<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Prescription medication pay for performance, and the rationale behind it</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2009/04/prescription-medication-pay-for.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2009/04/prescription-medication-pay-for.html</link>
	<description>medical blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:59:44 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Aubrey Blumsohn</title>
		<link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2009/04/prescription-medication-pay-for.html/comment-page-1#comment-91295</link>
		<dc:creator>Aubrey Blumsohn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 May 2009 22:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2009/04/prescription-medication-pay-for-performance-and-the-rationale-behind-it.html#comment-91295</guid>
		<description>The above makes it clear what a good gamble this is for P&amp;G. In fact the paradox is that the whole reason this gimmick works is not because Actonel is good, but because it is so non-cost effective. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;We could reasonably assume that 100 people would be treated for 3 years to prevent one hip fracture and to activate this claim for hip fracture prevention (P&amp;G requires a decent use of the drug to activate a claim). &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;At $105.11 from per month x 36 months x 200 people = a drug spend of £756,000 (for a payback of 30K). Given that part of the aim is to prevent users from changing to a generic, and also to provide some free misleading advertising &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;it&#039;s a great deal.....&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;But the advertisement backfires badly given that it is such an admission of poor cost effectiveness. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Aubrey Blumsohn&lt;br /&gt;http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The above makes it clear what a good gamble this is for P&amp;G. In fact the paradox is that the whole reason this gimmick works is not because Actonel is good, but because it is so non-cost effective. </p>
<p>We could reasonably assume that 100 people would be treated for 3 years to prevent one hip fracture and to activate this claim for hip fracture prevention (P&amp;G requires a decent use of the drug to activate a claim). </p>
<p>At $105.11 from per month x 36 months x 200 people = a drug spend of £756,000 (for a payback of 30K). Given that part of the aim is to prevent users from changing to a generic, and also to provide some free misleading advertising </p>
<p>it&#39;s a great deal&#8230;..</p>
<p>But the advertisement backfires badly given that it is such an admission of poor cost effectiveness. </p>
<p>Aubrey Blumsohn<br /><a href="http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2009/04/prescription-medication-pay-for.html/comment-page-1#comment-91067</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2009/04/prescription-medication-pay-for-performance-and-the-rationale-behind-it.html#comment-91067</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m not sure this is an idea that physicians should support.  It gives a wrong idea about what medicines (and by extension the health care) do.  Actonel (and other bisphosponates) have not been shown to prevent fractures completely, only reduce the risks of getting a fracture.  Hence a fracture on Actonel is not a &quot;failure&quot;. It seems that pharmaceutical companies should reduce the cost of drugs instead Imagine how much actonel you can buy with $30,000: at $105.11 from drugstore.com for a month for 35mg #4, you can buy 285 monthly courses, or enough for one year for 23 people; alendronate 70mg #4 costs $32.99 a month means you can cover 75 people for a year.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not sure this is an idea that physicians should support.  It gives a wrong idea about what medicines (and by extension the health care) do.  Actonel (and other bisphosponates) have not been shown to prevent fractures completely, only reduce the risks of getting a fracture.  Hence a fracture on Actonel is not a &#8220;failure&#8221;. It seems that pharmaceutical companies should reduce the cost of drugs instead Imagine how much actonel you can buy with $30,000: at $105.11 from drugstore.com for a month for 35mg #4, you can buy 285 monthly courses, or enough for one year for 23 people; alendronate 70mg #4 costs $32.99 a month means you can cover 75 people for a year.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
