Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • Classified ads
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • Classified ads
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Commentary

We need to mandate drug cost transparency on electronic medical records

Iris Gorfinkel and Joel Lexchin
CMAJ December 18, 2017 189 (50) E1541-E1542; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.171070
Iris Gorfinkel
PrimeHealth Clinical Research — Family Practice (Gorfinkel); School of Health Policy and Management (Lexchin), Faculty of Health, York University, Toronto, Ont.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: i.gor@outlook.com
Joel Lexchin
PrimeHealth Clinical Research — Family Practice (Gorfinkel); School of Health Policy and Management (Lexchin), Faculty of Health, York University, Toronto, Ont.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading
KEY POINTS
  • Canadian physicians have no direct access to drug costs at the time of prescribing, and they lack awareness of the costs of drugs.

  • Greater out-of-pocket costs for patients are associated with reduced adherence to medication, which contributes to downstream health care costs.

  • Limited but compelling evidence shows substantial potential savings associated with interventions that increase drug cost transparency to physicians.

  • Provincial and territorial guidelines mandating that providers of electronic medical records integrate drug benefit formulary information into the records would assist prescribers to identify cost-effective medications for patients.

Canada has the dubious distinction of boasting the second highest per capita drug costs in the world, after the United States, with prescription drugs as the second most costly component of health care.1 Yet physicians have no real-time access to drug costs, so patients routinely receive prescriptions with little, if any, discussion about the affordability of the drugs they are prescribed. Patients learn how much their prescriptions cost at the pharmacy, and many may then feel helpless if they find that they cannot afford their medications. These problems would be solved, and many other benefits realized, if drug costs were included in electronic medical records.

Physicians often have poor insight into the cost of drugs. A survey of 189 physicians found that 80% were unaware of drug costs and only 33% believed they had easy access to data about drug costs. However, most (88%) reported that drug cost was an important consideration when prescribing.2 Lack of awareness about drug costs among physicians leads to prescription of more costly drugs when cheaper, equally beneficial, alternatives exist.3,4 Studies have shown that increasing out-of-pocket costs for patients results in decreased prescription adherence, especially among older adults.5

Provincial drug programs and Canadian health care professional associations have underscored the need for cost-effective prescribing in Canada. A communication from the Executive Officer for Ontario Public Drug Programs stated that one of the goals of the programs included “operating transparently … to health care practitioners, consumers, manufacturers, wholesalers and pharmacies.” Another goal was “aiming to consistently achieve value-for-money and ensure the best use of resources at every level of the system.”6 In 2012, the Canadian Medical Association and the Canadian Pharmacists Association published a joint statement on e-prescribing that foresaw the potential benefits of e-prescribing and stressed that “clinicians must have access to … drug costs”7 to fully realize the benefits of e-prescribing.

The need to have access to the cost of a prescription for individual drugs is illustrated by a 2014 comparison of the prices of commonly prescribed pharmaceuticals that was published by the Alberta College of Family Physicians. Appendix 1 (available at www.cmaj.ca/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1503/cmaj.171070/-/DC1) uses examples from a variety of therapeutic areas to show how large the cost differences can be for a 90-day prescription for drugs that are equivalent therapeutic options.

The effects of transparency in drug costs have not been researched exhaustively, but limited evidence is compelling. A survey of 761 primary care physicians in Toronto found that the percentage who prescribed an expensive antibiotic option for a hypothetical patient with an infectious exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease dropped from 38% to 18% when insurance coverage and prices were disclosed.8 A longitudinal nonrandomized study examined prescription claims from a large health plan in Hawaii for 5883 members with diabetes over two years and found that providers who had received a Web-based prescribing guide (www.PrescribingGuide.com) had an average lower increase of $208 in total drug costs per patient per year than providers who did not receive the guide.9 Another study of e-prescribing with formulary support for 1.5 million patients estimated total savings in drug costs of $845 000 per 100 000 patients.10 These studies likely underestimate actual potential savings. None of these studies examined point-of-care provision of drug costs to the prescribing physician; potential savings associated with real-time access to drug costs are likely to be higher.

Integrating and updating prices listed in provincial formularies should be straightforward from a technical perspective, although we are not aware of any Canadian jurisdiction, or any other country, that has implemented full drug cost transparency in an electronic medical record. Reimbursements to pharmacies by the Ontario Drug Benefit Formulary are available in the online formulary and could, arguably, be uploaded and integrated into drug formularies in electronic medical records.

To ensure that physicians are able to prescribe the most cost-effective drugs for patients, we propose that integration of transparency of drug costs be mandated by provincial and territorial ministries of health in all drug formularies in electronic medical records, and provincial formulary reimbursements to pharmacies should appear in the electronic medical record at the point of care when prescriptions are written by physicians.

Improved physician knowledge about drug costs would have many benefits. It could spur dialogue between physicians and patients about the affordability of a given drug. Improved adherence could reduce complications from stopping drug therapy, visits to the emergency department, hospital admissions and suffering by individuals and their families. Furthermore, cost differentials between similar drugs would become more widely appreciated, which could result in reduced public and private spending on drugs.

