Comparison of peptic-ulcer drug use and expenditures before and after the implementation of a government policy to separate prescribing and dispensing practices in South Korea

doi:10.1016/S0149-2918(03)80098-X

Clinical Therapeutics

Volume 25, Issue 2, February 2003, Pages 578-592

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2918(03)80098-X Get rights and content

Abstract

The South Korean government instituted a new policy, the separation or prescribing and dispensing (SPD) of medications, on July 1, 2000, to provide greater differentiation between the roles of physicians and pharmacists than had historically existed in South Korea. It was hoped that this policy would promote the rational use of medications and reduce medication expenditures, which accounted for ∼30% of the total health care expenditures before the implementation of SPD.

The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of SPD on drug market share and expenditures for branded and generic medications by comparing the use of and expenditures for peptic-ulcer medications before and after the implementation of SPD.

Data on expenditures and quantity of use in January and December 2000 (in terms of defined daily dose [DDD]) of peptic-ulcer medications were obtained from the Korean National Health Insurance claims database. These data were derived using a 3-stage probability sample of prescription data from medical clinics in South Korea.

The number of prescription drug claims for peptic-ulcer drugs increased by 13.9% after the introduction of SPD. Medication expenditures increased by 98.4% for peptic-ulcer medications. The use of more expensive drugs and branded products, even when generic products were available, accounted for most of this increase. In particular, the use of branded ranitidine 150 mg (measured by DDD) increased from 6.3% of the market share before SPD to 27.6% of the market share after the implementation of SPD.

The implementation of SPD increased both prescription drug claims and expenditures for peptic-ulcer medications. A principal factor contributing to the increase in expenditures was the use of branded medications.

References (29)

P.H. Green et al.
Increasing incidence and excellent survival of patients with early gastric cancer: Experience in a United States medical center
Am J Med
(1988)
J.K. Jo et al.
Development of Drug Supply System and Standard Pharmacy Model under the Separation of Prescribing and Dispensing Practice
(2000)
B.M. Yang et al.
Economic Evaluation of the Separation of Prescribing and Dispensing
(1998)
W.J. Jung et al.
A Study on the Prescribing Fee for Doctors and Dispensing Fee for Pharmacists for the Separation of Prescribing and Dispensing Practice
(1998)
E.K. Lee et al.
Drug Use Evaluation
(2000)
Advance Data from Vital and Health Statistics
OECD Health Data
(2002)
1997 Trend Analysis of Health Insurance Medical Claims
(1997)
S. Jacobzone
Pharmaceutical Policies in OECD Countries: Reconciling Social and Industrial Goals
(2001)

Review of the Korean Health Care System

(2002)

S.I. Park et al.

Study on the Classification of Prescription and Non-prescription Drugs

(2000)

List of Drugs and the Reimbursement Price for National Health Insurance

(2001)

Cited by (15)

