A Longitudinal Multivariable Analysis: State Policies and Opioid Dispensing in Medicare Beneficiaries Undergoing Surgery.

BACKGROUND: States have implemented policies to decrease clinically unnecessary opioid prescribing, but few studies have examined how state policies affect opioid dispensing rate trends for surgical patients. OBJECTIVE: To examine trends in the perioperative opioid dispensing rates for fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries and the effects of select state policies. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective cohort study using 2006 to 2018 Medicare claims data for individuals undergoing surgical procedures for which opioid analgesic treatment is common. EXPOSURES: State policies mandating prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP; PDMP policies) use, initial opioid prescription duration limit (duration limit policies), and mandated continuing medical education (CME; CME pain policies) on pain management. MAIN MEASURES: Opioid dispensing rates, days' supply, and the daily morphine milligram equivalent dose (MMED). KEY RESULTS: The percentage of Medicare beneficiaries dispensed opioids in the perioperative period increased from 2007 to 2018; MMED and days' supply decreased over the same period, with significant variation by age, sex, and race. None of the three state policies affected the likelihood of Medicare beneficiaries being dispensed perioperative opioids. However, CME pain policies and duration limit policies were associated with decreased days' supply and decreased MMED in the several years following implementation, respectively. CONCLUSION: While we observed a slight increase in the rate of Medicare beneficiaries dispensed opioids perioperatively and a substantial decrease in MMED and days' supply for those receiving opioids, state policies examined had relatively modest effects on the main measures. Our findings suggest that these state policies may have a limited impact on opioid dispensing for a patient population that is commonly dispensed opioid analgesics to help control surgical pain, and as a result may have little direct effect on clinical outcomes for this population. Changes in opioid dispensing for this population may be the result of broader societal trends than such state policies.

Buprenorphine Treatment Episodes During the First Year of COVID: a Retrospective Examination of Treatment Initiation and Retention.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID pandemic, overall buprenorphine treatment appeared to remain relatively stable, despite some studies suggesting a decrease in patients starting buprenorphine. There is a paucity of empirical information regarding patterns of buprenorphine treatment during the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To better understand the patterns of buprenorphine episodes during the pandemic and how those patterns compared to pre-pandemic patterns. DESIGN: Pharmacy claims representing approximately 92% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals filling buprenorphine prescriptions indicated for treatment of opioid use disorder. MAIN MEASURES: The number of active, starting, and ending buprenorphine treatment episodes March 13 to December 1, 2020, and the expected number of such episodes in 2020 based on the growth in treatment episodes from March 13 to December 1, 2019. KEY RESULTS: The observed number of active buprenorphine episodes in December 2020 was comparable to the expected number, but new treatment episodes starting between March 13 and December 1, 2020, were 17.2% fewer than expected based on the 2019 experience. Similarly, the number of episodes that ended between March 13 and December 1, 2020, was 16.0% fewer than expected. Decreases from expected episode starts and ends occurred throughout the period but were greatest in the 2 months after the declaration of the public health emergency. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Beneath the apparent stability of buprenorphine patient numbers during the pandemic, the flow of individuals receiving buprenorphine treatment changed substantially. Our findings shed light on how policy changes meant to support buprenorphine prescribing influenced prescribing dynamics during that period, suggesting that while policy efforts may have been successful in maintaining existing patients in treatment, that success did not extend to individuals not yet in treatment.

Rapid Discontinuation of Chronic, High-Dose Opioid Treatment for Pain: Prevalence and Associated Factors.

PURPOSE: To examine the prevalence of rapid discontinuation of chronic, high-dose opioid analgesic treatment, and identify associated patient, clinician, and community factors. METHODS: Using 2017-2018 retail pharmacy claims data from IQVIA, we identified chronic, high-dose opioid analgesic treatment episodes discontinued during these years and determined the percent of episodes meeting criteria for rapid discontinuation. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the probability of rapid discontinuation, conditional on having a discontinued chronic, high-dose opioid treatment episode, as a function of patient, provider, and county characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 810,120 new, chronic, high-dose opioid treatment episodes discontinued in 2017 or 2018, of which 72.0% (n=583,415) were rapidly discontinued. Rapid discontinuation was significantly more likely among Medicare (aOR 1.14, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.15) and Medicaid enrollees (aOR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.05) compared to the commercially insured; in counties with higher fatal overdose rates (aOR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.04) compared to counties with the lowest fatal overdose rates; and in counties with a higher percentage of non-white residents (aOR 1.21 for counties in the highest quartile relative to the lowest, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.24). Likelihood of rapid discontinuation also varied by prescriber specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Most chronic, high-dose opioid treatment episodes that ended in 2017 or 2018 were discontinued more rapidly than recommended by clinical guidelines, raising concerns about adverse patient outcomes. Our findings highlight the need to understand what drives discontinuation and to inform safer opioid tapering and discontinuation practices.

Subsequent Buprenorphine Treatment Following Emergency Physician Buprenorphine Prescription Fills: A National Assessment 2019 to 2020.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder provided in the emergency department with subsequent buprenorphine treatment by community prescribers is associated with improved outcomes, but the frequency with which this occurs is unknown. We examined the rates of subsequent buprenorphine treatment for buprenorphine-naïve individuals filling buprenorphine prescriptions from emergency physicians and initiated buprenorphine treatment and how such rates varied before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: Using pharmacy claims capturing an estimated 92% of prescriptions filled at US retail pharmacies, we identified buprenorphine prescriptions filled between February 1, 2019, and November 30, 2020, written by emergency physicians. In this observational study, we calculated the rate at which patients subsequently filled buprenorphine prescriptions from other nonemergency clinicians, the frequency with which subsequent filled prescriptions were from different types of prescribers, and the changes in the rates of subsequent prescriptions following the declaration of the COVID-19 public health emergency. RESULTS: We identified 22,846 prescriptions written by emergency physicians and filled by buprenorphine-naïve patients. They were most commonly paid for by Medicaid and were in metropolitan counties; 28.5% of patients subsequently filled buprenorphine prescriptions written by other clinicians. Adult primary care physicians and advanced practice providers (eg, physician assistants and nurse practitioners) were responsible for most of the subsequent prescriptions. The rates of subsequent prescriptions were 3.5% lower after the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients filling buprenorphine prescriptions written by emergency physicians do not subsequently fill prescriptions written by other clinicians, and the rates of subsequent prescriptions were lower after the declaration of the COVID-19 public health emergency. These findings highlight the need for a system of care that improves buprenorphine treatment continuity of care for patients with opioid use disorder from emergency settings to community treatment providers.

Sociodemographic differences in quality of treatment to Medicaid enrollees receiving buprenorphine.

Background: Buprenorphine is a key medication to treat opioid use disorder, but little is known about how treatment quality varies across sociodemographic groups. Objective: We examined measures of treatment quality and explored variation by sociodemographic factors. Methods: We used Medicaid MAX data from 50 states from 2006 to 2014 to identify buprenorphine treatment episodes (N = 317,494). We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the quality of buprenorphine treatment along four dimensions: (1) sufficient duration, (2) effective dosage, and concurrent prescribing of (3) opioid analgesics and (4) benzodiazepines. We explored how quality varied by race/ethnicity, age, sex, and urbanicity. Results: In adjusted models, compared to non-Hispanic White individuals, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic individuals had lower odds of receiving effective dosage (aORs = 0.79 and 0.89, respectively) and sufficient duration (aORs = 0.64 and 0.71, respectively), and lower odds of concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics (aORs = 0.86 and 0.85, respectively) and benzodiazepines (aORs = 0.51 and 0.59, respectively). Older individuals had higher odds of sufficient duration (aORs from 1.21-1.33), but also had higher odds of concurrent opioid analgesics prescribing (aORs from 1.29-1.56) and benzodiazepines (aORs from 1.44-1.99). Females had higher odds of sufficient duration (aOR = 1.12), but lower odds of effective dosage (aOR = 0.77) and higher odds of concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics (aOR = 1.25) and benzodiazepines (aOR = 1.16). Compared to individuals living in metropolitan areas, individuals living in non-metropolitan areas had higher odds of sufficient duration (aORs = 1.11 and 1.24) and effective dosage (aORs = 1.06 and 1.33), and lower odds of concurrent prescribing (aORs from 0.81-0.98). Conclusions: Black and Hispanic individuals were less likely to receive effective buprenorphine dosage and sufficient duration. Quality results were mixed for older and female individuals; although these individuals were more likely to receive treatment of sufficient duration, they were also more likely to be concurrently prescribed potentially contraindicated medications, and females were less likely to receive effective dosage. Findings raise concerns about adequacy of care for minority and other at-risk populations.

Individual and Community Factors Associated with Naloxone Co-prescribing Among Long-term Opioid Patients: a Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Naloxone co-prescribing to individuals at increased opioid overdose risk is a key component of opioid overdose prevention efforts. OBJECTIVE: Examine naloxone co-prescribing in the general population and assess how co-prescribing varies by individual and community characteristics. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. We conducted a multivariable logistic regression of 2017-2018 de-identified pharmacy claims representing 90% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in 50 states and the District of Columbia. PATIENTS: Individuals with opioid analgesic treatment episodes > 90 days MAIN MEASURES: Outcome was co-prescribed naloxone. Predictor variables included insurance type, primary prescriber specialty, receipt of concomitant benzodiazepines, high-dose opioid episode, county urbanicity, fatal overdose rates, poverty rates, and primary care health professional shortage areas. KEY RESULTS: Naloxone co-prescribing occurred in 2.3% of long-term opioid therapy episodes. Medicaid (aOR 1.87, 95%CI 1.84 to 1.90) and Medicare (aOR 1.48, 95%CI 1.46 to 1.51) episodes had higher odds of naloxone co-prescribing than commercial insurance episodes, while cash pay (aOR 0.77, 95%CI 0.74 to 0.80) and other insurance episodes (aOR 0.81, 95%CI 0.79 to 0.83) had lower odds. Odds of naloxone co-prescribing were higher among high-dose opioid episodes (aOR 3.19, 95%CI 3.15 to 3.23), when concomitant benzodiazepines were prescribed (aOR 1.12, 95%CI 1.10 to 1.14), and in counties with higher fatal overdose rates. CONCLUSION: Co-prescription of naloxone represents a tangible clinical action that can be taken to help prevent opioid overdose deaths. However, despite recommendations to co-prescribe naloxone to patients at increased risk for opioid overdose, we found that co-prescribing rates remain low overall. States, insurers, and health systems should consider implementing strategies to facilitate increased co-prescribing of naloxone to at-risk individuals.

Advanced cognitive impairment among older nursing home residents.

BACKGROUND: Though work has been done studying nursing home (NH) residents with either advanced Alzheimer's disease (AD) or Alzheimer's disease related dementia (ADRD), none have distinguished between them; even though their clinical features affecting survival are different. In this study, we compared mortality risk factors and survival between NH residents with advanced AD and those with advanced ADRD. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study, in which we examined a sample of 34,493 U.S. NH residents aged 65 and over in the Minimum Data Set (2011-2013). Incident assessment of advanced disease was defined as the first MDS assessment with severe cognitive impairment (Cognitive Functional Score equals to 4) and diagnoses of AD or ADRD. Demographics, functional limitations, and comorbidities were evaluated as mortality risk factors using Cox models. Survival was characterized with Kaplan-Maier functions. RESULTS: Of those with advanced cognitive impairment, 35 % had AD and 65 % ADRD. At the incident assessment of advanced disease, those with AD had better health compared to those with ADRD. Mortality risk factors were similar between groups (shortness of breath, difficulties eating, substantial weight-loss, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and pneumonia; all p < 0.01). However, stroke and difficulty with transfer (for women) were significant mortality risk factors only for those with advanced AD. Urinary tract infection, and hypertension (for women) only were mortality risk factors for those with advanced ADRD. Median survival was significantly shorter for the advanced ADRD group (194 days) compared to the advanced AD group (300 days). CONCLUSIONS: There were distinct mortality and survival patterns of NH residents with advanced AD and ADRD. This may help with care planning decisions regarding therapeutic and palliative care.

Impact of Medicaid Policy on the Oral Health of Publicly Insured Children.

Objective Fluoride varnish (FV) applications among non-dentist primary care providers has increased due to state Medicaid policies. In this study we examine the impact of FV policies on the oral health of publicly insured children aged 2-6 years old. Methods Using three waves of the National Survey of Children's Health (2003, 2007, 2011/12), we used a logistic regression model with state and year fixed effects, adjusting for relevant child characteristics, to examine the association between years since a state implemented a FV policy and the odds of a publicly insured child having very good or excellent teeth. We compared children with public insurance in states with FV policies to children with public insurance in states without FV policies, controlling for the same difference among children with private insurance who were unlikely to be affected by Medicaid FV policies. Results Among 68,890 children aged 2-6 years, 38% had public insurance. Compared to privately insured children, publicly insured children had significantly lower odds of having very good or excellent teeth [odds ratio (OR) 0.70, 95% CI 0.62-0.81]. Publicly insured children in states with FV policies implemented for four or more years had significantly greater odds of having very good or excellent teeth (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.03-1.60) compared to publicly insured children in states without FV policies. Conclusions for Practice State policies supporting non-dental primary care providers application of FV were associated with improvements in oral health for young children with public insurance.

