This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on ISI (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related articles  • Similar articles in JAMA

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: The results of Dr Joyce and colleagues¹ do not seem surprising. Innovations in benefit packages, such as increased co-payments, are intended to have a direct fiscal effect by reducing insurers' costs. Furthermore, it is generally hoped that the increased out-of-pocket expenses would reduce the moral hazard problem created by insurance.

The most interesting finding was the lack of a relationship between physician office visit co-payment or managed care enrollment and prescription utilization. Given the unexpected nature of this finding, further detail on the regression analysis, including goodness of fit and model selection, is needed.

The authors conclude that the reduction in drug spending largely benefited health plans because members' cost-share percentage increased, a conclusion with which we disagree. For all the benefits studied, plan sponsors pass on much of the savings from use of the lower cost medication to the member through lower co-payments. Equally important, the . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLES

Financial Consequences of Drug Benefit Plans
Bartholomew E. Clark and Robert I. Garis
JAMA. 2003;289(4):423.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Financial Consequences of Drug Benefit Plans
John Hsu and Mary Reed
JAMA. 2003;289(4):423.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Financial Consequences of Drug Benefit Plans
Geoffrey F. Joyce and Dana P. Goldman
JAMA. 2003;289(4):424.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Employer Drug Benefit Plans and Spending on Prescription Drugs
Geoffrey F. Joyce, José J. Escarce, Matthew D. Solomon, and Dana P. Goldman
JAMA. 2002;288(14):1733-1739.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT