Laurence Mainville, Hélène Veillette, Paul R Fortin
{"title":"Drug Insurance and Psoriasis Severity: A Retrospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Laurence Mainville, Hélène Veillette, Paul R Fortin","doi":"10.36469/001c.127820","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Prescription drug insurance in Canada is constituted of a patchwork of public and private insurance plans. The type of drug insurance may have a negative impact on access to treatment for patients covered by public plans compared with private plans. <b>Objectives:</b> In patients with psoriasis treated with advanced therapy in public vs private drug insurance groups, we compared: (1) psoriasis severity scores when an advanced therapy was prescribed, (2) psoriasis severity scores at follow-up, (3) treatment response, and (4) delay between prescription and first dose of advanced therapy. <b>Methods:</b> This unicentric, retrospective cohort study included patients suffering from psoriasis treated by advanced therapy, dermatologist-prescribed between September 2015 and August 2019, in a tertiary academic care center in Québec City, Canada. Data were collected from medical records. <b>Results:</b> Patients treated with an advanced therapy for psoriasis covered under the provincial public drug insurance plan (n = 78) and under a private drug plan (n = 93) did not differ regarding the studied outcomes. Patients' characteristics differed between groups. Patients in the public group were older (<i>P</i> < .0001), more socioeconomically deprived (<i>P</i> < .05), and more likely to benefit from compassion from the industry to access a prescribed medication free of charge (<i>P</i> < .0001) compared with patients from the privately insured group. <b>Discussion:</b> The high prevalence of compassionate programs from the industry in the public insurance group (42% vs 14%), and the high prevalence of psoriasis on difficult-to-treat areas (face, genitalia, and/or palmoplantar areas) in our cohort (85.4%) may mask differences in access to advanced therapy between the two groups. <b>Conclusions:</b> Prescribers of advanced therapy can be reassured, as we found no inequality in access or care based on patients' drug insurance coverage.</p>","PeriodicalId":16012,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research","volume":"12 1","pages":"51-57"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11807372/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36469/001c.127820","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Prescription drug insurance in Canada is constituted of a patchwork of public and private insurance plans. The type of drug insurance may have a negative impact on access to treatment for patients covered by public plans compared with private plans. Objectives: In patients with psoriasis treated with advanced therapy in public vs private drug insurance groups, we compared: (1) psoriasis severity scores when an advanced therapy was prescribed, (2) psoriasis severity scores at follow-up, (3) treatment response, and (4) delay between prescription and first dose of advanced therapy. Methods: This unicentric, retrospective cohort study included patients suffering from psoriasis treated by advanced therapy, dermatologist-prescribed between September 2015 and August 2019, in a tertiary academic care center in Québec City, Canada. Data were collected from medical records. Results: Patients treated with an advanced therapy for psoriasis covered under the provincial public drug insurance plan (n = 78) and under a private drug plan (n = 93) did not differ regarding the studied outcomes. Patients' characteristics differed between groups. Patients in the public group were older (P < .0001), more socioeconomically deprived (P < .05), and more likely to benefit from compassion from the industry to access a prescribed medication free of charge (P < .0001) compared with patients from the privately insured group. Discussion: The high prevalence of compassionate programs from the industry in the public insurance group (42% vs 14%), and the high prevalence of psoriasis on difficult-to-treat areas (face, genitalia, and/or palmoplantar areas) in our cohort (85.4%) may mask differences in access to advanced therapy between the two groups. Conclusions: Prescribers of advanced therapy can be reassured, as we found no inequality in access or care based on patients' drug insurance coverage.
背景:加拿大的处方药保险是由公共和私人保险计划拼凑而成。与私人计划相比,药物保险的类型可能对公共计划覆盖的患者获得治疗的机会产生负面影响。目的:在公共和私人药物保险组中接受先进治疗的银屑病患者中,我们比较:(1)开药时的银屑病严重程度评分,(2)随访时的银屑病严重程度评分,(3)治疗反应,(4)开药和首次给药之间的延迟。方法:这项单中心、回顾性队列研究纳入了2015年9月至2019年8月在加拿大曲海贝市的一家三级学术护理中心接受皮肤科医生处方的先进疗法治疗的牛皮癣患者。数据是从医疗记录中收集的。结果:在省公共药物保险计划(n = 78)和私人药物保险计划(n = 93)下接受高级治疗的银屑病患者在研究结果方面没有差异。两组患者的特征不同。公共保险组的患者年龄较大(P P P P讨论:公共保险组中来自行业的同情计划的高患病率(42%对14%),以及我们队列中银屑病在难以治疗的部位(面部,生殖器和/或掌跖区)的高患病率(85.4%)可能掩盖了两组之间获得高级治疗的差异。结论:先进治疗的处方者可以放心,因为我们发现基于患者药物保险覆盖范围的可及性或护理不平等。