High-Risk Prescribing to Medicaid Enrollees Receiving Opioid Analgesics: Individual- and County-Level Factors.

BACKGROUND: Prescription opioid overdoses have increased dramatically in recent years, with the highest rates among Medicaid enrollees. High-risk prescribing includes practices associated with overdoses and a range of additional opioid-related problems. OBJECTIVES: To identify individual- and county-level factors associated with high-risk prescribing among Medicaid enrollees receiving opioids. METHODS: In a four-states, cross-sectional claims data study, Medicaid enrollees 18-64 years old with a new opioid analgesic treatment episode 2007-2009 were identified. Multivariate regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with high-risk prescribing, defined as high-dose opioid prescribing (morphine equivalent daily dose ≥100 mg for >6 days), opioid overlap, opioid-benzodiazepine overlap. RESULTS: High-risk prescribing occurred in 39.4% of episodes. Older age, rural county of residence, white race, and major depression diagnosis were associated with higher rates of all types of high-risk prescribing. Individuals with prior opioid, alcohol, and hypnotic/sedative use disorder diagnoses had lower odds of high-dose opioid prescribing but higher odds of opioid overlap and opioid-benzodiazepine overlap than individuals without such disorders. High-dose opioid prescribing in Massachusetts was less common than in California, Illinois, and New York, whereas the rate of benzodiazepine overlap in Massachusetts was more common than in other states. Conclusions/Importance: High-risk prescribing was common and associated with several important demographic, clinical, and community factors. Findings can be used to inform targeted interventions designed to reduce such prescribing, and given state variation observed, further research is needed to better understand the effects of state policies on high-risk prescribing.

A population-based examination of trends and disparities in medication treatment for opioid use disorders among Medicaid enrollees.

BACKGROUND: Medication treatment (MT) with methadone and buprenorphine are effective treatments for opioid use disorders, but little information is available regarding the extent to which buprenorphine's approval resulted in more individuals receiving MT nor to what extent receipt of such treatment was equitable across communities. METHODS: To examine changes in MT utilization and the association between MT utilization and county-level indicators of poverty, race/ethnicity, and urbanicity, we used Medicaid claims of non-dually eligible Medicaid enrollees aged 18-64 from 14 states for 2002-2009. We generated county-level aggregate counts of MT (methadone, buprenorphine, and any MT) by year (N = 7760 county-years). We estimated count data models to identify associations between MT and county characteristics, including levels of poverty and racial/ethnic concentration. RESULTS: The number of Medicaid enrollees receiving MT increased 62% from 2002 to 2009. The number of enrollees receiving methadone increased 20%, with the remaining increase resulting from buprenorphine. Urban county residents were significantly more likely to receive MT in both 2002 and 2009 than rural county residents. However, buprenorphine substantially increased MT in rural counties from 2002 to 2009. Receipt of MT increased at a much higher rate for residents of counties with lower poverty rates and lower concentrations of black and Hispanic individuals than for residents of counties without those characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The increase in Medicaid enrollees receiving MT in the years following buprenorphine's approval is encouraging. However, it is concerning that MT trends varied so dramatically by characteristics of the county population and that increases in utilization were substantially lower in counties with populations that historically have been disadvantaged with respect to health care access and quality. Concerted efforts are needed to ensure that MT benefits are equitably distributed across society and reach disadvantaged individuals who may be at higher risk of experiencing opioid use disorders.

Where Is Buprenorphine Dispensed to Treat Opioid Use Disorders? The Role of Private Offices, Opioid Treatment Programs, and Substance Abuse Treatment Facilities in Urban and Rural Counties.

