Estimating the scope for savings in referrals and drug prescription costs in the general Practice units of a UK primary care trust

This paper explores the potential for cost savings in the general Practice units of a Primary Care Trust (PCT) in the UK. We have used Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to identify benchmark Practices, which offer the lowest aggregate referral and drugs costs controlling for the number, age, gender, and deprivation level of the patients registered with each Practice. For the remaining, non-benchmark Practices, estimates of the potential for savings on referral and drug costs were obtained. Such savings could be delivered through a combination of the following actions: (i) reducing the levels of referrals and prescriptions without affecting their mix (£15.74 m savings were identified, representing 6.4% of total expenditure); (ii) switching between inpatient and outpatient referrals and/or drug treatment to exploit differences in their unit costs (£10.61 m savings were identified, representing 4.3% of total expenditure); (iii) seeking a different profile of referral and drug unit costs (£11.81 m savings were identified, representing 4.8% of total expenditure). © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Dispensing activity in a community pharmacy-based repeat dispensing pilot project

Objective: To measure changes in dispensing activity in a UK repeat dispensing pilot study and to estimate any associated cost savings. Method: Patients were provided with two successive three-monthly repeat prescriptions containing all of the items on their "repeat medicines list" and valid at a study pharmacy. Pharmacists consulted with patients at the time of supply and completed a patient-monitoring form. Prescriptions with pricing data were returned by the UK Prescription Pricing Authority. These data were used to calculate dispensing activity, the cost of dispensed items and an estimate of cost savings on non-dispensed items. A retrospective identification of items prescribed during the six months prior to the project was used to provide a comparison with those dispensed during the project and thus a more realistic estimate of changes. Setting: 350 patients from two medical practices in a large English City, with inner city and suburban locations, and served by seven pharmacies. Key findings: There were methodological challenges in establishing a robust framework for calculating changes. Based on all of the items that patients could have obtained from their repeat list, 23.8% were not dispensed during the intervention period. A correction was then made to allow for a comparison with usage in the six months prior to the study. Based on the corrected data, there was an estimated 11.3% savings in drug costs compared with the pre-intervention period. There was a marked difference in changes between the two practices, the pharmacies and individual patients. The capitation-based remuneration method was acceptable to all but one of the community pharmacists. Conclusion: The repeat dispensing system reduced dispensing volume in comparison with the control period. A repeat dispensing system with a focus on patients' needs and their use of medicines might be cost neutral.

A model to assess the cost effectiveness of statins in achieving the UK National Service Framework target cholesterol levels

Background: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a public health priority in the UK. The National Service Framework (NSF) has set standards for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of CHD, which include the use of cholesterol-lowering agents aimed at achieving targets of blood total cholesterol (TC) < 5.0 mmol/L and low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) < 3.0 mmol/L. In order to achieve these targets cost effectively, prescribers need to make an informed choice from the range of statins available. Aim: To estimate the average and relative cost effectiveness of atorvastatin, fluvastatin, pravastatin and simvastatin in achieving the NSF LDL-C and TC targets. Design: Model-based economic evaluation. Methods: An economic model was constructed to estimate the number of patients achieving the NSF targets for LDL-C and TC at each dose of statin, and to calculate the average drug cost and incremental drug cost per patient achieving the target levels. The population baseline LDL-C and TC, and drug efficacy and drug costs were taken from previously published data. Estimates of the distribution of patients receiving each dose of statin were derived from the UK national DIN-LINK database. Results: The estimated annual drug cost per 1000 patients treated with atorvastatin was £289 000, with simvastatin £315 000, with pravastatin £333 000 and with fluvastatin £167 000. The percentages of patients achieving target are 74.4%, 46.4%, 28.4% and 13.2% for atorvastatin, simvastatin, pravastatin and fluvastatin, respectively. Incremental drug cost per extra patient treated to LDL-C and TC targets compared with fluvastafin were £198 and £226 for atorvastatin, £443 and £567 for simvastatin and £1089 and £2298 for pravastatin, using 2002 drug costs. Conclusions: As a result of its superior efficacy, atorvastatin generates a favourable cost-effectiveness profile as measured by drug cost per patient treated to LDL-C and TC targets. For a given drug budget, more patients would achieve NSF LDL-C and TC targets with atorvastatin than with any of the other statins examined.