Using a learning health system to understand the mismatch between medicines supply and actual medicines use among adults with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Studies in separate cohorts suggest possible discrepancies between inhaled medicines supplied (median 50-60%) and medicines used (median 30-40%). We performed the first study that directly compares CF medicine supply against use to identify the cost of excess medicines supply. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included participants from 12 UK adult centres with ≥1 year of continuous adherence data from data-logging nebulisers. Medicine supply was measured as medication possession ratio (MPR) for a 1-year period from the first suitable supply date. Medicine use was measured as electronic data capture (EDC) adherence over the same period. The cost of excess medicines was calculated as whole excess box(es) supplied after accounting for the discrepancy between EDC adherence and MPR with 20% contingency. RESULTS: Among 275 participants, 133 (48.4%) were females and mean age was 30 years (95% CI 29-31 years). Median EDC adherence was 57% (IQR 23-86%), median MPR was 74% (IQR 46-96%) and the discrepancy between measures was median 14% (IQR 2-29%). Even with 20% contingency, mean potential cost of excess medicines was £1,124 (95% CI £855-1,394), ranging from £183 (95% CI £29-338) for EDC adherence ≥80% to £2,017 (95% CI £1,507-2,526) for EDC adherence <50%. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a conservative estimate of excess inhaled medicines supply cost among adults with CF in the UK. The excess supply cost was highest among those with lowest EDC adherence, highlighting the importance of adherence support and supplying medicine according to actual use. MPR provides information about medicine supply but over-estimates actual medicine use.

Unlicensed residential programs: the next challenge in protecting youth.

Over the past decade in the United States, the number of private residential facilities for youth has grown exponentially, and many are neither licensed as mental health programs by states, nor accredited by respected national accrediting organizations. The Alliance for the Safe, Therapeutic and Appropriate use of Residential Treatment (A START) is a multi-disciplinary group of mental health professionals and advocates that formed in response to rising concerns about reports from youth, families and journalists describing mistreatment in a number of the unregulated programs. This article summarizes the information gathered by A START regarding unregulated facilities. It provides an overview of common program features, marketing strategies and transportation options. It describes the range of mistreatment and abuse experienced by youth and families, including harsh discipline, inappropriate seclusion and restraint, substandard psychotherapeutic interventions, medical and nutritional neglect, rights violations and death. It reviews the licensing, regulatory and accrediting mechanisms associated with the protection of youth in residential programs, or the lack thereof. Finally, it outlines policy implications and provides recommendations for the protection of youth and families who pursue residential treatment.