Free drug samples may end up costing uninsured more

September 5, 2008,

Free drug samples provided to physicians by pharmaceutical companies could actually be costing uninsured patients more in the long run, according to a study done by researchers at Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center and colleagues.

The retrospective study looked at the prescribing habits of more than 70 physicians in a university-affiliated internal medicine practice in the months immediately before and after the closing of their drug sample closet. The results indicate that the availability of free samples from pharmaceutical companies greatly impacts whether an uninsured patient is given a prescription for a generic or a brand-name drug. The complete findings can be found in the September issue of Southern Medical Journal.

"It's true that samples can save patients money in the short-run," said David P. Miller, M.D., lead researcher and internal medicine physician at Wake Forest Baptist. "But our study shows that they may end up paying more in the long run when they are given prescriptions for brand-name only drugs."

For the study, researchers used a pharmacy database to track all of the prescriptions in four classes of chronic medications given to uninsured and Medicaid patients. Nearly 2,000 prescriptions categorized as antihypertensives (blood pressure medications), oral diabetic agents, peptic ulcer and gastroesophageal reflux medications, and non-narcotic pain medications, were tracked for the nine months leading up to and following the relocation of the practice, at which time the drug sample closet was permanently closed due to a lack of suitable storage space in the new building.

Researchers found that, for uninsured patients, the percentage of medications prescribed as generics rose from 12 percent to 30 percent after the clinic closed its drug sample closet. For Medicaid patients, however, there was no significant change in generic prescribing.

Drug samples are available only for brand name drugs, which are often newer, more heavily advertised and almost always much more expensive than generic drugs in the same class.

"The theory is that drug companies hand out samples because it gets physicians in the habit of using a drug and physicians, therefore, are more likely to prescribe that drug later," Miller said.

Many times, initially, a patient will be given a sample of a drug to test tolerability and effectiveness. Often times, when a physician gives a patient a sample, it is accompanied with a prescription to fill after the sample is gone. Sometimes free samples are used by physicians to help patients who cannot afford medications. But the availability of drug samples is not always predictable and, when patients return for refills and the samples they need are missing from a practice, either because the drug representative didn't leave enough or stopped distributing them altogether, patients who were started on brand name drugs in sample form are left paying the price when they have to fill a prescription.

Researchers were surprised to find that, throughout the study, Medicaid patients were generally prescribed generic drugs, even with the availability of branded samples. Surprising, Miller said, because at the time of the study, Medicaid didn't have a formulary, so all drugs for Medicaid patients, branded or generic, were only $1.

One possible explanation, Miller said, is that because Medicaid patients rarely receive samples, doctors' prescribing decisions for these patients were based purely on what drug they thought was best and not on what samples happened to be available in the closet.

"In terms of safety and effectiveness, doctors have the most information about older drugs because they have been used for years and are often more studied," Miller said. "Sometimes, doctors don't discover that a new drug has serious side-effects until it has been used in a large number of people or for a long time." In recent years, Miller added, the Food and Drug Administration has issued warnings about some new drugs and a few have been pulled from the market, showing how a promising new drug can later be discovered harmful.

"Physicians and medical organizations need to ask themselves if samples are doing more harm than good," Miller added. "While doctors might intend to help someone by handing them a free sample, in the long run, it could cost them more. And removing samples from a practice can help doctors focus on which medication is best for a patient, rather than which medication happens to be available for free. Patients who want to save money should ask their doctor if an effective generic medication is available for their condition instead of taking a sample. In the long run, the generic prescription will probably save them more."

Source: Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center

Explore further: Presurgical targeted therapy delays relapse of high-risk stage 3 melanoma

Related Stories

Presurgical targeted therapy delays relapse of high-risk stage 3 melanoma

January 17, 2018
A pair of targeted therapies given before and after surgery for melanoma produced at least a six-fold increase in time to progression compared to standard-of-care surgery for patients with stage 3 disease, researchers at ...

Smart insulin patch may aid future therapies

January 18, 2018
A smart insulin patch, once translated for humans, could eliminate the need for constant blood testing and help diabetics maintain a more consistent level of blood glucose.

Newly-discovered TB blood signal provides early warning for at-risk patients

January 17, 2018
Tuberculosis can be detected in people with HIV infection via a unique blood signal before symptoms appear, according to a new study by researchers from the Crick, Imperial College London and the University of Cape Town.

New test predicts whether patients with blood cancer respond to therapy

January 15, 2018
A new method developed by UNSW Sydney medical researchers offers a way to predict whether patients with the blood condition myelodysplastic syndrome will respond to treatment.

FDA approves first drug for tumors tied to breast cancer genes

January 12, 2018
(HealthDay)—The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Friday approved the first drug aimed at treating metastatic breast cancers linked to the BRCA gene mutation.

Who might benefit from immunotherapy? New study suggests possible marker

January 16, 2018
While immunotherapy has made a big impact on cancer treatment, the fact remains that only about a quarter of patients respond to these treatments.

Recommended for you

Women run faster after taking newly developed supplement, study finds

January 19, 2018
A new study found that women who took a specially prepared blend of minerals and nutrients for a month saw their 3-mile run times drop by almost a minute.

Americans are getting more sleep

January 19, 2018
Although more than one in three Americans still don't get enough sleep, a new analysis shows first signs of success in the fight for more shut eye. According to data from 181,335 respondents aged 15 and older who participated ...

Wine is good for you—to a point

January 18, 2018
The Mediterranean diet has become synonymous with healthy eating, but there's one thing in it that stands out: It's cool to drink wine.

Sleep better, lose weight?

January 17, 2018
(HealthDay)—Sleeplessness could cost you when it's time to stand on your bathroom scale, a new British study suggests.

Who uses phone apps to track sleep habits? Mostly the healthy and wealthy in US

January 16, 2018
The profile of most Americans who use popular mobile phone apps that track sleep habits is that they are relatively affluent, claim to eat well, and say they are in good health, even if some of them tend to smoke.

Improvements in mortality rates are slowed by rise in obesity in the United States

January 15, 2018
With countless medical advances and efforts to curb smoking, one might expect that life expectancy in the United States would improve. Yet according to recent studies, there's been a reduction in the rate of improvement in ...

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Arthur_Dent
not rated yet Sep 06, 2008
Which is EXACTLY why the free handouts are given by the pharmaceutical companies to the doctors!

Capitalism at its best!

Pharma corp wins, doctor gets more handouts, *market* -nudge-nudge-wink-wink- pays.

This has been known for ages, and is the sole motivation for the practice.

You think they don't know which markets they influence, or how?

Comically, there's one more aspect of this:
doctors VERY HEAVILY self-medicate.

And, of course, having all those pills lying around...

(yes, doctor in the family. Average self-medication purchasing, according to his secretary, equivalent to $500/mo)

Look at it from the Pharmaceutical corp's perspective:

Doctors are the means of sales/profit.

They, being the means, can be used in several ways, some more effective than others.

Freebies (pills, trips, computers, golf stuff, fancy dinners -- anything exclusive that indicates status, that doctor's culture "aspires" to) are a very effective means, if not the primary means.

Direct to consumer advertising is less effective.

Indirect (building hospital add-on) is less effective.

So, put money where it works!

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.