Implementing transparency in drug costs is not without challenges. One potential disadvantage is that prescribers will also need to explain to patients that listed prices are cost approximations and that the final cost will also include a dispensing fee. The prices that appear in the electronic medical record will be estimates only, because confidentiality agreements between companies and drug plans may mean that actual prices paid for drugs are not known, and prices might vary among provinces and territories, and among public and private insurance plans. However, the potential benefits to patients, providers and the health care system from an increase in cost-effective use of medication outweigh the practical problems associated with providing information about drug costs to physicians and patients within the electronic medical record.

Providing cost-effective care is simply not possible in the absence of accurate knowledge of drug costs. Mandating transparency for drug costs would define a new standard of care for physicians and other prescribers.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: Iris Gorfinkel has received research grants from Astellas, Mundipharma, GSK, Serenity, Ferring and Romark, and has served on an advisory board for GSK. Joel Lexchin has received consultant fees from the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality for a project researching indication-based prescribing; and from the Government of Canada, the Ontario Supporting Patient-Oriented Research Support Unit and St. Michael’s Hospital Foundation for a project determining which drugs should be distributed free of charge by family physicians. He also received renumeration from The Canadian Institute for being on a panel that discussed a pharmacare plan for Canada. He is a member of the Foundation Board of Health Action International. No other competing interests were declared.

  • This article has been peer reviewed.

  • Contributors: Both authors substantially contributed to the concept of the work, drafted the manuscript, revised it critically for important intellectual content, gave final approval of the version to be published and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

References

  1. ↵
    Prescription medication use by Canadians aged 6 to 79. Ottawa: Statistics Canada; 2015. Available: www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-003-x/2014006/article/14032-eng.htm (accessed 2017 Nov. 1).
  2. ↵
    1. Reichert S,
    2. Simon T,
    3. Ham EA
    . Physicians’ attitudes about prescribing and knowledge of the costs of common medications. Arch Intern Med 2000;160:2799–803.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Cassels A,
    2. Lexchin J
    . Potential savings from therapeutic substitution of 10 of Canada’s most dispensed prescription drugs. In: Temple N, Thompson A, editors. Excessive medical spending: facing the challange. Oxford (UK): Radcliffe Publishing; 2007:80–92.
  4. ↵
    1. Morgan SG,
    2. Bassett KL,
    3. Wright JM,
    4. et al
    . “Breakthrough” drugs and growth in expenditure on prescription drugs in Canada. BMJ 2005;331:815–6.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Milan R,
    2. Vasiliadis HM,
    3. Gontijo Guerra S,
    4. et al
    . Out-of-pocket costs and adherence to antihypertensive agents among older adults covered by the public drug insurance plan in Quebec. Patient Prefer Adherence 2017;11:1513–22.
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. McGurn S
    . Ontario Public Drug Programs: Executive Officer communications. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care; 2016. Available: www.health.gov.on.ca/en/pro/programs/drugs/opdp_eo/executive_officer.aspx (accessed 2017 Sept. 10).
  7. ↵
    Vision for e-prescribing: a joint statement by the Canadian Medical Association and the Canadian Pharmacists Association. Ottawa: Canadian Medical Association; 2012. Available: www.cma.ca/Assets/assets-library/document/en/advocacy/policy-research/CMA_Policy_Vision_for_e-Prescribing_a_joint_statement_by_the_Canadian_Medical_Association_and_the_CPhA_PD13-02-e.pdf (accessed 2017 Sept. 10).
  8. ↵
    1. Hux JE,
    2. Naylor CD
    . Drug prices and third party payment: Do they influence medication selection? Pharmacoeconomics 1994;5:343–50.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Tseng C-W,
    2. Lin GA,
    3. Davis J,
    4. et al
    . Giving formulary and drug cost information to providers and impact on medication cost and use: a longitudinal non-randomized study. BMC Health Serv Res 2016;16:499.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Fischer MA,
    2. Vogeli C,
    3. Stedman M,
    4. et al
    . Effect of electronic prescribing with formulary decision support on medication use and cost. Arch Intern Med 2008; 168:2433–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 189 (50)
CMAJ
Vol. 189, Issue 50
18 Dec 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
We need to mandate drug cost transparency on electronic medical records
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
We need to mandate drug cost transparency on electronic medical records
Iris Gorfinkel, Joel Lexchin
CMAJ Dec 2017, 189 (50) E1541-E1542; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.171070

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
We need to mandate drug cost transparency on electronic medical records
Iris Gorfinkel, Joel Lexchin
CMAJ Dec 2017, 189 (50) E1541-E1542; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.171070
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Inciter les medecins a prescrire en se souciant davantage des couts: Strategie de changement
  • Engaging physicians to prescribe more cost-effectively: Blueprint for change
  • Variable access to antiviral treatment of chronic hepatitis B in Canada: a descriptive study
  • The consequences of patient charges for prescription drugs in Canada: a cross-sectional survey
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Transforming race-based health research in Canada
  • Not neutral: reimagining antiracism as a professional competence
  • Time to dismantle systemic anti-Black racism in medicine in Canada
Show more Commentary

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Areas of Focus
    • Health services
  • Topics
    • Health technology
    • Health economics
    • Health care coverage
    • Health policy

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions

Copyright 2021, Joule Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

Powered by HighWire