Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Pharmacy / May 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Screwed again by our government!

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Pumbaa - 04 May 2006 02:03 GMT
Pharmacists may not survive Medicare changes

By Agustina Guerrero
Tampa Bay Business Journal
Updated: 8:00 p.m. ET April 30, 2006

Some of the most trusted professionals in America could soon be out of
business.

Independent pharmacists are being impacted by cash flow problems due to the
slow and low reimbursements from Medicare Part D.

Some local pharmacists are now receiving fees of just $1 to $2 a
prescription versus the $10 to $15 they used to get. Checks also are taking
longer to arrive.

"Things are going bleakly," said Dan Fucarino of Carrollwood Pharmacy. "The
hardest part appears to be over, but long term it is still going to be
bleak."

More than 90 percent of community pharmacists surveyed by the National
Community Pharmacists Association said that their cash flow was worse than
before the start of Medicare Part D. Many are already calling it "Part D for
Disaster."

Pharmacists depend on payments from insurance plans -- including
prescription drug plans administering Medicare Part D -- to pay drug
wholesalers, staff and other operating expenses. But since Jan. 1 they've
seen a drastic slow down in payment schedules.

Medicare Part D was the government's attempt at creating a Medicare
prescription plan, but it has turned out to be a nightmare for independent
pharmacists nationwide.

Under Medicaid, pharmacists were reimbursed weekly; under Medicare Part D,
prescription drug plans issue reimbursement checks only once every four
weeks.

"It took three billing circles before we got our first checks," said
Fucarino. "It literally will take a year to recuperate."

Out of pocket
Many local pharmacists are taking money out of savings or taking out lines
of credit to cover the late reimbursements and carry customers who need
their meds but can't figure out how to sign up.

"It was the first time since I bought the pharmacy in 1984 that I had to
borrow money to keep the business running," said Bob Bobo, owner of Davis
Islands Pharmacy. "It is definitely because of Medicare Part D. Our
reimbursement is very, very low. The only other time I had to borrow money
was to buy the business."

According to a survey commissioned by the National Council of State Pharmacy
Association Executives nearly 50 percent of pharmacists provided medications
to Medicare recipients at no charge since the program began.

The strange twist is that some local pharmacists are reporting an increase
in the number of customers and the volume of sales. In the past, that had
translated into more profits. Today, customers and volumes are up, but
profits are down.

The problem, said Rob Slavkin, an attorney with Foley & Lardner in Orlando,
is that there are too many prescription plans to choose from and pharmacists
want to have contracts with as many as possible.

That is easier for retail giants like CVS Corp. (NYSE: CVS), Walgreen Co.
(NYSE: WAG) and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (NYSE: WMT), which have a better
ability to contract on a national basis with the heavy hitters of health
insurance.

Independent pharmacists have a real competitive disadvantage, Slavkin said.
"They don't have the resources to get that many contracts to serve as many
senior citizens as possible."

Marketing guidelines set for Medicare Part D are also leaving independent
pharmacists behind. Larger chains can create compliance programs for their
stores nationwide. Smaller retailers must abide by the same standards but
with far less resources, said Slavkin.

Time is money
The NCSPAE also found that pharmacists across the country are spending more
than 10 hours a week resolving Part D-related problems.

"It is really time-consuming," said Bobo. "We are getting less than we were
but doing more work."

It is not unusual for a pharmacist to be on the phone with an insurance
company for an hour only to get a few dollars over the cost of the
prescription, he said. Plus, employees spend a great deal of time explaining
the plan, which should be the duty of the insurance company, he said.

Sixty percent of pharmacists surveyed by the NCSPAE believe that Part D
would have a negative impact upon their businesses, including 12 percent who
reported that it might even force their pharmacy to close.

Only 10 percent of them said that Part D would be good for their businesses.
John Noriega of Bill's Prescription Center in Brandon is one who has found
benefits in Part D.

"We are offering more services," Noriega said. "I offer a home delivery
service for $3. When Medicare Part D went into effect I bought a new van.
Medicare Part D gives patients another reason to come to me. In the
short-term I can see the downfall, but in the long term I see it as a
benefit."

The key, said Bobo, is to find a niche. "Those who are filling traditional
prescriptions, those who have a large percentage of business on Medicare are
going to be in trouble," he said.

But for many it may even be too late to find that niche, said Fucarino. "You
have to have certain bankroll to keep the business afloat during a difficult
time like this," he said.

Prognosis
Most independent pharmacists agree that improvements to the program are
required if Medicare Part D is to be successful.

National organizations are working with congressional offices to secure
legislative corrections.

"Congress must change the Part D program now, before it destroys the very
pharmacy infrastructure it relies upon," said NCSPAE's president, Jim
Bracewell, in a statement.

Local pharmacists also are trying to get in touch with politicians in
Florida to see if something can be done. Bobo was one of six pharmacists who
recently met with Commissioner Kathy Castor to discuss the challenges of the
plan.

But the road ahead still looks bumpy. There is talk of a proposal to lower
reimbursements even more next year.

Fucarino predicts that 50 percent of the 30 independent retail pharmacies in
Hillsborough County will go out of business in five years.

Independent pharmacies nationwide are an $84 billion business. They dispense
nearly half of the retail prescription medicines in the United States.

© 2006 MSNBC.com
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12571876/
P T - 06 May 2006 02:39 GMT
>There is talk of a proposal to lower
>reimbursements even more next year.

Something tells me politicians don't give a sh.t about pharmacists.

>Independent pharmacies nationwide are
>an $84 billion business. They dispense
>nearly half of the retail prescription
>medicines in the United States.

Am I the only one who finds this statement incredible? Here in the
Minneapolis area, I would guess independents account for <10% of
pharmacies.

In another forum, someone posted a link about a pharmacist who stopped
taking Part D Rx, and as I recall it, he seemed to be doing better.
Pumbaa - 06 May 2006 14:32 GMT
> >There is talk of a proposal to lower
> >reimbursements even more next year.
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> In another forum, someone posted a link about a pharmacist who stopped
> taking Part D Rx, and as I recall it, he seemed to be doing better.

In my really small  town in SE Mississippi there are five pharmacies.  The
only chain pharmacy in the area is the Wally World (Mao Mart).  At one time
the town had seven pharmacies and they all made a living. I wonder what will
happen to the pharmacists that work for the independent stores if they are
run out of business?  Will it create a surplus  of pharmacists and thus
depress the salaries of other pharmacists (so the chains would hope!).

I have a friend that owned his own store that he got from his dad.  He got
tired of working six days a week and making very little money.  He closed it
and he now works for CVS.  He tells me he often fills 400 Rx a shift (only
pharmacist) and there is no closing for lunch.  He does make a lot of money
but he says he is so rushed and tired by the end of the day that he wonders
if he made any dispensing mistakes. He says CVS cooks the number of Rxs
filled during a period of time so that they do not have to provide any extra
personnel.

When I went to my eye doctor last week he was refusing to accept claims from
some insurance companies.  You paid him and he would sign your insurance
forms and then YOU waited for the insurance payment.  When Medicare was
first started by the State of Alabama they issued their customers check like
vouchers.  The drug store filled out the form with the prescription charge
and it was deposited in the bank and it was paid quickly just like a bank
check.
Pumbaa - 06 May 2006 15:47 GMT
<Snip>
> When I went to my eye doctor last week he was refusing to accept claims from
> some insurance companies.  You paid him and he would sign your insurance
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> and it was deposited in the bank and it was paid quickly just like a bank
> check.

It should be Medicaid, not Medicare.
pharmedtradenews@gmail.com - 06 May 2006 17:25 GMT
hi iam from india . can any us pharmacist explain me how the final
selling price is arrive at in the absence of maximum retail price. in
india the pharmacist margin is fixed by govt. we do not have problems
of waiting for govt reimbursement.
Pumbaa - 06 May 2006 21:47 GMT
> hi iam from india . can any us pharmacist explain me how the final
> selling price is arrive at in the absence of maximum retail price. in
> india the pharmacist margin is fixed by govt. we do not have problems
> of waiting for govt reimbursement.

Maybe a current (I am a now a retired pharmacist) pharmacist can add more
information about how chain pharmacies price medication.

Originally few people in the US had any health insurance. The prices were
set at what you could sell the medication for at cash. Factors included the
cost of the ingredients and the labor involved, Most prescriptions (Rxs)
were made (compounded).  People would go to different pharmacies and ask for
a price for a particular Rx. This tended to reduce the price of the Rx as
someone would usually cut the price to get a new customer's business. My dad
(who owned his own business) would usually reduce his price to the "best
price" even if it meant loosing money on a particular Rx.  He figured he
could make up the profit from other Rxs that the customer would bring in.

Now most Americans have private health insurance or welfare (Medicaid) or
insurance for older people (Medicare). Medicare has just starting covering
Rxs this year in the USA.  Apparently the health insurance companies dictate
the price that a pharmacist can charge for filling  a Rx.  I have insurance
with an outfit from Nashville, TN.  On their website they actually list the
"average" price of a Rx for a particular drug in my area.  I found  this is
about what I have to pay if the Rx is for a drug that is not covered by the
insurance plan. Then there is such a thing as a perferred drug (one the
insurance company pays less for and thus charges me a lower price so I can
influence my doctor to use it!). The insurance company likes generic drugs
best and they have no or a very low co-payment for them.

It is not rare to be in an American pharmacy (at least in the State of
Mississippi or Alabama) and see people walk away with unfilled Rxs.  A
doctor will sometimes write a Rx for a person who is very poor that may have
a price of several hundred dollars.  It might be the best drug for the
patient but he can't afford it as he needs the money for food. One of the
major causes of going bankrupt in America is ill health with resulting drug
bills and hospital-doctor bills..

So the pricing of Rxs is a unique thing in America.  Just about every thing
I buy has a suggested retail price except Rx medication. Automobiles, TV
sets, appliences, food items, etc., have suggested retail prices.  It is
usually possible to pay less than retail by shopping around.  However a
prescription drug can be priced at wholesale at the highest level that the
pharmaceutical company thinks it can sell it for.  Usually it can't be too
much out of line from a similar product unless it is really a so-called
"wonder" drug, which is hard to invent.  The retail pharmacist can charge a
cash patient as much as he thinks he can get out of his customer. (Pretty
much pure capitalism - if you don't like the price then you are FREE not to
buy it). It works the same way here with gasoline.

Sometimes patients would tell me about paying $25 or $30 for a couple dozen
cheap generic penicillin tablets that cost the pharmacy very little.  The
retail pharmacies love those Rxs (cheap cash generic drug Rxs) as they are
the only ones that really have a good profit margin because the price is not
controlled.

I can't see that letting private (for profit) insurance companies set
prescription prices is any better (or even as good) as having the price set
by the government as in India.  It would seem that the Indian Pharmacist
trade associations could bargain with the Indian government to raise the
rates.  It would be better to deal with one agency than with very many
insurance companies like in the USA.       :
P T - 07 May 2006 05:44 GMT
Okay, here's my explanation, for the person from India who wondered how
prices are set:

There are 2 kinds of patients in American pharmacies: those with
insurance, and those without.

If you don't have insurance, pharmacies price prescriptions at the cost
of the drug + mark up.  I don't really know how mark up is determined,
but usually pharmacies that are near each other will charge
approximately the same for a given prescription (as Economic theory
would predict.)

For patients with insurance, the picture is much murkier.  There could
be 5 entities involved in the price of a prescription: the patient, the
pharmacy, the wholesaler / manufacturer, the insurance company, and a
Pharmacy Benefits Manager (PBM.)

To keep things simple, let's assume that the PBM and the insurance
company are a single entity (which is what most patients believe.)  When
insurance companies started paying for large numbers of prescriptions,
they used the same tactic they had used with doctors, dentists, and
hospitals.  They started telling pharmacies what they would pay for a
prescription (less than pharmacies traditionally charged) and the
pharmacies could take it or leave it.  Since pharmacies wanted the
business, they agreed, and consequently "prices" at the pharmacies have
fallen.  Hence, the profits of pharmacies have fallen. I suspect most of
the savings have gone to insurance companies and PBMs: it is debatable
whether patients are better off.  Additionally, pharmacists complain
that they are filling increasingly more prescriptions for less profit
per prescription.

To decrease frivolous demand for medicine, and to save themselves money,
insurance companies began mandating that patients pay a portion of the
cost of a prescription: the copayment.  The pharmacist is expected to
collect this and keep it, and his reimbursement from the insurance
company is decreased by this amount.  The copayment is the source of
endless struggles between pharmacies and patients :-\

This is a basic outline of the system.  
Actually it is far more complex.

The financing of health care in America is mysterious, confusing, and
sometimes illogical.  This is my understanding of the system: I speak
from the perspective of someone who has only been in the industry for
about 10 years, and I work in a large city.  Others may have a different
opinion.  
Bob G. - 07 May 2006 12:29 GMT
>hi iam from india . can any us pharmacist explain me how the final
>selling price is arrive at in the absence of maximum retail price. in
>india the pharmacist margin is fixed by govt. we do not have problems
>of waiting for govt reimbursement.

Like one of the previous posters I am also a retired  ( semi retired
is a better term since I still work one evening) ...

Anyway...  pricing has always been determined by the cost of doing
business...simply put if the "store" could not cover its operational
costs the doors were closed...!

My complaint TODAY is two fold...

1. 99 percent of the Pharmacists working today have absolutely no idea
of what a drug actually costs.... Seriously !  
2.And those Pharmacists have no idea of how much (the dispensing (
( fee) that the  Insurance Companies add to what they determine the
cost the drug really is....is unknown to those Pharmacists..

Can any working Pharmacist actually tell me how much it actually costs
them for a single month supply of any birth control pill?  Or can any
Pharmacist actually tell me what the dispensing fee the various
Insurance companies in their area  actually pay them ?  

Its too early on a Sunday morning to go any further ... But needless
to say This OLD Pharmacist is of the opinion that nobody in the store
has any idea of how any single Rx was priced..or if they actually made
any money..

Bob .


P T - 07 May 2006 17:29 GMT
Bob complained...

"...Can any working Pharmacist actually tell me how much it actually
costs them for a single month supply of any birth control pill? Or can
any Pharmacist actually tell me what the dispensing fee the various
Insurance companies in their area actually pay them ?  ... But needless
to say This OLD Pharmacist is of the opinion that nobody in the store
has any idea of how any single Rx was priced..or if they actually made
any money."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Well, of course not!  Those are owner / managerial functions, and as an
employee my time is best spent dispensing.  I know the companies make a
profit, or they would go bankrupt.  I know from the general scuttlebutt
that dispensing fees are lower than we'd like, but we're making the
payroll.  A few of our guys, "higher up," are in tune to that stuff.
Like one guy complained we could buy four 4 oz bottles of Cheratussin AC
for less than a 16 oz bottle, but the buyer seemed unimpressed.  I have
a general idea of costs, and I've caught a few errors on Quantity
Dispensed for some of those super-expensive meds. Like Copaxone or
Lovenox or BetaSeron, where it's muddy what "1" unit is. But you're
right, I don't know if we make anything on that #6 Bactrim DS.  Probably
very little, especially the Medicaid Rx.

I don't think the situation is that bad.
I suppose next you'll go on a rant that the young guys can't make powder
papers :-)
Pumbaa - 07 May 2006 20:04 GMT
I don't know if you can tell that much about a pharmacy chain by it's share
price.  Good old Rite Aid (RAD) for instance. If you had purchased $10,000
dollars of RAD in May 1996 it would have been worth 35K during January 1999.
Then the boom went bust!  By January 2001 your 10K was worth only about
$1900.  As of now, it is $4.65 a share.  MSN Money now gives it a rating of
9 out of a possible 10.

The site also says:

a.. RITE AID CORPORATION one-year sales growth: 2.70%.
Difference from the average for the Drug Stores group: -6.10 pct. pts.

If the average Drug Store has a sales growth of negative 6.10 percent, then
it will have to cut costs and work the employees harder if they are to make
any money. I have always believed that the chain pharmacies make more money
selling cheap Chinese junk, candy, OTC medications, so forth than they make
selling prescription drugs.
P T - 07 May 2006 23:40 GMT
I would be a buyer below 4, and a seller above 4. These target may need
to be adjusted with the general trend of the stock.

If a few experts issue bullish comments and it starts to run up, riding
it for a 20-50 cent profit would be another strategy I might employ.

I think you can make money with WAG.  Buy in the low 40s sell in the mid
40s. A buck here, a buck there... do that four times in a year and
you're up 10%.

The trouble with stock is, fundamentally, you must buy low and sell
high.  That means you must buy when everyone else thinks it is not worth
owning, and sell when everyone else thinks you'd be crazy to sell.  But
what do I know.
Bob G. - 08 May 2006 14:47 GMT
.

>If the average Drug Store has a sales growth of negative 6.10 percent, then
>it will have to cut costs and work the employees harder if they are to make
>any money. I have always believed that the chain pharmacies make more money
>selling cheap Chinese junk, candy, OTC medications, so forth than they make
>selling prescription drugs.

===============================
You should check the gross margins on Kitty Litter... OTC drugs
honestly are not a big profit center ..margins are ok at best, but the
turn over is slow...

Bob G.  
Bob G. - 08 May 2006 14:35 GMT
>I don't think the situation is that bad.
>I suppose next you'll go on a rant that the young guys can't make powder
>papers :-)

LOL....
    No  
I sure would not  complain about not knowing how to fold powder
papers... Even this OLD fart will admit that I have had to dispense
2, maybe 3 of those in my entire carreer and the last one was is the
60's...and I never had to hand roll a "pill" (thank the good Lord)  

But I'm sorry...Pharmacy is both a profession and a business and EVERY
Pharmacist  who practices the profession in a retail "store"   has to
be aware of that fact... Not to say he or she should actin in any way
less professional

Bob G.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.