How many people noticed that the significant savings (~4-5%) arranged by consultants on behalf of employer coalitions occurred about the same time the AWP increases (~4%) occurred? I suspect that nearly all employers eventually entered into contracts at similar rates. If so, then the increased revenues for pharmacies due to the AWP increases may have been mostly offset by the lower reimbursement rates. Even though employers thought they were enjoying significant savings from their new contracts they actually were paying similar prices.
Despite what the press releases claimed about the impact of the settlement, employers will likely not receive an effective 4% decrease in their drug prices. The PBM contracts with their network pharmacies typically allow adjustments in reimbursement to maintain pricing levels in the event of such a settlement. I just question why the PBMs did not use these contract clauses to automatically lower client pricing in the first place rather than forcing them to enter into new contracts during renewal. (Just kidding, I actually know why.)
Friday, September 18, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment