Data Brief | | August 2024

Oregon Survey Respondents Worry about High Drug Costs; Support a Range of Government Solutions

According to a survey of more than 1,400 Oregon adults, conducted from June 6 to June 17, 2024,
respondents across the state are concerned about prescription drug costs and express a strong desire for
policymakers to enact solutions.

Roughly half (51%) 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 $75,000 to less than $100,000 per year experiencing the most worry (see Figure 1).¹
However, it is important to note that a percentage of households making less than $75,000 and more than $100,000 per year also reported worrying about the cost of prescription drugs.

---

---

In addition to the concerns about affording prescription drugs in the future, the survey reveals that more
than a quarter of respondents (27%) have had to ration medication due to cost concerns in the last year,
which for the purpose of this brief is defined as not filling a prescription, cutting pills in half or skipping a
dose (see Figure 2).

---

---

Lower-income respondents and respondents enrolled in Oregon Health Plan, the state Medicaid program,
reported the highest rates of rationing medications due to cost. However, these hardships are also
alarmingly prevalent in middle-income households. Also of note, respondents living in households with a
person with a disability reported markedly higher rates of rationing medication due to cost when
compared to respondents without a disabled household member (see Table 1).

---

---

Despite Oregon Health Plan, the state Medicaid program, paying for covered prescription drugs at no
cost to the enrollee, respondents enrolled in the program still reported the highest rates of rationing
medication due to cost. When asked to elaborate on the conditions which led them to ration or forgo
medication, respondents provided a variety of examples including the medication not being covered and
challenges meeting prior authorization requirements (see Table 2).

---

---

Considering the challenges respondents reported concerning prescription drug affordability, as well as
concerns about high healthcare costs generally,² it is not surprising that Oregon respondents are generally dissatisfied with the health care system. In fact, just 34% of respondents agreed or strongly
agreed that the United States health care system is “great,” while 75% agreed or strongly agreed that the
United States health care system needs to change.

Oregon respondents also frequently reported that they believe that drug companies charging too much
are a major reason for high health care costs. In fact, out of fifteen options, the most frequently cited
reasons for high health care costs were:

• 70% — Drug companies charging too much money
• 65% — Insurance companies charging too much money
• 64% — Hospitals charging too much money

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

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

Moreover, there is strong bipartisan support for a variety of policies designed to address unaffordable
prescription drug costs. For example, 91% of respondents agreed that drug companies should be required to provide advance notice of price increases and to provide information to justify those increases,
including 91% of respondents identifying as a Republican, 90% of respondents identifying as a Democrat
and 93% of unaffiliated respondents (see Table 3).

---

---

While Oregon respondents support government action to address high drug costs, they also see a role for
themselves. Seventy-two percent (72%) would switch from a brand-name to an equivalent generic drug if
given the chance, and 54% have sought or attempted to find the cost of a prescription drug beforehand.

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 should make addressing this consumer
burden a top priority. Recent legislative action at both the federal and state levels may positively impact
consumer affordability, specifically for prescription drugs used to treat chronic conditions such as insulin,
epinephrine autoinjectors and asthma inhalers. Annual surveys can help assess whether progress is being made.

Notes

1. Median household income in Oregon is $75,657 (2022 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates). U.S. Census, Quick Facts. Oregon - Census Bureau Profile
2. For more detailed information about healthcare affordability burdens facing Oregon respondents, please see Healthcare Value Hub, Oregon Residents Struggle to Afford High Healthcare Costs; Worry About Affording Healthcare in the Future; Support Government Action across Party Lines, Data Brief (August 2024).

Methodology

Altarum’s Consumer Healthcare Experience State Survey (CHESS) is designed to elicit respondents’ 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 June 6 to June 17, 2024, used a web panel from Dynata with a demographically balanced sample of approximately 1,551 respondents who live in Oregon. 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 1,499 cases for analysis. After those exclusions, the demographic composition of respondents was as follows, although not all demographic information has complete response rates: