PBMs are billed as a way to lower drug costs for employers and consumers, but they’ve increasingly come under fire in recent years as drug prices have soared. PBMs’ slice of the costs and role as a middleman is little understood.
 |
| Learn More |
Critics of PBMs say the companies sometimes agree to favor high-cost drugs on the lists of medicines your insurer agrees to pay for and that they agree they won’t place quantity limits — or prior authorization programs — on the drugs. That’s despite the fact doing so could help health plans save money and make medical sense.
Tyrone’s commentary:
If integrating the medical and pharmacy benefit requires that you relinquish flexibility and cost controls, the disadvantages of integration far outweigh the advantages. Disadvantages may include:
- Plan members may pay U&C (usual and customary) prices, which are higher than discounted prices
- Formulary and rebate arrangements may not be available or are significantly limited
- Plan sponsors lack authority and flexibility and are typically unable to adjudicate plan limitations, plan exclusions, enforce generic dispensing mandates or validate appropriate drug pricing
There’s already a lack of transparency when it comes to drug prices and employers may have even less information if the insurer and the pharmacy benefit manager are the same entity. It’s going to be harder to get behind the curtain.
