Primary Care Physicians In Medicare Advantage Were Less Costly, Provided Similar Quality Versus Regional Average.

The use of many services is lower in Medicare Advantage (MA) compared with traditional Medicare, generating cost savings for insurers, whereas the quality of ambulatory services is higher. This study examined the role of selective contracting with providers in achieving these outcomes, focusing on primary care physicians. Assessing primary care physician costliness based on the gap between observed and predicted costs for their traditional Medicare patients, we found that the average primary care physician in MA networks was $433 less costly per patient (2.9 percent of baseline) compared with the regional mean, with less costly primary care physicians included in more networks than more costly ones. Favorable selection of patients by MA primary care physicians contributed partially to this result. The quality measures of MA primary care physicians were similar to the regional mean. In contrast, primary care physicians excluded from all MA networks were $1,617 (13.8 percent) costlier than the regional mean, with lower quality. Primary care physicians in narrow networks were $212 (1.4 percent) less costly than those in wide networks, but their quality was slightly lower. These findings highlight the potential role of selective contracting in reducing costs in the MA program.

Changes in the Use of Long-Term Medications Following Incident Dementia Diagnosis.

Importance: Dementia is a life-altering diagnosis that may affect medication safety and goals for chronic disease management. Objective: To examine changes in medication use following an incident dementia diagnosis among community-dwelling older adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study of adults aged 67 years or older enrolled in traditional Medicare and Medicare Part D, patients with incident dementia diagnosed between January 2012 and December 2018 were matched to control patients based on demographics, geographic location, and baseline medication count. The index date was defined as the date of first dementia diagnosis or, for controls, the date of the closest office visit. Data were analyzed from August 2021 to June 2023. Exposure: Incident dementia diagnosis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were overall medication counts and use of cardiometabolic, central nervous system (CNS)-active, and anticholinergic medications. A comparative time-series analysis was conducted to examine quarterly changes in medication use in the year before through the year following the index date. Results: The study included 266 675 adults with incident dementia and 266 675 control adults; in both groups, 65.1% were aged 80 years or older (mean [SD] age, 82.2 [7.1] years) and 67.8% were female. At baseline, patients with incident dementia were more likely than controls to use CNS-active medications (54.32% vs 48.39%) and anticholinergic medications (17.79% vs 15.96%) and less likely to use most cardiometabolic medications (eg, diabetes medications, 31.19% vs 36.45%). Immediately following the index date, the cohort with dementia had a greater increase in mean number of medications used (0.41 vs -0.06; difference, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.27-0.66]) and in the proportion of patients using CNS-active medications (absolute change, 3.44% vs 0.79%; difference, 2.65% [95% CI, 0.85%-4.45%]) owing to an increased use of antipsychotics, antidepressants, and antiepileptics. The cohort with dementia also had a modestly greater decline in use of anticholinergic medications (quarterly change in use, -0.53% vs -0.21%; difference, -0.32% [95% CI, -0.55% to -0.08%]) and most cardiometabolic medications (eg, quarterly change in antihypertensive use: -0.84% vs -0.40%; difference, -0.44% [95% CI, -0.64% to -0.25%]). One year after diagnosis, 75.2% of the cohort with dementia were using 5 or more medications (2.8% increase). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of Medicare Part D beneficiaries, following an incident dementia diagnosis, patients were more likely to initiate CNS-active medications and modestly more likely to discontinue cardiometabolic and anticholinergic medications compared with the control group. These findings suggest missed opportunities to reduce burdensome polypharmacy by deprescribing long-term medications with high safety risks or limited likelihood of benefit or that may be associated with impaired cognition.

Development of a model to predict antidepressant treatment response for depression among Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Only a limited number of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) respond to a first course of antidepressant medication (ADM). We investigated the feasibility of creating a baseline model to determine which of these would be among patients beginning ADM treatment in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA). METHODS: A 2018-2020 national sample of n = 660 VHA patients receiving ADM treatment for MDD completed an extensive baseline self-report assessment near the beginning of treatment and a 3-month self-report follow-up assessment. Using baseline self-report data along with administrative and geospatial data, an ensemble machine learning method was used to develop a model for 3-month treatment response defined by the Quick Inventory of Depression Symptomatology Self-Report and a modified Sheehan Disability Scale. The model was developed in a 70% training sample and tested in the remaining 30% test sample. RESULTS: In total, 35.7% of patients responded to treatment. The prediction model had an area under the ROC curve (s.e.) of 0.66 (0.04) in the test sample. A strong gradient in probability (s.e.) of treatment response was found across three subsamples of the test sample using training sample thresholds for high [45.6% (5.5)], intermediate [34.5% (7.6)], and low [11.1% (4.9)] probabilities of response. Baseline symptom severity, comorbidity, treatment characteristics (expectations, history, and aspects of current treatment), and protective/resilience factors were the most important predictors. CONCLUSIONS: Although these results are promising, parallel models to predict response to alternative treatments based on data collected before initiating treatment would be needed for such models to help guide treatment selection.

Antidepressant use in low- middle- and high-income countries: a World Mental Health Surveys report.

BACKGROUND: The most common treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) is antidepressant medication (ADM). Results are reported on frequency of ADM use, reasons for use, and perceived effectiveness of use in general population surveys across 20 countries. METHODS: Face-to-face interviews with community samples totaling n = 49 919 respondents in the World Health Organization (WHO) World Mental Health (WMH) Surveys asked about ADM use anytime in the prior 12 months in conjunction with validated fully structured diagnostic interviews. Treatment questions were administered independently of diagnoses and asked of all respondents. RESULTS: 3.1% of respondents reported ADM use within the past 12 months. In high-income countries (HICs), depression (49.2%) and anxiety (36.4%) were the most common reasons for use. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), depression (38.4%) and sleep problems (31.9%) were the most common reasons for use. Prevalence of use was 2-4 times as high in HICs as LMICs across all examined diagnoses. Newer ADMs were proportionally used more often in HICs than LMICs. Across all conditions, ADMs were reported as very effective by 58.8% of users and somewhat effective by an additional 28.3% of users, with both proportions higher in LMICs than HICs. Neither ADM class nor reason for use was a significant predictor of perceived effectiveness. CONCLUSION: ADMs are in widespread use and for a variety of conditions including but going beyond depression and anxiety. In a general population sample from multiple LMICs and HICs, ADMs were widely perceived to be either very or somewhat effective by the people who use them.

Differences In Use Of Services And Quality Of Care In Medicare Advantage And Traditional Medicare, 2010 And 2017.

Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollment growth could make it difficult for MA plans to maintain their track record of limiting discretionary utilization while delivering higher-quality care than traditional Medicare. We compared quality and utilization measures in Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare in 2010 and 2017. Clinical quality performance was higher in MA health maintenance organizations (HMOs) and preferred provider organizations (PPOs) than in traditional Medicare for almost all measures in both years. MA HMOs outperformed traditional Medicare on all measures in 2017. MA HMOs' performance on nearly all seven patient-reported quality measures improved, and MA HMOs outperformed traditional Medicare on five of those measures in 2017. MA PPOs performed the same as or better than traditional Medicare on all but one patient-reported quality measure in 2010 and 2017. The number of emergency department visits was 30 percent lower, the number of elective hip and knee replacements was approximately 10 percent lower, and the number of back surgeries was almost 30 percent lower in MA HMOs than in traditional Medicare in 2017. Utilization trends were similar in MA PPOs, but differences from traditional Medicare were narrower. Despite increased enrollment, overall utilization remains lower in Medicare Advantage than in traditional Medicare, whereas quality performance is the same or higher.

Development of a model to predict combined antidepressant medication and psychotherapy treatment response for depression among veterans.

BACKGROUND: Although research shows that more depressed patients respond to combined antidepressants (ADM) and psychotherapy than either alone, many patients do not respond even to combined treatment. A reliable prediction model for this could help treatment decision-making. We attempted to create such a model using machine learning methods among patients in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA). METHODS: A 2018-2020 national sample of VHA patients beginning combined depression treatment completed self-report assessments at baseline and 3 months (n = 658). A learning model was developed using baseline self-report, administrative, and geospatial data to predict 3-month treatment response defined by reductions in the Quick Inventory of Depression Symptomatology Self-Report and/or in the Sheehan Disability Scale. The model was developed in a 70 % training sample and tested in the remaining 30 % test sample. RESULTS: 30.0 % of patients responded to treatment. The prediction model had a test sample AUC-ROC of 0.657. A strong gradient was found in probability of treatment response from 52.7 % in the highest predicted quintile to 14.4 % in the lowest predicted quintile. The most important predictors were episode characteristics (symptoms, comorbidities, history), personality/psychological resilience, recent stressors, and treatment characteristics. LIMITATIONS: Restrictions in sample definition, a low recruitment rate, and reliance on patient self-report rather than clinician assessments to determine treatment response limited the generalizability of results. CONCLUSIONS: A machine learning model could help depressed patients and providers predict likely response to combined ADM-psychotherapy. Parallel information about potential harms and costs of alternative treatments would be needed, though, to inform optimal treatment selection.

Development of a model to predict psychotherapy response for depression among Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Fewer than half of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) respond to psychotherapy. Pre-emptively informing patients of their likelihood of responding could be useful as part of a patient-centered treatment decision-support plan. METHODS: This prospective observational study examined a national sample of 807 patients beginning psychotherapy for MDD at the Veterans Health Administration. Patients completed a self-report survey at baseline and 3-months follow-up (data collected 2018-2020). We developed a machine learning (ML) model to predict psychotherapy response at 3 months using baseline survey, administrative, and geospatial variables in a 70% training sample. Model performance was then evaluated in the 30% test sample. RESULTS: 32.0% of patients responded to treatment after 3 months. The best ML model had an AUC (SE) of 0.652 (0.038) in the test sample. Among the one-third of patients ranked by the model as most likely to respond, 50.0% in the test sample responded to psychotherapy. In comparison, among the remaining two-thirds of patients, <25% responded to psychotherapy. The model selected 43 predictors, of which nearly all were self-report variables. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MDD could pre-emptively be informed of their likelihood of responding to psychotherapy using a prediction tool based on self-report data. This tool could meaningfully help patients and providers in shared decision-making, although parallel information about the likelihood of responding to alternative treatments would be needed to inform decision-making across multiple treatments.

Association of Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare With 30-Day Mortality Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Importance: Medicare Advantage health plans covered 37% of beneficiaries in 2018, and coverage increased to 48% in 2022. Whether Medicare Advantage plans provide similar care for patients presenting with specific clinical conditions is unknown. Objective: To compare 30-day mortality and treatment for Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (MI) from 2009 to 2018. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study that included 557 309 participants with ST-segment elevation [acute] MI (STEMI) and 1 670 193 with non-ST-segment elevation [acute] MI (NSTEMI) presenting to US hospitals from 2009-2018 (date of final follow up, December 31, 2019). Exposures: Enrollment in Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was adjusted 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included age- and sex-adjusted rates of procedure use (catheterization, revascularization), postdischarge medication prescriptions and adherence, and measures of health system performance (intensive care unit [ICU] admission and 30-day readmissions). Results: The study included a total of 2 227 502 participants, and the mean age in 2018 ranged from 76.9 years (Medicare Advantage STEMI) to 79.3 years (traditional Medicare NSTEMI), with similar proportions of female patients in Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare (41.4% vs 41.9% for STEMI in 2018). Enrollment in Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare was associated with significantly lower adjusted 30-day mortality rates in 2009 (19.1% vs 20.6% for STEMI; difference, -1.5 percentage points [95% CI, -2.2 to -0.7] and 12.0% vs 12.5% for NSTEMI; difference, -0.5 percentage points [95% CI, -0.9% to -0.1%]). By 2018, mortality had declined in all groups, and there were no longer statically significant differences between Medicare Advantage (17.7%) and traditional Medicare (17.8%) for STEMI (difference, 0.0 percentage points [95% CI, -0.7 to 0.6]) or between Medicare Advantage (10.9%) and traditional Medicare (11.1%) for NSTEMI (difference, -0.2 percentage points [95% CI, -0.4 to 0.1]). By 2018, there was no statistically significant difference in standardized 90-day revascularization rates between Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare. Rates of guideline-recommended medication prescriptions were significantly higher in Medicare Advantage (91.7%) vs traditional Medicare patients (89.0%) who received a statin prescription (difference, 2.7 percentage points [95% CI, 1.2 to 4.2] for 2018 STEMI). Medicare Advantage patients were significantly less likely to be admitted to an ICU than traditional Medicare patients (for 2018 STEMI, 50.3% vs 51.2%; difference, -0.9 percentage points [95% CI, -1.8 to 0.0]) and significantly more likely to be discharged to home rather than to a postacute facility (for 2018 STEMI, 71.5% vs 70.2%; difference, 1.3 percentage points [95% CI, 0.5 to 2.1]). Adjusted 30-day readmission rates were consistently lower in Medicare Advantage than in traditional Medicare (for 2009 STEMI, 13.8% vs 15.2%; difference, -1.3 percentage points [95% CI, -2.0 to -0.6]; and for 2018 STEMI, 11.2% vs 11.9%; difference, 0.6 percentage points [95% CI, -1.5 to 0.0]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among Medicare beneficiaries with acute MI, enrollment in Medicare Advantage, compared with traditional Medicare, was significantly associated with modestly lower rates of 30-day mortality in 2009, and the difference was no longer statistically significant by 2018. These findings, considered with other outcomes, may provide insight into differences in treatment and outcomes by Medicare insurance type.

Turnover among new Medicare Advantage enrollees may be greater than perceived.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the proportion of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees who switched insurers or disenrolled to traditional Medicare (TM) in the years immediately after first choosing to join an MA health plan. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis using 2012-2017 Medicare enrollment data. METHODS: We studied enrollees who joined MA between 2012 and 2016 and identified all enrollees who changed insurers (switched insurance or disenrolled to TM) at least once between the start of enrollment and the end of the study period. We categorized each change as switching insurers or disenrollment to TM, and by whether the previous insurer had exited the market. RESULTS: Among 6,520,169 new MA enrollees, 15.6% had changed insurance within 1 year after enrollment in MA and 49.2% had changed insurance by 5 years. More enrollees switched insurers rather than disenrolled, and most enrollees who changed insurers did not do so as a result of insurer exits. CONCLUSIONS: New MA enrollees change insurers at a substantial rate when followed across multiple years. These changes may disincentivize insurers from investing in preventive care and chronic disease management and, as shown in several non-MA populations, may lead to discontinuities in care, increased expenditures, and inferior health outcomes.

Estimated Prevalence of and Factors Associated With Clinically Significant Anxiety and Depression Among US Adults During the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Claims of dramatic increases in clinically significant anxiety and depression early in the COVID-19 pandemic came from online surveys with extremely low or unreported response rates. Objective: To examine trend data in a calibrated screening for clinically significant anxiety and depression among adults in the only US government benchmark probability trend survey not disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a monthly state-based trend survey conducted over the telephone. Participants were adult respondents in the 50 US states and District of Columbia who were surveyed March to December 2020 compared with the same months in 2017 to 2019. Exposures: Monthly state COVID-19 death rates. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated 30-day prevalence of clinically significant anxiety and depression based on responses to a single BRFSS item calibrated to a score of 6 or greater on the 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.84). All percentages are weighted based on BRFSS calibration weights. Results: Overall, there were 1 429 354 respondents, with 1 093 663 in 2017 to 2019 (600 416 [51.1%] women; 87 153 [11.8%] non-Hispanic Black; 826 334 [61.5%] non-Hispanic White; 411 254 [27.8%] with college education; and 543 619 [56.8] employed) and 335 691 in 2020 (182 351 [51.3%] women; 25 517 [11.7%] non-Hispanic Black; 250 333 [60.5%] non-Hispanic White; 130 642 [29.3%] with college education; and 168 921 [54.9%] employed). Median within-state response rates were 45.9% to 49.4% in 2017 to 2019 and 47.9% in 2020. Estimated 30-day prevalence of clinically significant anxiety and depression was 0.4 (95% CI, 0.0 to 0.7) percentage points higher in March to December 2020 (12.4%) than March to December 2017 to 2019 (12.1%). This estimated increase was limited, however, to students (2.4 [95% CI, 0.8 to 3.9] percentage points) and the employed (0.9 [95% CI, 0.5 to 1.4] percentage points). Estimated prevalence decreased among the short-term unemployed (-1.8 [95% CI, -3.1 to -0.5] percentage points) and those unable to work (-4.2 [95% CI, -5.3 to -3.2] percentage points), but did not change significantly among the long-term unemployed (-2.1 [95% CI, -4.5 to 0.5] percentage points), homemakers (0.8 [95% CI, -0.3 to 1.9] percentage points), or the retired (0.1 [95% CI, -0.6 to 0.8] percentage points). The increase in anxiety and depression prevalence among employed people was positively associated with the state-month COVID-19 death rate (1.8 [95% CI, 1.2 to 2.5] percentage points when high and 0.0 [95% CI, -0.7 to 0.6] percentage points when low) and was elevated among women compared with men (2.0 [95% CI, 1.4 to 2.5] percentage points vs 0.2 [95% CI, -0.1 to 0.6] percentage points), Non-Hispanic White individuals compared with Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black individuals (1.3 [95% CI, 0.6 to 1.9] percentage points vs 1.1 [95% CI, -0.2 to 2.5] percentage points and 0.7 [95% CI, -0.1 to 1.5] percentage points), and those with college educations compared with less than high school educations (2.5 [95% CI, 1.9 to 3.1] percentage points vs -0.6 [95% CI, -2.7 to 1.4] percentage points). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, clinically significant US adult anxiety and depression increased less during 2020 than suggested by online surveys. However, this modest aggregate increase could mask more substantial increases in key population segments (eg, first responders) and might have become larger in 2021 and 2022.

Measuring Racial Inequities In The Quality Of Care Across Oncology Practices In The US.

Racial inequities in clinical performance diminish overall health care system performance; however, quality assessments have rarely incorporated reliable measures of racial inequities. We studied care for more than one million Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with cancer to assess the feasibility of calculating reliable practice-level measures of racial inequities in chemotherapy-associated emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations. Specifically, we used hierarchical models to estimate adjusted practice-level Black-White differences in these events and described differences across practices. We calculated reliable inequity measures for 426 and 322 practices, depending on the measure. These practices reflected fewer than 10 percent of practices treating Medicare beneficiaries with chemotherapy, but they treated approximately half of all White and Black Medicare beneficiaries receiving chemotherapy and two-thirds of Black Medicare beneficiaries receiving chemotherapy. Black patients experienced chemotherapy-associated ED visits and hospitalizations at higher rates (54.2 percent and 35.8 percent, respectively) than White patients (45.7 percent and 31.9 percent, respectively). The median within-practice Black-White difference was 8.1 percentage points for chemotherapy-associated ED visits and 2.7 percentage points for chemotherapy-associated hospitalizations. Additional research is needed to identify other reliable measures of racial inequities in health care quality, measure care inequities in smaller practices, and assess whether providing practice-level feedback could improve equity.

National Trends in Antihypertensive Treatment Among Older Adults by Race and Presence of Comorbidity, 2008 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, hypertension guidelines for older adults endorsed increased use of fixed-dose combinations, prioritized thiazide diuretics and calcium channel blockers (CCBs) for Black patients, and no longer recommend beta-blockers as first-line therapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate older adults' antihypertensive use following guideline changes. DESIGN: Time series analysis. PATIENTS: Twenty percent national sample of Medicare Part D beneficiaries aged 66 years and older with hypertension. INTERVENTION: Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC8) guidelines MAIN MEASURES: Quarterly trends in prevalent and initial antihypertensive use were examined before (2008 to 2013) and after (2014 to 2017) JNC8. Analyses were conducted among all beneficiaries with hypertension, beneficiaries without chronic conditions that might influence antihypertensive selection (hypertension-only cohort), and among Black patients, given race-based guideline recommendations. KEY RESULTS: The number of beneficiaries with hypertension increased from 1,978,494 in 2008 to 2,809,680 in 2017, the proportions using antihypertensives increased from 80.3 to 81.2%, and the proportion using multiple classes and fixed-dose combinations declined (60.8 to 58.1% and 20.7 to 15.1%, respectively, all P<.01). Prior to JNC8, the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and CCBs was increasing. Use of CCBs as initial therapy increased more rapidly following JNC8 (relative change in quarterly trend 0.15% [95% CI, 0.13-0.18%), especially among Black beneficiaries (relative change 0.44% [95% CI, 0.21-0.68%]). Contrary to guidelines, the use of thiazides and combinations as initial therapy consistently decreased in the hypertension-only cohort (13.8 to 8.3% and 25.1 to 15.7% respectively). By 2017, 65.9% of Black patients in the hypertension-only cohort were initiated on recommended first-line or combination therapy compared to 80.3% of non-Black patients. CONCLUSIONS: Many older adults, particularly Black patients, continue to be initiated on antihypertensive classes not recommended as first-line, indicating opportunities to improve the effectiveness and equity of hypertension care and potentially reduce antihypertensive regimen complexity.

Changes in Prevalence of Mental Illness Among US Adults During Compared with Before the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The authors review trend and cohort surveys and administrative data comparing prevalence of mental disorders during, versus, and before the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in mental health disparities. Best evidence suggests clinically significant anxiety-depression point prevalence increased by relative-risk (RR) = 1.3 to 1.5 during the pandemic compared with before. This level of increase is much less than the implausibly high RR = 5.0 to 8.0 estimates reported in trend studies early in the pandemic based on less-appropriate comparisons. Changes in prevalence also occurred during the pandemic, but relative prevalence appears not to have changed substantially over this time.

Childhood adversities and suicidal thoughts and behaviors among first-year college students: results from the WMH-ICS initiative.

PURPOSE: To investigate the associations of childhood adversities (CAs) with lifetime onset and transitions across suicidal thoughts and behaviors (STB) among incoming college students. METHODS: Web-based self-report surveys administered to 20,842 incoming college students from nine countries (response rate 45.6%) assessed lifetime suicidal ideation, plans and attempts along with seven CAs: parental psychopathology, three types of abuse (emotional, physical, sexual), neglect, bully victimization, and dating violence. Logistic regression estimated individual- and population-level associations using CA operationalizations for type, number, severity, and frequency. RESULTS: Associations of CAs with lifetime ideation and the transition from ideation to plan were best explained by the exact number of CA types (OR range 1.32-52.30 for exactly two to seven CAs). Associations of CAs with a transition to attempts were best explained by the frequency of specific CA types (scaled 0-4). Attempts among ideators with a plan were significantly associated with all seven CAs (OR range 1.16-1.59) and associations remained significant in adjusted analyses with the frequency of sexual abuse (OR = 1.42), dating violence (OR = 1.29), physical abuse (OR = 1.17) and bully victimization (OR = 1.17). Attempts among ideators without plan were significantly associated with frequency of emotional abuse (OR = 1.29) and bully victimization (OR = 1.36), in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Population attributable risk simulations found 63% of ideation and 30-47% of STB transitions associated with CAs. CONCLUSION: Early-life adversities represent a potentially important driver in explaining lifetime STB among incoming college students. Comprehensive intervention strategies that prevent or reduce the negative effects of CAs may reduce subsequent onset of STB.

Are Veterans Getting Their Preferred Depression Treatment? A National Observational Study in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Physician responsiveness to patient preferences for depression treatment may improve treatment adherence and clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To examine associations of patient treatment preferences with types of depression treatment received and treatment adherence among Veterans initiating depression treatment. DESIGN: Patient self-report surveys at treatment initiation linked to medical records. SETTING: Veterans Health Administration (VA) clinics nationally, 2018-2020. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2582 patients (76.7% male, mean age 48.7 years, 62.3% Non-Hispanic White) MAIN MEASURES: Patient self-reported preferences for medication and psychotherapy on 0-10 self-anchoring visual analog scales (0="completely unwilling"; 10="completely willing"). Treatment receipt and adherence (refilling medications; attending 3+ psychotherapy sessions) over 3 months. Logistic regression models controlled for socio-demographics and geographic variables. KEY RESULTS: More patients reported strong preferences (10/10) for psychotherapy than medication (51.2% versus 36.7%, McNemar χ21=175.3, p<0.001). A total of 32.1% of patients who preferred (7-10/10) medication and 21.8% who preferred psychotherapy did not receive these treatments. Patients who strongly preferred medication were substantially more likely to receive medication than those who had strong negative preferences (odds ratios [OR]=17.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]=12.5-24.5). Compared with patients who had strong negative psychotherapy preferences, those with strong psychotherapy preferences were about twice as likely to receive psychotherapy (OR=1.9; 95% CI=1.0-3.5). Patients who strongly preferred psychotherapy were more likely to adhere to psychotherapy than those with strong negative preferences (OR=3.3; 95% CI=1.4-7.4). Treatment preferences were not associated with medication or combined treatment adherence. Patients in primary care settings had lower odds of receiving (but not adhering to) psychotherapy than patients in specialty mental health settings. Depression severity was not associated with treatment receipt or adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Mismatches between treatment preferences and treatment type received were common and associated with worse treatment adherence for psychotherapy. Future research could examine ways to decrease mismatch between patient preferences and treatments received and potential effects on patient outcomes.

Association of emotion reactivity and distress intolerance with suicide attempts in U.S. Army soldiers.

INTRODUCTION: Emotion reactivity (ER) and distress intolerance (DI) may be associated with increased suicide attempt (SA) risk among U.S. Army soldiers. METHOD: In this case-control study, 74 soldiers recently hospitalized for SA (cases) were compared with 133 control soldiers from the same Army installations selected based on either propensity score matching (n = 103) or reported 12-month suicide ideation (SI) (n = 30). Controls were weighted to represent the total Army population at the study sites and the subpopulation of 12-month ideators. Participants completed questionnaires assessing ER, DI, and other psychosocial variables. Logistic regression analyses examined whether ER and DI differentiated SA cases from the general population and from 12-month ideators before and after controlling for additional important risk factors (sociodemographic characteristics, stressors, mental disorders). RESULTS: In univariate analyses, ER differentiated SA cases from both the general population (OR = 2.5[95%CI = 1.7-3.6]) and soldiers with 12-month SI (OR = 2.5[95%CI = 1.3-4.6]). DI also differentiated cases from the general population (OR = 2.9[95%CI = 2.0-4.1]) and 12-month ideators (OR = 1.9[95%CI = 1.1-3.5]). These associations persisted after controlling for sociodemographic variables, stressors, and mental disorders. CONCLUSION: Findings provide evidence that higher ER and DI are associated with increased risk of SA among soldiers, even after adjusting for known risk factors. Prospective research with larger samples is needed.

Predictors of Suicide Attempt Within 30 Days After First Medically Documented Suicidal Ideation in U.S. Army Soldiers.

OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to identify predictors of imminent suicide attempt (within 30 days) among U.S. Army soldiers following their first documented suicidal ideation. METHODS: Using administrative data from the Army Study to Assess Risk and Resilience in Servicemembers, the authors identified 11,178 active-duty Regular Army enlisted soldiers (2006-2009) with medically documented suicidal ideation and no prior medically documented suicide attempts. The authors examined risk factors for suicide attempt within 30 days of first suicidal ideation using logistic regression analyses, including sociodemographic and service-related characteristics, psychiatric diagnoses, physical health care visits, injuries, and history of family violence or crime perpetration or victimization. RESULTS: Among soldiers with first documented suicidal ideation, 830 (7.4%) attempted suicide, 46.3% of whom (N=387) attempted suicide within 30 days (rate, 35.4 per 1,000 soldiers). Following a series of multivariate analyses, the final model identified females (odds ratio=1.3, 95% CI=1.0, 1.8), combat medics (odds ratio=1.6, 95% CI=1.1, 2.2), individuals with an anxiety disorder diagnosis prior to suicidal ideation (odds ratio=1.3, 95% CI=1.0, 1.6), and those who received a sleep disorder diagnosis on the same day as the recorded suicidal ideation (odds ratio=2.3, 95% CI=1.1, 4.6) as being more likely to attempt suicide within 30 days. Black soldiers (odds ratio=0.6, 95% CI=0.4, 0.9) and those who received an anxiety disorder diagnosis on the same day as suicidal ideation (odds ratio=0.7, 95% CI=0.5, 0.9) were less likely. CONCLUSIONS: Suicide attempt risk is highest in the first 30 days following ideation diagnosis and is more likely among women, combat medics, and soldiers with an anxiety disorder diagnosis before suicidal ideation and a same-day sleep disorder diagnosis. Black soldiers and those with a same-day anxiety disorder diagnosis were at decreased risk. These factors may help identify soldiers at imminent risk of suicide attempt.

Comorbid mental disorders, depression symptom severity, and role impairment among Veterans initiating depression treatment through the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Psychiatric comorbidities may complicate depression treatment by being associated with increased role impairments. However, depression symptom severity might account for these associations. Understanding the independent associations of depression severity and comorbidity with impairments could help in treatment planning. This is especially true for depressed Veterans, who have high psychiatric comorbidity rates. METHODS: 2,610 Veterans beginning major depression treatment at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) were administered a baseline self-report survey that screened for diverse psychiatric comorbidities and assessed depression severity and role impairments. Logistic and generalized linear regression models estimated univariable and multivariable associations of depression severity and comorbidities with impairments. Population attributable risk proportions (PARPs) estimated the relative importance of depression severity and comorbidities in accounting for role impairments. RESULTS: Nearly all patients (97.8%) screened positive for at least one comorbidity and half (49.8%) for 4+ comorbidities. The most common positive screens were for generalized anxiety disorder (80.2%), posttraumatic stress disorder (77.9%), and panic/phobia (77.4%). Depression severity and comorbidities were significantly and additively associated with impairments in multivariable models. Associations were attenuated much less for depression severity than for comorbidities in multivariable versus univariable models. PARPs indicated that 15-60% of role impairments were attributable to depression severity and 5-32% to comorbidities. LIMITATIONS: The screening scales could have over-estimated comorbidity prevalence. The cross-sectional observational design cannot determine either temporal or causal priorities. CONCLUSIONS: Although positive screens for psychiatric comorbidity are pervasive among depressed VHA patients, depression severity accounts for most of the associations of these comorbidities with role impairments.

