Assessing the postdeployment quality of treatment for substance use disorders among Army enlisted soldiers in the Military Health System.

Little is known about the rates and predictors of substance use treatment received in the Military Health System among Army soldiers diagnosed with a postdeployment substance use disorder (SUD). We used data from the Substance Use and Psychological Injury Combat study to determine the proportion of active duty (n = 338,708) and National Guard/Reserve (n = 178,801) enlisted soldiers returning from an Afghanistan/Iraq deployment in fiscal years 2008 to 2011 who had an SUD diagnosis in the first 150 days postdeployment. Among soldiers diagnosed with an SUD, we examined the rates and predictors of substance use treatment initiation and engagement according to the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set criteria. In the first 150 days postdeployment 3.3% of active duty soldiers and 1.0% of National Guard/Reserve soldiers were diagnosed with an SUD. Active duty soldiers were more likely to initiate and engage in substance use treatment than National Guard/Reserve soldiers, yet overall, engagement rates were low (25.0% and 15.7%, respectively). Soldiers were more likely to engage in treatment if they received their index diagnosis in a specialty behavioral health setting. Efforts to improve substance use treatment in the Military Health System should include initiatives to more accurately identify soldiers with undiagnosed SUD. Suggestions to improve substance use treatment engagement in the Military Health System will be discussed.

Impact of recovery support navigators on continuity of care after detoxification.

Although evidence points to the benefits of continuity of care after detoxification (detox), especially when continuity of care occurs within a short time after discharge from a detox episode, the rate at which clients engage in continued treatment after detox remains low. The goal of the study was to develop and deploy a specially trained workforce, called recovery support navigators (RSNs), to increase the likelihood of clients continuing onto treatment after detox. Continuity of care is defined as receiving any substance use disorder (SUD) treatment service within 14 days of discharge from the index detox. We examined whether clients in the RSN Intervention group were more likely to meet the continuity of care after detox criteria than clients in the treatment-as-usual (TAU) group. A quasi-experimental intervention versus comparison group study was conducted. Data were from the Massachusetts Behavioral Health Partnership (MBHP), a Beacon Health Options company that manages behavioral health benefits for a subset of Medicaid beneficiaries in the state. Inclusion in the analytic sample (N = 4,236) required that the client's index admission to detox was between 3/29/13 and 3/31/15. RSN Intervention versus TAU status was assigned based on provider organization where the index detox occurred. Analyses were conducted on an intent-to-treat basis. Overall, the continuity of care rate across all study groups was 42%. The rate by study group was 38% for the TAU and 45% for the RSN group. Clients who were in the RSN group were significantly more likely to have continuity of care after discharge from detox than those in the TAU (OR = 1.233, p < .05, 95% CI = 1.044, 1.455). Clients who entered detox at a site that provided specialized training to RSN, which included motivational interviewing and educational sessions related to treatment issues, and allowing them to bill with a flexible daily case rate instead of the usual fee-for-service billing, were more likely to have continuity of care after discharge from detox compared to clients in the TAU group.

Referral to Treatment After Positive Screens for Unhealthy Drug Use in an Outpatient Veterans Administration Setting.

OBJECTIVES: To measure the rates and predictors of clinician recommendation for follow-up after a positive screen for unhealthy drug use, in a context of mandatory routine screening. To measure response to clinician recommendations and identification of new drug use diagnoses. METHODS: Data are from a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical center that introduced mandatory routine screening for unhealthy drug use in outpatient primary care and mental health settings, using a validated single question. This study analyzed VHA electronic health records data for patients who screened positive for unhealthy drug use (n = 570) and estimated logistic regression models to identify the predictors of receiving a recommendation for any follow-up and for specialty substance use disorder (SUD) treatment. Bivariate tests were used for other analyses. RESULTS: Among patients who screened positive for unhealthy drug use, 66% received no recommendation to return to primary care or another setting from the screening clinician. Further, among the 23% of patients who received a recommendation to visit specialty SUD treatment, only 25% completed the visit within 60 days. Six percent of all positive screens both received a referral to specialty SUD treatment and acted upon it. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of mandatory drug use screening using a single item, rates of clinician action and patient receipt of care appeared low. Improved follow-up will require health systems to provide more supports for clinicians and patients at each of the stages from positive screen to attending the follow-up appointment.

