administrative costs of the programme. The Estimated Acquisition Cost programme has not resulted in significant savings.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Inquiry. 1985 Winter;22(4):396-403 - PubMed
    1. J Pharm Mark Manage. 1988;3(2):37-46 - PubMed
    1. Soc Sci Med. 1985;21(10):1063-9 - PubMed
    1. Pharmacoeconomics. 1992 Sep;2(3):219-37 - PubMed
    1. Pharmacoeconomics. 1992 Mar;1(3):217-9 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources