print-icon.png

email-icon.png

 

 

Data Brief | | December 2023

North Carolina Survey Respondents Worried about High Drug Costs; Support a Range of Government Solutions

According to a survey of more than 1,400 North Carolina adults, conducted from October 18 to October
23, 2023, respondents are concerned about prescription drug costs and express a strong desire for
policymakers to enact solutions.

More than half (58%) of survey respondents reported being somewhat or very worried about affording the
cost of prescription drugs. Worry varied substantially by income group, with respondents in households
making less than $50,000 per year1 experiencing the most worry (see Figure 1). However, it is important
to note that households at all income levels reported high levels of worry.


NC_Rx_Brief_2023_Figure1.png


In addition to being worried about prescription drug affordability in the future, many North Carolina
respondents have skipped, delayed, or avoided care altogether in the prior 12 months due to the
cost. 1 in 3 respondents (33%) reported rationing medication by either not filling a prescription, cutting
pills in half, or skipping a dose of medicine in the last year due to cost (see Figure 2).


NC_Rx_Brief_2023_Figure2.png


NC_Rx_Brief_2023_Table1.png


These hardships disproportionately impact people in lower-income households. As Table 1 shows,
respondents living in households earning less than $50,000 and those earning between $50,000 and
$75,000 per year reported higher rates of rationing their prescription medicines than respondents living in
higher-income households. However, these hardships are alarmingly prevalent in middle-income
households as well.

Respondents with North Carolina Medicaid coverage reported the highest rates of rationing medication
compared to other insurance types, followed by those with private insurance. Finally, respondents living in
households with a person with a disability reported notably higher rates of rationing medication due to cost in the past 12 months compared to respondents without a disabled household member (see Table 1).

Considering these prescription drug cost concerns—as well as concerns about high healthcare costs
generally2—it is not surprising that North Carolina respondents were generally dissatisfied with the health
system:

  • Just 30% agreed or strongly agreed that “we have a great healthcare system in the U.S.,”
  • While 75% agreed or strongly agreed that “the system needs to change.”

North Carolina respondents see a role for themselves in addressing prescription drug affordability. When
asked about specific actions they could take:

  • 59% of respondents reported researching the cost of a drug beforehand, and
  • 80% said they would be willing to switch from a brand name to an equivalent generic drug if given the chance.

When given more than 20 options, the options cited most frequently as being a "major reason" for high
healthcare costs were:

  • 77%—Drug companies charging too much money
  • 73%—Hospitals charging too much money
  • 70%—Insurance companies charging too much money

When it comes to tackling high drug costs, North Carolina respondents endorsed a number of prescription
drug-related strategies:

  • 92%—Cap out-of-pocket costs for life-saving medications, such as insulin
  • 92%—Require drug companies to provide advanced notice of price increases and information to justify those increases
  • 91%—Authorize the Attorney General to take legal action to prevent price gouging or unfair prescription drug price hikes
  • 90%—Set standard prices for drugs to make them affordable
  • 90%—Create a Prescription Drug Affordability Board to examine the evidence and establish acceptable costs for drugs
  • 89%—Prohibit drug companies from charging more in the U.S. than abroad

Moreover, there is substantial support for government action on drug costs regardless of the respondent’s
political affiliation (see Table 2).


NC_Rx_Brief_2023_Table2.png


Conclusion

The high burden of healthcare and prescription drug affordability, along with high levels of support for
change, suggests that elected leaders and other stakeholders need to make addressing this consumer
burden a top priority. Moreover, the COVID crisis has led state residents to take a hard look at how well
health and public health systems are working for them, with strong support for a wide variety of actions.
Annual surveys can help assess whether progress is being made.

Notes

  1. Median household income in North Carolina was $60,516 (2017-2021). U.S. Census, Quick Facts. Retrieved from: U.S.Census Bureau QuickFacts
  2. For more detailed information about healthcare affordability burdens facing North Carolina respondents, please see Healthcare Value Hub, North Carolina Residents Struggle to Afford High Healthcare Costs; Worry About Affording Healthcare in the Future; Support Government Action across Party Lines, Data Brief (December 2023).

Methodology

Altarum’s Consumer Healthcare Experience State Survey (CHESS) is designed to elicit respondents’ unbiased views on a wide range of health system issues, including confidence using the health system, financial burden and possible policy solutions.

This survey, conducted from October 18 to October 23, 2023, used a web panel from online survey company Dynata with a demographically balanced sample of approximately 1,500 respondents who live in North Carolina. Information about Dynata’s recruitment and compensation methods can be found here. The survey was conducted in English or Spanish and restricted to adults ages 18 and older. Respondents who finished the survey in less than half the median time were excluded from the final sample, leaving 1,455 cases for analysis. After those exclusions, the demographic composition of respondents was as follows, although not all demographic information has complete response rates:

NC_Rx_Brief_2023_Methodology.png

Percentages in the body of the brief are based on weighted values, while the data presented in the demographic table is unweighted. An explanation of weighted versus unweighted variables is available here. Altarum does not conduct statistical calculations on the significance of differences between groups in findings. Therefore, determinations that one group experienced a significantly different affordability burden than another should not be inferred. Rather, comparisons are for conversational purposes. The groups selected for this brief were selected by advocate partners in each state based on organizational/advocacy priorities. We do not report any estimates under N=100 and a co-efficient of
variance more than 0.30.
 

Appendix

NC_Affordability_Brief_2023_Appendix.png

Black Belt

Non-Rural

Rural

Anson County, North Carolina

Alamance County, North Carolina

Alleghany County, North Carolina

Bertie County, North Carolina

Alexander County, North Carolina

Ashe County, North Carolina

Bladen County, North Carolina

Brunswick County, North Carolina

Avery County, North Carolina

Columbus County, North Carolina

Buncombe County, North Carolina

Beaufort County, North Carolina

Cumberland County, North Carolina

Burke County, North Carolina

Camden County, North Carolina

Duplin County, North Carolina

Cabarrus County, North Carolina

Carteret County, North Carolina

Edgecombe County, North Carolina

Caldwell County, North Carolina

Caswell County, North Carolina

Franklin County, North Carolina

Catawba County, North Carolina

Cherokee County, North Carolina

Gates County, North Carolina

Chatham County, North Carolina

Chowan County, North Carolina

Granville County, North Carolina

Craven County, North Carolina

Clay County, North Carolina

Greene County, North Carolina

Currituck County, North Carolina

Cleveland County, North Carolina

Halifax County, North Carolina

Davidson County, North Carolina

Dare County, North Carolina

Hertford County, North Carolina

Davie County, North Carolina

Graham County, North Carolina

Hoke County, North Carolina

Durham County, North Carolina

Harnett County, North Carolina

Lenoir County, North Carolina

Forsyth County, North Carolina

Hyde County, North Carolina

Martin County, North Carolina

Gaston County, North Carolina

Jackson County, North Carolina

Nash County, North Carolina

Guilford County, North Carolina

Lee County, North Carolina

Northampton County, North Carolina

Haywood County, North Carolina

McDowell County, North Carolina

Pitt County, North Carolina

Henderson County, North Carolina

Macon County, North Carolina

Richmond County, North Carolina

Iredell County, North Carolina

Mitchell County, North Carolina

Robeson County, North Carolina

Johnston County, North Carolina

Montgomery County, North Carolina

Sampson County, North Carolina

Jones County, North Carolina

Moore County, North Carolina

Scotland County, North Carolina

Lincoln County, North Carolina

Pasquotank County, North Carolina

Tyrrell County, North Carolina

Madison County, North Carolina

Perquimans County, North Carolina

Vance County, North Carolina

Mecklenburg County, North Carolina

Polk County, North Carolina

Warren County, North Carolina

New Hanover County, North Carolina

Rutherford County, North Carolina

Washington County, North Carolina

Onslow County, North Carolina

Stanly County, North Carolina

Wayne County, North Carolina

Orange County, North Carolina

Surry County, North Carolina

Wilson County, North Carolina

Pamlico County, North Carolina

Swain County, North Carolina

 

Pender County, North Carolina

Transylvania County, North Carolina

 

Person County, North Carolina

Watauga County, North Carolina

 

Randolph County, North Carolina

Wilkes County, North Carolina

 

Rockingham County, North Carolina

Yancey County, North Carolina

 

Rowan County, North Carolina

 

 

Stokes County, North Carolina

 

 

Union County, North Carolina

 

 

Wake County, North Carolina

 

 

Yadkin County, North Carolina