To whom do bureaucrats need to respond? Two faces of civil society in health policy
2014, Social Science and Medicine
Citation Excerpt :
Regardless of which figures are used, the increased cost exceeded the government's predictions at the beginning of SDP reform. In addition, Lee and Malone (2003) compared the medication expenditures for peptic ulcer drugs in December 2000 to those in January 2000. They found that the expenditure increased by 98.4% after introducing SDP reform.
The South Korean government implemented a law that separates the dispensing and prescribing (SDP) of drugs in July 2000. It was one of the most controversial issues in the Korean healthcare delivery system. Drawing on the conflict-cycle view and stakeholder analysis, which was used to examine how multiple stakeholders influenced this policymaking process, this study examines 1) the role of Korean civil society (i.e., civic and special interest groups) in SDP reform and 2) why SDP reform led to unintended consequences. We argue that bureaucrats in the Ministry of Health and Welfare (MoHW) should have played a central role in accommodating the public interest. Because they failed to do so, civic groups assumed major mediating and moderating roles. Due to the civic groups' lack of technical knowledge and professional experience, however, they played a limited role. In finalizing the proposal, therefore, bureaucrats were captured by strong interest groups, leading to unintended consequences, such as the increased use of non-covered services and higher healthcare expenditures. To ensure that the government serves the authentic public interest rather than special interest groups, bureaucrats should be responsible to the public rather than these interest groups. Moreover, civic groups should be strengthened (in relation to strongly organized interest groups) and included systematically in creating health policy.
Separation of prescribing and dispensing in Malaysia: A summary of arguments
2012, Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy
The role of pharmacists has transformed significantly because of changes in pharmacists' training and population health demands. Within this context, community pharmacists are recognized as important health personnel for the provision of extended health services. Similarly, in Malaysia, the need to transform community pharmacy practice has been discussed by all interested parties; however, the transition has been slow due in part to the nonexistence of a dispensing separation policy between pharmacists and medical doctors in private community practices. For decades, medical doctors in private community practices have had the right to prescribe and dispense, thus diluting the role of community pharmacists because of overlapping roles. This article explores dispensing separation in Malaysia and, by taking into account the needs of health professionals and health care consumers, suggests a mechanism for how dispensing separation practice can be implemented.
The effects of new pricing and copayment schemes for pharmaceuticals in South Korea
2012, Health Policy
Citation Excerpt :
In the pharmaceutical market, after a policy of separation of prescribing and dispensing that has legally stopped doctors from dispensing and pharmacists from prescribing since 2000, pharmaceutical expenditure surged, partly because of cost shifting from the private to the public sector by transferring drugs with private expenses in community pharmacy into those in publicly funded authorised prescription [1–4]. Evidence also suggests that rising expenditure has been associated with an increasing use of expensive drugs [2,5–8]. To contain the rising pharmaceutical bill, the Korean authorities enacted a new pricing scheme, aiming to contain pharmaceutical expenditure and facilitate cost-effective purchasing in 2006 [9].
This study examined the effect of new Korean pricing and copayment schemes for pharmaceuticals (1) on per patient drug expenditure, utilisation and unit prices of overall pharmaceuticals; (2) on the utilisation of essential medications and (3) on the utilisation of less costly alternatives to the study medication.
Interrupted time series analysis using retrospective observational data.
The increasing trend of per patient drug expenditure fell gradually after the introduction of a new copayment scheme. The segmented regression model suggested that per patient drug expenditure might decrease by about 12% 1 year after the copayment increase, compared with the absence of such a policy, with few changes in overall utilisation and unit prices. The level of savings was much smaller when the new price scheme was included, while the effects of a price cut were inconclusive due to the short time period before an additional policy change. Based on the segmented regression models, we estimate that the number of patients filling their antihyperlipidemics prescriptions decreased by 18% in the corresponding period. Those prescribed generic and brand-named antihyperlipidemics declined by around 16 and 19%, respectively, indicating little evidence of generic substitution resulting from the copayment increase. Few changes were found in the use of antihypertensives.
The policies under consideration appear to contain costs not by the intended mechanisms, such as substituting generics for brand name products, but by reducing patients’ access to costly therapies regardless of clinical necessity. Thus, concerns were raised about potentially compromising overall health and loss of equity in pharmaceutical utilisation.