Cost Savings from a Navigator Intervention for Repeat Detoxification Clients.

BACKGROUND: Many clients with substance use disorders (SUD) have multiple admissions to a 24-hour level of care for detoxification without ever progressing to SUD treatment. In the US, health insurers have become concerned about the high costs and ineffective results of repeat detox admissions. For other diseases, health systems increasingly target high-risk, high-cost patients with individually tailored interventions delivered by `navigators' who help patients negotiate the complex health care system. Patient incentives are another increasingly common intervention. AIMS OF THE STUDY: (i) To examine how health care spending was affected by an intervention intended to improve entry to SUD treatment among clients who had multiple detox admissions. (ii) To see whether spending effects, overall and by type of service, differed by intervention arm. (iii) To assess whether the intervention resulted in net savings from the payer perspective, after subtracting implementation costs. METHODS: The intervention was implemented in a segment of the Massachusetts Medicaid population, and used Recovery Support Navigators (RSNs) who were trained to effectively engage and connect clients with SUD to follow-up care and community resources. Services were funded using a flat daily rate per client. Additionally, in one of the two intervention arms, clients were offered successive incentive payments for meeting pre-specified milestones to reinforce recovery-oriented behaviors. For this paper, multivariate analyses of claims and administrative data were used to measure the intervention's effect on health care spending, and to estimate net savings to the payer. RESULTS: Health care spending grew 1.6 percentage points more slowly for intervention-enrolled members than for others, implying gross savings of $68 per member per month. After subtracting intervention-related costs, net savings were estimated at $57 per member per month. The intervention was also associated with shifts in the health care service mix from more to less acute settings. DISCUSSION: While the results for total spending did not reach statistical significance, they suggest some potential for insurers to reduce the health care costs associated with repeat detox utilization by using a navigator-based intervention. Analyses reported elsewhere found that this intervention had favorable effects on rates of initiation of SUD treatment. Limitations of the study include the fact that neither subjects nor sites were randomized between study groups; lack of data on crime or productivity outcomes; low participant use of RSN services; and a policy change which altered the participant pool and truncated follow-up for some. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: These results suggest some potential for payers to reduce the health care costs associated with repeat detox by using a navigator-based intervention. To the extent that this results in shifting resources from repeat detox to actual treatment, the result should provide longer term benefit to the population coping with SUD. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY: These results may encourage Medicaid and other payers to further experiment with similar interventions using navigators to decrease health care costs and improved the lives of SUD patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: It could be informative to test similar navigator interventions for detox patients in other settings where enrollment periods are longer.

Prevalence and predictors of physician recommendations for medication adjustment in bipolar disorder treatment.

BACKGROUND: Successful medication management for bipolar disorder requires clinicians to monitor and adjust regimens as needed, to achieve maximum effectiveness and patient adherence. This study aims to measure the prevalence of indications for medication adjustment at visits for bipolar disorder treatment; the frequency with which physicians recommend medication adjustments; and how strongly the indications predict the adjustments. METHODS: Data included 3,094 visits for 457 patients in Bipolar CHOICE, a comparative effectiveness study that compared treatment with lithium versus quetiapine. A set of indications for adjustment was matched to reports of whether the physician recommended a medication adjustment at that visit, and what type. Associations between indication and adjustment were examined using bivariate tests and hierarchical logistic mixed effects models. RESULTS: Medication adjustment was recommended at 63% of the visits where one of the indications was present, and at 53% of all visits. In multivariable analyses, adjustment was more likely to be recommended if there was an indication of non-response or side effects, for patients who started on quetiapine rather than lithium, or for patients who were female, married, employed or more educated. LIMITATIONS: The study's cross-sectional design implies that observed associations could result from confounding variables. Also, the CHOICE trial placed certain restrictions on physicians' medication choices, although this is not likely to have resulted in major alterations of prescribing patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical inertia may help explain the lack of any adjustment recommendation at 37% of the visits where one of the indications was present. Other explanations could also apply, such as watchful waiting.

Implementing single-item screening for drug use in a Veterans Health Administration outpatient setting.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy drug use is a concern in many settings, including military and veteran populations. In 2013, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical center in Bedford, Massachusetts, started requiring routine screening for unhealthy drug use in outpatient primary care and mental health settings, using a validated single question. METHODS: This study used descriptive and multivariable analyses of VHA electronic records for patients eligible for the screening program (N = 16,118). The study assessed first-year rates and predictors of screening and of positive screens, both for drug use and for unhealthy alcohol use, for which screening was already required. RESULTS: During the first year, 70% of patients were screened for unhealthy drug use and 84% were screened for unhealthy alcohol use. In multivariable analyses, screening for drug use was more likely for patients who had 8 or more days with VHA visits or were aged 40 or over. Patients with a prior drug use disorder diagnosis were much less likely to be screened. Three percent of patients screened for unhealthy drug use had a positive screen, and 14% of those screened for unhealthy alcohol use had a positive screen. Strong predictors of a positive drug use screen included a prior-year diagnosis of drug use disorder, any mental health clinic visits, younger age, or being unmarried. CONCLUSIONS: The drug screening initiative was relatively successful in its first-year implementation, having screened 70% of eligible subjects. However, it failed to screen many of those most likely to screen positive, thereby missing many opportunities to address unhealthy drug use. Future refinements should include better training clinicians in how to ask sensitive questions and how to address positive screens.

The Role of Health Plans in Supporting Behavioral Health Integration.

Health plan policies can influence delivery of integrated behavioral health and general medical care. This study provides national estimates for the prevalence of practices used by health plans that may support behavioral health integration. Results indicate that health plans employ financing and other policies likely to support integration. They also directly provide services that facilitate integration. Behavioral health contracting arrangements are associated with use of these policies. Delivery of integrated care requires systemic changes by both providers and payers thus health plans are key players in achieving this goal.

How Do Private Health Plans Manage Specialty Behavioral Health Treatment Entry and Continuing Care?

OBJECTIVE: This study examined private health plans' arrangements for accessing and continuing specialty behavioral health treatment in 2010 as federal health reforms were being implemented. These management practices have historically been stricter in behavioral health care than in general medical care; however, the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2010 required parity in management policies. METHODS: The data source was a nationally representative survey of private health plans' behavioral health treatment management approaches in 2010. Health plan executives were asked about activities for their plan's three products with highest enrollment (weighted N=8,427, 88% response rate). RESULTS: Prior authorization for outpatient behavioral health care was rarely required (4.7% of products), but 75% of products required authorization for ongoing care and over 90% required prior authorization for other levels of care. The most common medical necessity criteria were self-developed and American Society of Addiction Medicine criteria. Nearly all products had formal standards to limit waiting time for routine and urgent treatment, but almost 30% lacked such standards for detoxification services. A range of wait time-monitoring approaches was used. CONCLUSIONS: Health plans used a variety of methods to influence behavioral health treatment entry and continuing care. Few relied on prior authorization for outpatient care, but the use of other approaches to influence, manage, or facilitate access was common. Results provide a baseline for understanding the current management environment for specialty behavioral health care. Tracking health plans' approaches over time will be important to ensure that access to behavioral health care is not prohibitively restrictive.

Testing for clinical inertia in medication treatment of bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: Clinical inertia has been defined as lack of change in medication treatment at visits where a medication adjustment appears to be indicated. This paper seeks to identify the extent of clinical inertia in medication treatment of bipolar disorder. A second goal is to identify patient characteristics that predict this treatment pattern. METHOD: Data describe 23,406 visits made by 1815 patients treated for bipolar disorder during the STEP-BD practical clinical trial. Visits were classified in terms of whether a medication adjustment appears to be indicated, and also whether or not one occurred. Multivariable regression analyses were conducted to find which patient characteristics were predictive of whether adjustment occurred. RESULTS: 36% of visits showed at least 1 indication for adjustment. The most common indications were non-response to medication, side effects, and start of a new illness episode. Among visits with an indication for adjustment, no adjustment occurred 19% of the time, which may be suggestive of clinical inertia. In multivariable models, presence of any indication for medication adjustment was a predictor of receiving one (OR=1.125, 95% CI =1.015, 1.246), although not as strong as clinical status measures. LIMITATIONS: The associations observed are not necessarily causal, given the study design. The data also lack information about physician-patient communication. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients remained on the same medication regimen despite indications of side effects or non-response to treatment. Although lack of adjustment does not necessarily reflect clinical inertia in all cases, the reasons for this treatment pattern merit further examination.

