Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Jan 2017)

Public versus Private Drug Insurance and Outcomes of Patients Requiring Biologic Therapies for Inflammatory Bowel Disease

  • Amir Rumman,
  • Roberto Candia,
  • Justina J. Sam,
  • Kenneth Croitoru,
  • Mark S. Silverberg,
  • A. Hillary Steinhart,
  • Geoffrey C. Nguyen

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/7365937
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 2017

Abstract

Read online

Background. Antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy is a highly effective but costly treatment for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of IBD patients who were prescribed anti-TNF therapy (2007–2014) in Ontario. We assessed if the insurance type was a predictor of timely access to anti-TNF therapy and nonroutine health utilization (emergency department visits and hospitalizations). Results. There were 268 patients with IBD who were prescribed anti-TNF therapy. Public drug coverage was associated with longer median wait times to first dose than private one (56 versus 35 days, P=0.002). After adjusting for confounders, publicly insured patients were less likely to receive timely access to anti-TNF therapy compared with those privately insured (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45–0.95). After adjustment for demographic and clinical characteristics, publicly funded subjects were more than 2-fold more likely to require hospitalization (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 2.30; 95% CI: 1.19–4.43) and ED visits (IRR 2.42; 95% CI: 1.44–4.08) related to IBD. Conclusions. IBD patients in Ontario with public drug coverage experienced greater delays in access to anti-TNF therapy than privately insured patients and have a higher rate of hospitalizations and ED visits related to IBD.