A systematic review of the literature comparing the practices of dispensing and non-dispensing doctors
2009, Health Policy
Some doctors perform the dual roles of prescribing and dispensing pharmaceuticals. The dispensing doctors (DDs) role may give rise to prescribing behaviours that vary from those of non-DDs. The aim of this review was to systematically and comparatively appraise the research evidence related to the practices of DDs.
A systematic search of bibliographic databases and reference lists from selected papers were the sources of the data. Inclusion criteria were papers published in English, between 1970 and 2008 that provided quantitative data comparing the practices of DDs and non-DDs. At least two of the authors abstracted data from all eligible papers using a purpose-made data extraction form.
Twenty-one papers were included in this review. Evidence indicated that DDs prescribed more pharmaceutical items and less often generically than non-DDs. There was limited evidence to suggest that DDs prescribed less judiciously and were associated with poor dispensing standards. Patient convenience and access to pharmaceuticals were main reasons for doctors to dispense.
DDs can fill an important gap in the provision of pharmaceuticals for their patients especially where health workforce shortages exist. There was evidence the dispensing role influenced prescribing. Patient convenience should be balanced against scarce medical resources, being utilised for dispensing.
Application of concentration ratios to analyze the phenomenon of "next-door" pharmacy in Taiwan
2006, Clinical Therapeutics
In Taiwan, a policy of separation of prescribing and dispensing practices of practitioners at Western medical and dental clinics was implemented on an incremental basis in 1997. The purpose of this policy was to promote pharmacists' autonomy and increase the transparency and safety of prescribing medications. To avoid profit loss from no longer being able to dispense prescription medications, some clinics opened pharmacies located under the same roof as the clinic (“next-door” pharmacies) or hired an on-site pharmacist. This practice might compromise pharmacists' professional autonomy and patients' benefit in pharmaceutical care.
The aim of the current study was to clarify the relationship between practicing pharmacies and clinics that resulted from contracts between pharmacies and the Bureau of National Health Insurance from 1996 to 2004.
The National Health Research Institutes database in Taiwan supplied the complete claims data sets of practicing pharmacies from 1997 to 2004. The prescribing source of every dispensed prescription was used to calculate the 1-firm concentration ratio (CR-1) (ie, the proportion of prescriptions issued by the largest prescribing clinic/hospital in the total number of dispensed prescriptions of a pharmacy in each year). Similar processing was applied to the clinics. We identified each clinic's largest cooperating pharmacy and compared their CR-1s. Pharmacies that dispensed >900 prescriptions/mo during the study period were considered thriving. Pharmacies with a CR-1 ≥0.99 and whose largest cooperating clinic had a CR-1 ≥0.99 were considered to have a close business relationship, possibly indicating a next-door pharmacy.
The total number of prescriptions dispensed at all pharmacies in the database grew from 226,901 in 1996 to 59,785,039 in 2004, and the number of pharmacies, from 481 to 3529. An increasing number of pharmacies had a higher CR-1 after 1999. We found that most prescriptions could be dispensed at only 1 pharmacy during the study period. In 2004, 1429 clinics had >900 prescriptions/mo dispensed externally and a CR-1 ≥0.99. They had released 75.8% of all prescriptions to be dispensed at practicing pharmacies; 811 of these clinics had a cooperating pharmacy with a CR-1 ≥0.99.
In this data analysis in Taiwan, most prescriptions from practitioners at Western medical and dental clinics could be dispensed at only 1 pharmacy during the study period, suggesting that pharmacists' professional autonomy and the patients' benefit in pharmaceutical care might be compromised in Taiwan.
Effects of different mark-up drug policies on drug-related expenditures in tertiary public hospitals: An interrupted time series study in Shanghai, China, 2015-2018
2020, BioScience Trends

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Original researchComparison of peptic-ulcer drug use and expenditures before and after the implementation of a government policy to separate prescribing and dispensing practices in South Korea

Abstract

Am J Med

Development of Drug Supply System and Standard Pharmacy Model under the Separation of Prescribing and Dispensing Practice

Economic Evaluation of the Separation of Prescribing and Dispensing

A Study on the Prescribing Fee for Doctors and Dispensing Fee for Pharmacists for the Separation of Prescribing and Dispensing Practice

Drug Use Evaluation

Advance Data from Vital and Health Statistics

OECD Health Data

1997 Trend Analysis of Health Insurance Medical Claims

Pharmaceutical Policies in OECD Countries: Reconciling Social and Industrial Goals

Review of the Korean Health Care System

Study on the Classification of Prescription and Non-prescription Drugs

List of Drugs and the Reimbursement Price for National Health Insurance

Original research
Comparison of peptic-ulcer drug use and expenditures before and after the implementation of a government policy to separate prescribing and dispensing practices in South Korea