POLICY POINTS: Buprenorphine is an effective opioid dependence treatment that has expanded access to care since its 2002 approval, but it can only be prescribed by physicians waivered to treat a limited number of individuals. We examined the impact of 2006 legislation that increased waivered physician patient limits from 30 to 100 on buprenorphine use, and found that 100-patient-waivered physicians were significantly associated with growth in buprenorphine use, with no such relationship for 30-patient-waivered physicians. Policies relaxing patient limits may be more effective in increasing buprenorphine use than alternatives such as opening new substance abuse treatment facilities or increasing the overall number of waivered physicians. CONTEXT: Opioid use disorders are a significant public health problem. In 2002, the FDA approved buprenorphine as an opioid use disorder treatment when prescribed by waivered physicians who were limited to treating 30 patients at a time. In 2006, federal legislation raised this number to 100 patients. Although federal legislators are considering increasing these limits further and expanding prescribing privileges to nonphysicians, little information is available regarding the impact of such changes on buprenorphine use. We therefore examined the impact of the 2006 legislation-as well as the association between urban and rural waivered physicians, opioid treatment programs, and substance abuse treatment facilities-on buprenorphine distributed per capita over the past decade. METHODS: Using 2004-2011 state-level data on buprenorphine dispensed and county-level data on the number of buprenorphine-waivered physicians and substance abuse treatment facilities using buprenorphine, we estimated a multivariate ordinary least squares regression model with state fixed effects of a state's annual total buprenorphine dispensed per capita as a function of the state's number of buprenorphine providers. FINDINGS: The amount of buprenorphine dispensed has been increasing at a greater rate than the number of buprenorphine providers. The number of physicians waivered to treat 100 patients with buprenorphine in both rural and urban settings was significantly associated with increased amounts of buprenorphine dispensed per capita. There was no significant association in the growth of buprenorphine distributed and the number of physicians with 30-patient waivers. CONCLUSIONS: The greater amounts of buprenorphine dispensed are consistent with the potentially greater use of opioid agonists for opioid use disorder treatment, though they also make their misuse more likely. The changes after the 2006 legislation suggest that policies focused on increasing the number of patients that a single waivered physician could safely and effectively treat could be more effective in increasing buprenorphine use than would alternatives such as opening new substance abuse treatment facilities or raising the overall number of waivered physicians.

Psychometric investigation of a brief measure of outcomes in children's mental health.

The current investigation sought to provide reliability and validity evidence for the Child Outcomes Survey (COS), a brief measure designed with a dual purpose to measure functioning and therapeutic relationship and to serve as a clinician-caregiver communication tool. Exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were performed using a sample of 774 responses collected from 15 provider sites throughout the state of Pennsylvania. Results of the EFA (n = 387) uncovered a three factor structure (family functioning, child functioning, and therapeutic relationship) which was confirmed in the CFA (n = 387). The internal consistency reliability of the three subscales ranged from α = .76 to α = .91. There was a significant relationship between the therapeutic relationship subscale and the use of the COS as a communication aid (r s = .50, p < .001). Findings support the COS as an accurate measure of functioning and therapeutic relationship and its utility as a communication aid between clinician and caregiver.

Determining engagement in services for high-need individuals with serious mental illness.

This study examined whether Medicaid claims and other administrative data could identify high-need individuals with serious mental illness in need of outreach in a large urban setting. A claims-based notification algorithm identified individuals belonging to high-need cohorts who may not be receiving needed services. Reviewers contacted providers who previously served the individuals to confirm whether they were in need of outreach. Over 10,000 individuals set a notification flag over 12-months. Disengagement was confirmed in 55 % of completed reviews, but outreach was initiated for only 30 %. Disengagement and outreach status varied by high-need cohort.

Hospital Strain During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Outcomes in Older Racial and Ethnic Minority Adults.

Importance: Marginalized populations have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Critically ill patients belonging to racial and ethnic minority populations treated in hospitals operating under crisis or near-crisis conditions may have experienced worse outcomes than White individuals. Objective: To examine whether hospital strain was associated with worse outcomes for older patients hospitalized with sepsis and whether these increases in poor outcomes were greater for members of racial and ethnic minority groups compared with White individuals. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, multivariable regression analysis was conducted to assess differential changes in all-cause 30-day mortality and major morbidity among older racial and ethnic minoritized individuals hospitalized with sepsis compared with White individuals and changes in hospital strain using Medicare claims data. Data were obtained on patients hospitalized between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2021, and analyzed between December 16, 2023, and July 11, 2024. Exposure: Time-varying weekly hospital percentage of inpatients with COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: Composite of all-cause 30-day mortality and major morbidity. Results: Among the 5 899 869 hospitalizations for sepsis (51.5% women; mean [SD] age, 78.2 [8.8] years), there were 177 864 (3.0%) Asian, 664 648 (11.3%) Black, 522 964 (8.9%) Hispanic, and 4 534 393 (76.9%) White individuals. During weeks when the hospital COVID-19 burden was greater than 40%, the risk of death or major morbidity increased nearly 2-fold (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.90; 95% CI, 1.80-2.00; P < .001) for White individuals compared with before the pandemic. Asian, Black, and Hispanic individuals experienced 44% (AOR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.28-1.61; P < .001), 21% (AOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11-1.33; P < .001), and 45% (AOR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.32-1.59; P < .001) higher risk of death or morbidity, respectively, compared with White individuals when the hospital weekly COVID-19 burden was greater than 40%. Conclusion and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, older adults hospitalized with sepsis were more likely to die or experience major morbidity as the hospital COVID-19 burden increased. These increases in adverse outcomes were greater in magnitude among members of minority populations than for White individuals.

