Increasing the amount of money that people pay for medicines may reduce insurers ' medicine expenditures and may reduce patients ' medicine use .
These types of interventions may lead to small decreases in or uncertain effects on healthcare utilisation .
Cap and co-payment polices may reduce the use of medicines and reduce medicine expenditures for health insurers .
However , they may also reduce the use of life-sustaining medicines or medicines that are important in treating chronic , including symptomatic , conditions and , consequently , could increase the use of healthcare services .
Fixed co-payment with a ceiling and tiered fixed co-payment may be less likely to reduce the use of essential medicines or to increase the use of healthcare services
BACKGROUND Growing expenditures on prescription medicines represent a major challenge to many health systems .
Cap and co-payment policies are intended as an incentive to deter unnecessary or marginal utilisation , and to reduce third-party payer expenditures by shifting parts of the financial burden from insurers to patients , thus increasing their financial responsibility for prescription medicines .
Direct patient payment policies include caps ( maximum numbers of prescriptions or medicines that are reimbursed ) , fixed co-payments ( patients pay a fixed amount per prescription or medicine ) , co-insurance ( patients pay a percentage of the price ) , ceilings ( patients pay the full price or part of the cost up to a ceiling , after which medicines are free or are available at reduced cost ) and tier co-payments ( differential co-payments usually assigned to generic and br and medicines ) .
This is the first up date of the original review .
OBJECTIVES To determine the effects of cap and co-payment ( cost-sharing ) policies on use of medicines , healthcare utilisation , health outcomes and costs ( expenditures ) .
The impact of cost sharing on emergency department use.
We studied the effect of  insurance coverage  on the use of emergency department services , using data from a national trial of cost sharing in health insurance . A total of 3973 persons below the age of 62 years were r and omly assigned to fee-for-service health insurance plans with coinsurance rates of 0 , 25 , 50 , or 95 per cent , subject to an income-related upper limit on out-of-pocket expenses . Persons with no cost sharing had emergency department expenses that were 42 per cent higher than those for persons on the 95 per cent plan ( P less than 0.01 ) and about 16 per cent higher than those for persons with smaller amounts of cost sharing . Without cost sharing , emergency department visits for less serious diagnoses ( e.g. , abrasions ) increased three times as much as did visits for more serious diagnoses ( e.g. , lacerations ) . After control for insurance , persons in the lower third of the income distribution had emergency department expenses that were 64 per cent higher than those in the upper third ( P less than 0.001 ) and received a greater proportion of their ambulatory care in the emergency department . We conclude that the absence of cost sharing results in significantly greater emergency department use than does insurance with cost sharing . A disproportionate amount of the increased use involves less serious conditions
Increasing the amount of money that people pay for medicines may reduce insurers ' medicine expenditures and may reduce patients ' medicine use .
These types of interventions may lead to small decreases in or uncertain effects on healthcare utilisation .
Cap and co-payment polices may reduce the use of medicines and reduce medicine expenditures for health insurers .
However , they may also reduce the use of life-sustaining medicines or medicines that are important in treating chronic , including symptomatic , conditions and , consequently , could increase the use of healthcare services .
Fixed co-payment with a ceiling and tiered fixed co-payment may be less likely to reduce the use of essential medicines or to increase the use of healthcare services
BACKGROUND Growing expenditures on prescription medicines represent a major challenge to many health systems .
Cap and co-payment policies are intended as an incentive to deter unnecessary or marginal utilisation , and to reduce third-party payer expenditures by shifting parts of the financial burden from insurers to patients , thus increasing their financial responsibility for prescription medicines .
Direct patient payment policies include caps ( maximum numbers of prescriptions or medicines that are reimbursed ) , fixed co-payments ( patients pay a fixed amount per prescription or medicine ) , co-insurance ( patients pay a percentage of the price ) , ceilings ( patients pay the full price or part of the cost up to a ceiling , after which medicines are free or are available at reduced cost ) and tier co-payments ( differential co-payments usually assigned to generic and br and medicines ) .
This is the first up date of the original review .
OBJECTIVES To determine the effects of cap and co-payment ( cost-sharing ) policies on use of medicines , healthcare utilisation , health outcomes and costs ( expenditures ) .