按种族、民族、付款人、健康状况和美国各州划分的处方药使用和支出。

IF 11.3 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Maitreyi Sahu, Tyler D Wagner, Azalea Thomson, Meera Beauchamp, Jonathan D Campbell, Sawyer Crosby, Drew DeJarnatt, Haley Lescinsky, Rayan K Salih, Kayla Taylor, Maxwell Weil, Laura Dwyer-Lindgren, Annie Haakenstad, John W Scott, Andy Stergachis, Utibe R Essien, Joseph L Dieleman
{"title":"按种族、民族、付款人、健康状况和美国各州划分的处方药使用和支出。","authors":"Maitreyi Sahu, Tyler D Wagner, Azalea Thomson, Meera Beauchamp, Jonathan D Campbell, Sawyer Crosby, Drew DeJarnatt, Haley Lescinsky, Rayan K Salih, Kayla Taylor, Maxwell Weil, Laura Dwyer-Lindgren, Annie Haakenstad, John W Scott, Andy Stergachis, Utibe R Essien, Joseph L Dieleman","doi":"10.1001/jamahealthforum.2025.2329","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Achieving equitable access to medicines requires understanding of how pharmaceutical use and spending vary by race and ethnicity across the US.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To quantify variation in prescription drug utilization and spending per capita and per prevalent case by race, ethnicity, health condition, payer, and US state.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, the US Disease Expenditure project was extended to incorporate disaggregation by race and ethnicity for state-level retail prescription drug utilization and spending-in addition to 143 health conditions, 38 age and sex groups, and 4 payers (Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, and out of pocket)-across the 2019 population in all 50 states and Washington, DC. Data were analyzed from October 2023 to April 2025.</p><p><strong>Exposure: </strong>Four mutually exclusive racial and ethnic groups (Asian or Pacific Islander, Black, Hispanic, and White).</p><p><strong>Main outcome and measures: </strong>Outcomes include prescriptions dispensed and spending for retail pharmaceuticals. Estimates were standardized by population size, population age, and-where data permitted-by disease burden (52 conditions). Das Gupta decomposition was used to estimate the relative contribution of 3 factors (disease prevalence, prescriptions per prevalent case, and spending per prescription) on observed disparities in age-standardized per capita pharmaceutical spending.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 2019, age-standardized pharmaceutical utilization and spending per person with a given disease was substantially lower than the all-population mean for Black populations, close to the mean for Hispanic populations, and often higher than the mean for Asian or Pacific Islander and White populations. These trends-particularly those for the Black population-were generally consistent across 52 health conditions but varied widely across payers and US states. The decomposition analysis for these 52 conditions showed that differences in per capita pharmaceutical spending across race and ethnicity groups were primarily explained by disease prevalence for Black populations (associated with increased per capita spending) and by utilization rates per prevalent case for Hispanic populations (also associated with increased spending). In contrast, differences in drug price or product type (spending per prescription) contributed less to observed spending disparities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, racial and ethnic disparities in medication use persisted, most notably the underutilization of medicines relative to disease burden among Black populations. These patterns varied by state, highlighting the need for local- and condition-specific approaches to advancing pharmacoequity in the US.</p>","PeriodicalId":53180,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Health Forum","volume":"6 8","pages":"e252329"},"PeriodicalIF":11.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12334964/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prescription Drug Utilization and Spending by Race, Ethnicity, Payer, Health Condition, and US State.\",\"authors\":\"Maitreyi Sahu, Tyler D Wagner, Azalea Thomson, Meera Beauchamp, Jonathan D Campbell, Sawyer Crosby, Drew DeJarnatt, Haley Lescinsky, Rayan K Salih, Kayla Taylor, Maxwell Weil, Laura Dwyer-Lindgren, Annie Haakenstad, John W Scott, Andy Stergachis, Utibe R Essien, Joseph L Dieleman\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jamahealthforum.2025.2329\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Achieving equitable access to medicines requires understanding of how pharmaceutical use and spending vary by race and ethnicity across the US.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To quantify variation in prescription drug utilization and spending per capita and per prevalent case by race, ethnicity, health condition, payer, and US state.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, the US Disease Expenditure project was extended to incorporate disaggregation by race and ethnicity for state-level retail prescription drug utilization and spending-in addition to 143 health conditions, 38 age and sex groups, and 4 payers (Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, and out of pocket)-across the 2019 population in all 50 states and Washington, DC. Data were analyzed from October 2023 to April 2025.</p><p><strong>Exposure: </strong>Four mutually exclusive racial and ethnic groups (Asian or Pacific Islander, Black, Hispanic, and White).</p><p><strong>Main outcome and measures: </strong>Outcomes include prescriptions dispensed and spending for retail pharmaceuticals. Estimates were standardized by population size, population age, and-where data permitted-by disease burden (52 conditions). Das Gupta decomposition was used to estimate the relative contribution of 3 factors (disease prevalence, prescriptions per prevalent case, and spending per prescription) on observed disparities in age-standardized per capita pharmaceutical spending.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 2019, age-standardized pharmaceutical utilization and spending per person with a given disease was substantially lower than the all-population mean for Black populations, close to the mean for Hispanic populations, and often higher than the mean for Asian or Pacific Islander and White populations. These trends-particularly those for the Black population-were generally consistent across 52 health conditions but varied widely across payers and US states. The decomposition analysis for these 52 conditions showed that differences in per capita pharmaceutical spending across race and ethnicity groups were primarily explained by disease prevalence for Black populations (associated with increased per capita spending) and by utilization rates per prevalent case for Hispanic populations (also associated with increased spending). In contrast, differences in drug price or product type (spending per prescription) contributed less to observed spending disparities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, racial and ethnic disparities in medication use persisted, most notably the underutilization of medicines relative to disease burden among Black populations. These patterns varied by state, highlighting the need for local- and condition-specific approaches to advancing pharmacoequity in the US.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53180,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMA Health Forum\",\"volume\":\"6 8\",\"pages\":\"e252329\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12334964/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMA Health Forum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2025.2329\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Health Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2025.2329","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性:实现药物的公平获取需要了解美国各地药物使用和支出的种族差异。目的:量化不同种族、民族、健康状况、付款人和美国各州的人均和流行病例处方药使用和支出的变化。设计、环境和参与者:在这项横断面研究中,美国疾病支出项目被扩展到纳入按种族和民族分类的州一级零售处方药使用和支出——除了143种健康状况、38个年龄和性别群体、4个支付者(医疗保险、医疗补助、私人保险和自付)——在所有50个州和华盛顿特区的2019年人口中。数据分析时间为2023年10月至2025年4月。暴露:四个相互排斥的种族和民族群体(亚洲或太平洋岛民、黑人、西班牙裔和白人)。主要结果和措施:结果包括处方分配和零售药品支出。根据人口规模、人口年龄以及数据允许的疾病负担(52种情况)对估计值进行标准化。使用Das Gupta分解来估计3个因素(患病率、每个流行病例的处方和每个处方的支出)对观察到的年龄标准化人均药品支出差异的相对贡献。结果:2019年,患有特定疾病的年龄标准化药物使用率和人均支出大大低于黑人人口的全部人口平均值,接近西班牙裔人口的平均值,往往高于亚洲或太平洋岛民和白人人口的平均值。这些趋势——尤其是黑人人群的趋势——在52种健康状况中总体上是一致的,但在不同的付款人和美国各州之间差异很大。对这52种情况的分解分析表明,不同种族和族裔群体的人均药品支出差异主要由黑人人口的患病率(与人均支出增加有关)和西班牙裔人口的每个流行病例的使用率(也与支出增加有关)来解释。相比之下,药品价格或产品类型(每个处方的支出)的差异对观察到的支出差异贡献较小。结论和相关性:在这项横断面研究中,药物使用方面的种族和民族差异持续存在,最明显的是与黑人人群的疾病负担相关的药物利用不足。这些模式因州而异,突出表明需要采取因地制宜的方法来促进美国的药品公平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prescription Drug Utilization and Spending by Race, Ethnicity, Payer, Health Condition, and US State.