Behavioral Health Services in the Changing Landscape of Private Health Plans.

OBJECTIVE: Health plans play a key role in facilitating improvements in population health and may engage in activities that have an impact on access, cost, and quality of behavioral health care. Although behavioral health care is becoming more integrated with general medical care, its delivery system has unique aspects. The study examined how health plans deliver and manage behavioral health care in the context of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the 2008 Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA). This is a critical time to examine how health plans manage behavioral health care. METHODS: A nationally representative survey of private health plans (weighted N=8,431 products; 89% response rate) was conducted in 2010 during the first year of MHPAEA, when plans were subject to the law but before final regulations, and just before the ACA went into effect. The survey addressed behavioral health coverage, cost-sharing, contracting arrangements, medical home innovations, support for technology, and financial incentives to improve behavioral health care. RESULTS: Coverage for inpatient and outpatient behavioral health services was stable between 2003 and 2010. In 2010, health plans were more likely than in 2003 to manage behavioral health care through internal arrangements and to contract for other services. Medical home initiatives were common and almost always included behavioral health, but financial incentives did not. Some plans facilitated providers' use of technology to improve care delivery, but this was not the norm. CONCLUSIONS: Health plans are key to mainstreaming and supporting delivery of high-quality behavioral health services. Since 2003, plans have made changes to support delivery of behavioral health services in the context of a rapidly changing environment.

Health Plans' Early Response to Federal Parity Legislation for Mental Health and Addiction Services.

OBJECTIVE: In 2008, the federal Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) passed, prohibiting U.S. health plans from subjecting mental health and substance use disorder (behavioral health) coverage to more restrictive limitations than those applied to general medical care. This require d some health plans to make changes in coverage and management of services. The aim of this study was to examine private health plans' early responses to MHPAEA (after its 2010 implementation), in terms of both intended and unintended effects. METHODS: Data were from a nationally representative survey of commercial health plans regarding the 2010 benefit year and the preparity 2009 benefit year (weighted N=8,431 products; 89% response rate). RESULTS: Annual limits specific to behavioral health care were virtually eliminated between 2009 and 2010. Prevalence of behavioral health coverage was unchanged, and copayments for both behavioral and general medical services increased slightly. Prior authorization requirements for specialty medical and behavioral health outpatient services continued to decline, and the proportion of products reporting strict continuing review requirements increased slightly. Contrary to expectations, plans did not make significant changes in contracting arrangements for behavioral health services, and 80% reported an increase in size of their behavioral health provider network. CONCLUSIONS: The law had the intended effect of eliminating quantitative limitations that applied only to behavioral health care without unintended consequences such as eliminating behavioral health coverage. Plan decisions may also reflect other factors, including anticipation of the 2010 regulations and a continuation of trends away from requiring prior authorization.

Management of Newer Antidepressant Medications in U.S. Commercial Health Plans.

BACKGROUND: Private health insurance plays a large role in the U.S. health system, including for many individuals with depression. Private insurers have been actively trying to influence pharmaceutical utilization and costs, particularly for newer and costlier medications. The approaches that insurers use may have important effects on patients' access to antidepressant medications. AIMS OF THE STUDY: To report which approaches (e.g., tiered copayments, prior authorization, and step therapy) commercial health plans are employing to manage newer antidepressant medications, and how the use of these approaches has changed since 2003. METHODS: Data are from a nationally representative survey of commercial health plans in 60 market areas regarding alcohol, drug abuse and mental health services in 2010. Responses were obtained from 389 plans (89% response rate), reporting on 925 insurance products. For each of six branded antidepressant medications, respondents were asked whether the plan covered the medication and if so, on what copayment tier, and whether it was subject to prior authorization or step therapy. Measures of management approach were constructed for each medication and for the group of medications. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were used to test for association of the management approach with various health plan characteristics. RESULTS: Less than 1% of health plan products excluded any of the six antidepressants studied. Medications were more likely to be subjected to restrictions if they were newer, more expensive or were reformulations. 55% of products used placement on a high cost-sharing tier (3 or 4) as their only form of restriction for newer branded antidepressants. This proportion was lower than in 2003, when 71% of products took this approach. In addition, only 2% of products left all the newer branded medications unrestricted, down from 25% in 2003. Multivariate analysis indicated that preferred provider organizations were more likely than other product types to use tier 3 or 4 placement. DISCUSSION: We find that U.S. health plans are using a variety of strategies to manage cost and utilization of newer branded antidepressant medications. Plans appear to be finding that approaches other than exclusion are adequate to meet their cost-management goals for newer branded antidepressants, although they have increased their use of administrative restrictions since 2003. Limitations include lack of information about how administrative restrictions were applied in practice, information on only six medications, and some potential for endogeneity bias in the regression analyses. CONCLUSION: This study has documented substantial use of various restrictions on access to newer branded antidepressants in U.S. commercial health plans. Most of these medications had generic equivalents that offered at least some substitutability, reducing access concerns. At the same time, it is worth noting that high copayments and administrative requirements can nonetheless be burdensome for some patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY: Health plans' pharmacy management approaches may concern policymakers less than in the early 2000s, due to the lesser distinctiveness of today's branded medications. This may change depending on future drug introductions. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Future research should examine the impact of plans' pharmacy management approaches, using patient-level data.

Management of newer medications for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in commercial health plans.

PURPOSE: In the United States, many individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) pay for their medications using private health insurance coverage. As in other drug classes, private insurers are actively seeking to influence use and costs, particularly for newer and costlier medications. The approaches that insurers use may have important effects on patients' access to medications. This article examines approaches (eg, copayments, prior authorization, and step therapy) that commercial health plans are using to manage newer medications used to treat ADHD and changes in approaches since 2003. METHODS: Data are from a nationally representative survey of commercial health plans in 60 market areas regarding alcohol, drug abuse, and mental health services in 2010. Responses were obtained from 389 plans (89% response rate), reporting on 925 insurance products. For each of 6 branded ADHD medications, respondents were asked whether the plan covered the medication and, if so, on what copayment tier each medication was placed and whether it was subject to prior authorization or step therapy. Measures of management approach were constructed for each medication and for the group of medications. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were used to test for association of the management approach with various health plan characteristics. FINDINGS: There was considerable variation across these 6 medications in how tightly they were managed by health plans, with newer medications being subject to more stringent management. The proportion of insurance products relying solely on copayment tiering to manage new ADHD medications appears to have decreased since 2003. Less than half of insurance products (43%) managed these 6 medications solely by use of tier 3 or 4 placement, and most of the remainder (48%) used other restrictions (with or without tier 3 or 4 placement). The average insurance product restricted access to at least 3 of the 6 brand-only medications examined, whether through copayment tier placement or other approaches. More ADHD medications were left unrestricted in health maintenance organization products than in preferred provider organization ones, products with internal or hybrid-internal contracts for behavioral health, those not contracting with pharmacy benefits managers, and those with for-profit ownership. IMPLICATIONS: Many plans have supplemented copayment tiering with other approaches, such as prior authorization and step therapy, to influence use and decrease costs. It may be that plans have found copayments to be less effective in redirecting use in this medication class. The effect on clinical outcomes was not examined in this study but should be prioritized using other data sources.

Rationale and methods of the Substance Use and Psychological Injury Combat Study (SUPIC): a longitudinal study of Army service members returning from deployment in FY2008-2011.

The Substance Use and Psychological Injury Combat Study (SUPIC) will examine whether early detection and intervention for post-deployment problems among Army Active Duty and National Guard/Reservists returning from Iraq or Afghanistan are associated with improved long-term substance use and psychological outcomes. This paper describes the rationale and significance of SUPIC, and presents demographic and deployment characteristics of the study sample (N = 643,205), and self-reported alcohol use and health problems from the subsample with matched post-deployment health assessments (N = 487,600). This longitudinal study aims to provide new insight into the long-term post-deployment outcomes of Army members by combining service member data from the Military Health System and Veterans Health Administration.

Gender differences in substance use treatment utilization in the year prior to deployment in Army service members.

Although military men have heavier drinking patterns, military women experience equal or higher rates of dependence symptoms and similar rates of alcohol-related problems as men at lower levels of consumption. Thus, gender may be important for understanding substance use treatment (SUT) utilization before deployment. Military health system data were analyzed to examine gender differences in both substance use diagnosis (SUDX) and SUT in 152,447 Army service members returning from deployments in FY2010. Propensity score analysis of probability of SUDX indicated that women had lower odds (AOR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.86-0.96) of military lifetime SUDX. After adjusting for lifetime SUDX using propensity score analysis, multivariate regression found women had substantially lower odds (AOR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.54-0.70) of using SUT the year prior to deployment. Findings suggest gender disparities in military-provided SUT and a need to consider whether military substance use assessment protocols are sensitive to gender differences.

Drinking patterns of older adults with chronic medical conditions.

BACKGROUND: Understanding alcohol consumption patterns of older adults with chronic illness is important given the aging baby boomer generation, the increase in prevalence of chronic conditions and associated medication use, and the potential consequences of excessive drinking in this population. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of alcohol consumption patterns, including at-risk drinking, in older adults with at least one of seven common chronic conditions. DESIGN/METHODS: This descriptive study used the nationally representative 2005 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey linked with Medicare claims. The sample included community-dwelling, fee-for-service beneficiaries 65 years and older with one or more of seven chronic conditions (Alzheimer's disease and other senile dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, diabetes, heart failure, hypertension, and stroke; n = 7,422). Based on self-reported alcohol consumption, individuals were categorized as nondrinkers, within-guidelines drinkers, or at-risk drinkers (exceeds guidelines). RESULTS: Overall, 30.9 % (CI 28.0-34.1 %) of older adults with at least one of seven chronic conditions reported alcohol consumption in a typical month in the past year, and 6.9 % (CI 6.0-7.8 %) reported at-risk drinking. Older adults with higher chronic disease burdens were less likely to report alcohol consumption and at-risk drinking. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one-third of older adults with selected chronic illnesses report drinking alcohol and almost 7 % drink in excess of National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) guidelines. It is important for physicians and patients to discuss alcohol consumption as a component of chronic illness management. In cases of at-risk drinking, providers have an opportunity to provide brief intervention or to offer referrals if needed.

Characteristics of practitioners in a private managed behavioral health plan.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the practitioners in managed behavioral healthcare organization (MBHO) networks who are treating mental and substance use disorders among privately insured patients in the United States. It is likely that the role of the private sector in treating behavioral health will increase due to the recent implementation of federal parity legislation and the inclusion of behavioral health as a required service in the insurance exchange plans created under healthcare reform. Further, the healthcare reform legislation has highlighted the need to ensure a qualified workforce in order to improve access to quality healthcare, and provides an additional focus on the behavioral health workforce. To expand understanding of treatment of mental and substance use disorders among privately insured patients, this study examines practitioner types, experience, specialized expertise, and demographics of in-network practitioners providing outpatient care in one large national MBHO. METHODS: Descriptive analyses used 2004 practitioner credentialing and other administrative data for one MBHO. The sample included 28,897 practitioners who submitted at least one outpatient claim in 2004. Chi-square and t-tests were used to compare findings across types of practitioners. RESULTS: About half of practitioners were female, 12% were bilingual, and mean age was 53, with significant variation by practitioner type. On average, practitioners report 15.3 years of experience (SD = 9.4), also with significant variation by practitioner type. Many practitioners reported specialized expertise, with about 40% reporting expertise for treating children and about 60% for treating adolescents. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, these results based on self-report indicate that the practitioner network in this large MBHO is experienced and has specialized training, but echo concerns about the aging of this workforce. These data should provide us with a baseline of practitioner characteristics as we enter an era that anticipates great change in the behavioral health workforce.

Is Customization in Antidepressant Prescribing Associated with Acute-Phase Treatment Adherence?

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to explore whether prescribing variation is associated with duration of antidepressant use during the acute phase of treatment. Improving quality of care and increasing the extent to which treatment is patient-centered and customized are interrelated goals. Prescribing variation may be considered a marker of customization, and could be associated with better antidepressant treatment adherence. METHODS: A cross-sectional secondary data analysis examining the association between providers' antidepressant prescribing variation and patient continuity of antidepressant treatment. The data source was two states' Medicaid claims for dual-eligible Medicaid/Medicare patients. The sample included 383 patients with new episodes of antidepressant treatment, representing 70 providers with at least four patients in the sample. We tested two alternate measures of prescribing concentration: 1) share of prescriber's initial antidepressant prescribing accounted for by the two most common regimens, and 2) Herfindahl index. The HEDIS performance measure of effective acute-phase treatment (at least 84 out of 114 days with antidepressant) was the dependent variable. KEY FINDINGS: In multivariate analyses, the concentration measure based on the top two regimens was significant and inversely related to duration adequacy (p <.05). The Herfindahl index measure showed a trend towards a similar inverse relationship (p<.10). CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide some support for the hypothesized relationship between prescribing variation and adequate antidepressant treatment duration during the acute phase of treatment. Future work with more detailed, clinical longitudinal data could extend this inquiry to better understand the causal mechanisms using a more direct measure of customized care.

The relationship of antidepressant prescribing concentration to treatment duration and cost.

BACKGROUND: Widely accepted treatment guidelines and performance measures encourage patients to stay on antidepressant medication beyond the acute phase of treatment in order to achieve full remission and reduce risk of relapse. However, many patients discontinue antidepressant medication treatment prematurely for various reasons, including side-effects or nonresponse to the initial medication prescribed. Customization of medications to differing patient profiles could potentially improve medication treatment duration, but for many diseases physicians tend to concentrate on a limited subset of available medications. Little is known about the effects of concentration in prescribing on medication treatment duration and expenditures. AIMS OF THE STUDY: To determine the extent to which prescribing for treatment of depression is concentrated, using data from a privately insured population. To evaluate the relationship between prescribing concentration and subsequent duration of medication treatment, expenditure on medications, and the number of distinct medications used. STUDY POPULATION: Individuals receiving antidepressant treatment paid for by a large private managed behavioral health organization, in the US. METHODS: The study uses psychotropic pharmacy claims data for 2003-06 for plan members who received a depression diagnosis and had an antidepressant claim. The resulting sample includes 9,017 patients seen by 543 prescribers. For each prescriber, we compute prescribing concentration, using the Herfindahl index and the share for the three most-used medications. Treatment expenditure is computed as the sum of payments by plan and by patients. Regression analysis is used to identify the association of prescribing concentration with medication treatment duration, expenditures and other utilization measures. RESULTS: For these physicians, the mean share of the physician's total antidepressant prescribing accounted for by their three most-used regimens was 72%. The mean value of the Herfindahl index was 0.27. Over the 180-day follow-up period, the average patient had 103 days covered by antidepressant prescriptions, resulting in mean expenditures of $286, or $2.25 per day of medication supplied. Regression analysis indicates that higher concentration in a physician's prescribing was associated with fewer days of antidepressant coverage, lower medication expenditures, and subsequent use of fewer distinct medications. DISCUSSION: Higher concentration in prescribing is associated with shorter observed duration of medication treatment and lower expenditures on medications. The lower expenditures appear to be due to earlier discontinuation and fewer different medications, not to a lower cost per day supplied. Limitations of this study include lack of data on medical visits or on reasons for medication discontinuation, as the study is based on pharmacy claims data, not medical claims or surveys. In addition, it is not known whether the patient's antidepressant use represents a new episode. Finally, lack of randomization implies that the associations identified may not be causal. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: Concentration of physicians on certain medications may run counter to the increasing calls for customization of medication selection. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY: Insurer policies which limit physicians' choice of medications may be lowering expenditures in part by reducing patients' medication treatment duration. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Additional studies are needed to understand what mechanisms may link concentration in prescribing to medication treatment duration and expenditures.