In a general population survey (N = 314), 79 percent of respondents stated that they would take a hypothetical genetic test to predict whether they will eventually develop Alzheimer's disease. The proportion fell to 45 percent for a "partially predictive" test (which had a one in ten chance of being incorrect). Inclination to obtain testing was similar across age groups. Respondents were willing to pay $324 for the completely predictive test. Respondents stated that if they tested positive, they would sign advance directives (84 percent), get their finances in order (74 percent), and purchase long-term care insurance (69 percent). Only a third of respondents expressed concern about confidentiality. The results suggest that people value genetic testingfor personal and financial reasons, but they also underscore the need to counsel potential recipients carefully about the accuracy and implications of test information.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine how pharmaceutical expenditures vary by age and the presence of chronic health problems. METHODS: Data from the 1987 National Medical Expenditure Survey were used to obtain nationally representative estimates of outpatient prescription drug expenditures for the noninstitutionalized population and the fraction of total health expenditures used to purchase medications for age-chronic disease population subgroups. RESULTS: Although the elderly make up 12% of the population, they account for 34% of total pharmaceutical expenditures. Pharmaceutical expenditures are 9% of total expenditures for children, 13% for nonelderly adults, and 23% for the elderly. Among nonelderly adults, approximately one third have at least one chronic condition and account for over two thirds of drug expenditures. Among the elderly, 36% have three or more chronic conditions and account for 57% of drug expenditures for this group; 41% of total drug expenditures are for cardiovascular or renal drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Significant pharmaceutical spending is for treatment of chronic conditions, which subjects insurance coverage to adverse selection and could affect the design of prescription drug benefit packages. Current enrollees in Medicare risk management plans who have drug benefits may face significantly higher out-of-pocket expenses for pharmaceuticals if capitation rates are cut as a means of controlling Medicare program expenditures.
background. Nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) prevalence and treatment costs are rapidly increasing at an unknown rate. objective. To determine actual prevalence and treatment costs for NMSC in patients over 65 years of age covered by Medicare. methods. We used a 5% random sample of Medicare claims available for 1994 and 1995. Demographic characteristics, period prevalence, treatment types and frequencies, treating physician specialty, and allowable treatment charges associated with the diagnosis of NMSC were analyzed and described. results. More than 789,000 patients over age 65 covered by Medicare had a diagnosis and treatment for NMSC in 1995.Fifty-eight percent were men and 98% were Caucasian. The majority were from the South and West regions of the United States. Dermatologists treated more than 60% of these NMSCs. Treatment costs were approximately $285 million. The largest percentage of treatment expenditures (34%) was for excisions. conclusion. The number of patients with NMSC is far greater than previous estimates. Dermatologists treat the majority of NMSCs. The mean treatment cost per patient is $329. Total expenditures for NMSC eradication represent 0.7% of the Medicare budget. NMSC is a major public health concern because of its increasing prevalence, costs, and the aging U.S. population.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.