Predictors of adequate depression treatment among Medicaid-enrolled youth.

PURPOSE: To determine if Medicaid-enrolled youth with depressive symptoms receive adequate acute treatment, and to identify the characteristics of those receiving inadequate treatment. METHODS: We used administrative claims data from a Medicaid-enrolled population in a large urban community to identify youth aged 6-24 years who started a new episode of treatment for a depressive disorder between August 2006 and February 2010. We examined rates and predictors of minimally adequate psychotherapy (four visits in first 12 weeks) and pharmacotherapy (filled antidepressant prescription for 84 of the first 144 days) among youth with a new treatment episode during the study period (n = 930). RESULTS: Fifty-nine percent of depressed youth received minimally adequate psychotherapy, but 13 % received minimally adequate pharmacotherapy. Youth who began their treatment episode with an inpatient psychiatric stay for depression and racial minorities were significantly less likely to receive minimally adequate pharmacotherapy and significantly more likely to receive inadequate overall treatment. CONCLUSIONS: While the majority of youth appear to be receiving minimally adequate acute care for depression, a substantial number are not. Given current child mental health workforce constraints, efforts to substantially improve the provision of adequate care to depressed youth are likely to require both quality improvement and system redesign efforts.

Use of a computerized medication shared decision making tool in community mental health settings: impact on psychotropic medication adherence.

Healthcare reform emphasizes patient-centered care and shared decision-making. This study examined the impact on psychotropic adherence of a decision support center and computerized tool designed to empower and activate consumers prior to an outpatient medication management visit. Administrative data were used to identify 1,122 Medicaid-enrolled adults receiving psychotropic medication from community mental health centers over a two-year period from community mental health centers. Multivariate linear regression models were used to examine if tool users had higher rates of 180-day medication adherence than non-users. Older clients, Caucasian clients, those without recent hospitalizations, and those who were Medicaid-eligible due to disability had higher rates of 180-day medication adherence. After controlling for sociodemographics, clinical characteristics, baseline adherence, and secular changes over time, using the computerized tool did not affect adherence to psychotropic medications. The computerized decision tool did not affect medication adherence among clients in outpatient mental health clinics. Additional research should clarify the impact of decision-making tools on other important outcomes such as engagement, patient-prescriber communication, quality of care, self-management, and long-term clinical and functional outcomes.

Differences in medicaid expansion effects on buprenorphine treatment utilization by county rurality and income: A pharmacy data claims analysis from 2009-2018.

Background: Although use of buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder increased over the past decade, buprenorphine utilization remains limited in lower-income and rural areas. We examine how the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion influenced buprenorphine initiation rates by county income and evaluate how associations differ by county rural-urban status. Methods: This study used nationwide 2009-2018 IQVIA retail pharmacy data and a comparative interrupted time series framework-a hybrid framework combining regression discontinuity and difference-in-difference approaches. We used piecewise linear estimation to quantify changes in buprenorphine initiation rates before and after Medicaid expansion. Results: The sample included observations from 376,704 county-months. We identified 5,227,340 new buprenorphine treatment episodes, with an average of 9.2 new buprenorphine episodes per month per 100,000 county residents. Among urban counties, those with the lowest median incomes experienced significantly larger increases in buprenorphine initiation rates associated with Medicaid expansion than counties with higher median incomes (5-year rates difference est=3525.3, se=1695.3, p = 0.04). However, among rural counties, there was no significant association between buprenorphine initiation rates and county median income after Medicaid expansion (5-year rates difference est=979.0, se=915.8, p = 0.29). Conclusions: Medicaid expansion was associated with a reduction in income-related buprenorphine disparities in urban counties, but not in rural counties. To achieve more equitable buprenorphine access, future policies should target low-income rural areas.