Importance: Achieving equitable access to medicines requires understanding of how pharmaceutical use and spending vary by race and ethnicity across the US.

Objective: To quantify variation in prescription drug utilization and spending per capita and per prevalent case by race, ethnicity, health condition, payer, and US state.

Design, setting, and participants: In this cross-sectional study, the US Disease Expenditure project was extended to incorporate disaggregation by race and ethnicity for state-level retail prescription drug utilization and spending-in addition to 143 health conditions, 38 age and sex groups, and 4 payers (Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, and out of pocket)-across the 2019 population in all 50 states and Washington, DC. Data were analyzed from October 2023 to April 2025.

Exposure: Four mutually exclusive racial and ethnic groups (Asian or Pacific Islander, Black, Hispanic, and White).

Main outcome and measures: Outcomes include prescriptions dispensed and spending for retail pharmaceuticals. Estimates were standardized by population size, population age, and-where data permitted-by disease burden (52 conditions). Das Gupta decomposition was used to estimate the relative contribution of 3 factors (disease prevalence, prescriptions per prevalent case, and spending per prescription) on observed disparities in age-standardized per capita pharmaceutical spending.

Results: In 2019, age-standardized pharmaceutical utilization and spending per person with a given disease was substantially lower than the all-population mean for Black populations, close to the mean for Hispanic populations, and often higher than the mean for Asian or Pacific Islander and White populations. These trends-particularly those for the Black population-were generally consistent across 52 health conditions but varied widely across payers and US states. The decomposition analysis for these 52 conditions showed that differences in per capita pharmaceutical spending across race and ethnicity groups were primarily explained by disease prevalence for Black populations (associated with increased per capita spending) and by utilization rates per prevalent case for Hispanic populations (also associated with increased spending). In contrast, differences in drug price or product type (spending per prescription) contributed less to observed spending disparities.

Conclusions and relevance: In this cross-sectional study, racial and ethnic disparities in medication use persisted, most notably the underutilization of medicines relative to disease burden among Black populations. These patterns varied by state, highlighting the need for local- and condition-specific approaches to advancing pharmacoequity in the US.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
7.80%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: JAMA Health Forum is an international, peer-reviewed, online, open access journal that addresses health policy and strategies affecting medicine, health, and health care. The journal publishes original research, evidence-based reports, and opinion about national and global health policy. It covers innovative approaches to health care delivery and health care economics, access, quality, safety, equity, and reform. In addition to publishing articles, JAMA Health Forum also features commentary from health policy leaders on the JAMA Forum. It covers news briefs on major reports released by government agencies, foundations, health policy think tanks, and other policy-focused organizations. JAMA Health Forum is a member of the JAMA Network, which is a consortium of peer-reviewed, general medical and specialty publications. The journal presents curated health policy content from across the JAMA Network, including journals such as JAMA and JAMA Internal Medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信