Table 4.
Study | Description of Intervention | Effect on Adherencea |
---|---|---|
Chernew et al,59 2008 |
Reduction of copayment rates for ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and beta- blockers |
• MPR: ○ +2.6% points for ACE inhibi- tors/ARBs (P<.001) ○ +3.0% points for beta-blockers (P<.001) |
Maciejewski et al,60 2010 |
Reduction of copayment rates | • MPR: ○ +3.4% for diuretics (P<.001) ○ 13.1% for ACE inhibitors (P<.001) ○ +2.7% for beta-blockers (P<.001) ○ +1.3% for calcium-channel blockers (P<.05) |
Zhang et al,61 2010 |
Introduction of Medicare Part D coverage ($8/$20 copayments for generic/brand medications) to 3 intervention groups with following baseline conditions:
[Comparison group had benefits similar to Part D coverage at baseline.] |
• MPR: ○ +13.5% points for group with no coverage at baseline (95% CI 11.5–15.5) ○ +2.6% points for group with low cap at baseline (95% CI 1.2–4.1) ○ +2.5% points for group with high cap at baseline (95% CI 1.7–3.2) |
Li et al,62 2012 | Medicare Part D coverage gap, 3 intervention groups with following baseline conditions:
[Comparison group eligible for low- income subsidies during the gap.] |
• PDC <0.8 (low adherence) ○ OR = 1.60 (95% CI 1.50–1.71) for group with no coverage at baseline ○ OR = 1.50 (95% CI 1.30–1.73) for group with generic-only coverage at baseline ○ OR = 1.00 (95% CI 0.88–1.15) for group with brand and generic coverage at baseline |
Volpp et al,63 2014 |
Financial incentive equal to copayments for all antihypertensive medications, which effectively eliminated copayments |
• MPR: ○ No effect (P = .74) |
Abbreviations: ACE, angiotensin-converting enzyme; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; BP, blood pressure; CI, confidence interval; MPR, medication possession ratio; OR, odds ratio; PDC, proportion of days covered.
Only Volpp et al assessed the effect of the intervention on BP outcomes; no effect was detected.