Association of Low-Value Care Exposure With Health Care Experience Ratings Among Patient Panels.

Importance: Patient reviews of health care experiences are increasingly used for public reporting and alternative payment models. Critics have argued that this incentivizes physicians to provide more care, including low-value care, undermining efforts to reduce wasteful practices. Objective: To assess associations between rates of low-value service provision to a primary care professional (PCP) patient panel and patients' ratings of their health care experiences. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study used Medicare fee-for-service claims from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2014, for a random 20% sample of beneficiaries to identify beneficiaries for whom each of 8 low-value services could be ordered but would be considered unnecessary. The study also used health care experience reports from independently sampled beneficiaries who responded to the 2010-2015 Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Medicare fee-for-service survey. Statistical analysis was performed from January 1, 2019, to December 9, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were health care experience ratings from Medicare beneficiaries who responded to the CAHPS survey from 2 domains, namely "Your Health Care in the Last 6 Months" (overall health care, office wait time, timely access to nonurgent care, and timely access to urgent care) and "Your Personal Doctor" (overall personal physician and a composite score for interactions with personal physician). Beneficiaries in both samples were attributed to the PCP with whom they had the most spending. For each PCP, a composite score of low-value service exposure was constructed using the 20% sample; this score represented the adjusted relative propensity of the PCP patient panel to receive low-value care. The association between low-value service exposure and health care experience ratings reported by the CAHPS respondents in the PCP patient panel was estimated using regression analysis. Results: The final sample had 100 743 PCPs, with a mean of approximately 258 patients per PCP. Only 1 notable association was found; more low-value care exposure was associated with more frequent reports of having to wait more than 15 minutes after the scheduled time of an appointment (a mean of 0.448 points lower CAHPS score on a 10-point scale for PCP patient panels who received the most low-value care vs the least low-value care). Although some other associations were statistically significant, their magnitudes were substantially smaller than those typically considered meaningful in other CAHPS literature and were inconsistent in direction across levels of low-value service exposure. Conclusions and Relevance: This quality improvement study found that more low-value care exposure for a PCP patient panel was not associated with more favorable patient ratings of their health care experiences.

Use of diabetes medications in traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage.

OBJECTIVES: To compare use of diabetes medications between beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare Advantage (MA) and traditional Medicare (TM). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis of Medicare enrollment and Part D event claims during 2015-2016. METHODS: Data came from 1,027,884 TM and 838,420 MA beneficiaries who received at least 1 prescription for an oral or injectable diabetes medication. After matching MA and TM enrollees by demographic characteristics and geography, we analyzed use of medication overall, choices of first diabetes medication for those new to medication, and patterns of adding medications. RESULTS: Overall and for patients on 1, 2, or 3 diabetes medications, use of metformin was higher in MA by about 3 percentage points, but use of newer medication classes was 5.1 percentage points higher in TM overall (21.3% vs 16.2%). Use of guideline-recommended first-line agents was higher in MA. For those who started metformin first, use of a sulfonylurea as a second medication was 7.8 percentage points higher in MA than TM (61.5% vs 53.7%), whereas use of medications from newer classes was 7.7 percentage points lower (22.0% vs 29.7%). Mean total spending was $149 higher in TM for those taking 1 medication and $298 higher for those taking 2 medications. Differences in spending among MA plans were of similar magnitude to the MA-TM differences. CONCLUSIONS: MA enrollees are more likely to be treated with metformin and sulfonylureas and less likely to receive costly newer medications than those in TM, but there also is substantial variation within MA. A limitation of the study is that we could not assess glucose control using glycated hemoglobin levels.