PBM Mail Fails Employers

For the last decade PBM's have actively engaged employers to move maintenance drugs to mail ostensibly for the lower costs available via that channel.

Yet a study published in The Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy reveals mail relative to community pharmacy;

1. Generated lower generic utilization rates (37.7% Mail versus 49% Community Pharmacy);
2. Produced higher costs in roughly half the top 20 generic categories;
3. Plan sponsors were found to make higher payments per day of drug therapy for prescriptions dispensed via mail order for many therapeutic categories.
4. One plan sponsor paid higher net costs for generic drugs secured through mail
   

This study was conducted from claims data from two public entities in Texas covering over 637,000 members and 8.7M pharmacy claims. In other words it is we taxpayers in The State of Texas who get to pay for "failed mail". I call it failed mail simply because implementing a process that moves members who desire the low cost in therapuetic class generics could easily take the overall generic utilization rate at least to 49% and likely into the 70% range for some employers.

Assuming mail order is less costly may prove to be an expensive mistake.

Employers with a $250,000 annual drug spend can request a 12 month claim file from their PBM with the right data elements below and know with certainty whether they are getting the best deal.

Would it not make sense to bend your pharmacy trend into a negative direction before all the specialty drugs hit the market?