Impact of High-Deductible Health Plans on Medication Use Among Individuals With Bipolar Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) require substantial out-of-pocket spending for most services, although medications may be subject to traditional copayment arrangements. This study examined effects of HDHPs on medication out-of-pocket spending and use and quality of care among individuals with bipolar disorder. METHODS: This quasi-experimental study used claims data (2003-2014) for a national sample of 3,532 members with bipolar disorder, ages 12-64, continuously enrolled for 1 year in a low-deductible plan (≤$500) and then for 1 year in an HDHP (≥$1,000) after an employer-mandated switch. HDHP members were matched to 18,923 contemporaneous individuals in low-deductible plans (control group). Outcome measures were out-of-pocket spending and use of bipolar disorder medications, psychotropics for other disorders, and all other medications and appropriate laboratory monitoring for psychotropics. RESULTS: Relative to the control group, annual out-of-pocket spending per person for bipolar disorder medications increased 20.8% among HDHP members (95% confidence interval [CI]=14.9%-26.7%), and the absolute increase was $36 (95% CI=$25.9-$45.2). Specifically, out-of-pocket spending increased for antipsychotics (27.1%; 95% CI=17.4%-36.7%) and anticonvulsants (19.2%; 95% CI=11.9%-26.6%) but remained stable for lithium (-3.7%; 95% CI=-12.2% to 4.8%). No statistically significant changes were detected in use of bipolar disorder medications, other psychotropics, or all other medications or in appropriate laboratory monitoring for bipolar disorder medications. CONCLUSIONS: HDHP members with bipolar disorder experienced a moderate increase in out-of-pocket spending for medications but preserved bipolar disorder medication use. Findings may reflect individuals' perceptions of the importance of these medications for their functioning and well-being.

Integrating Stakeholder Engagement With Claims-Based Research on Health Insurance Design and Bipolar Disorder.

Researchers increasingly recognize that stakeholder involvement enhances research relevance and validity. However, reports of patient engagement in research that relies on administrative records data are rare. The authors' collaborative project combined quantitative and qualitative studies of costs and access to care among U.S. adults with employer-sponsored insurance. The authors analyzed insurance claims to estimate the impacts on enrollee costs and utilization after patients with bipolar disorder were switched from traditional coverage to high-deductible health plans. In parallel, in-depth interviews explored people's experiences accessing treatment for bipolar disorder. Academic investigators on the research team partnered with the Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance (DBSA), a national advocacy organization for people with mood disorders. Detailed personal stories from DBSA-recruited volunteers informed and complemented the claims analyses. Several DBSA audience forums and a stakeholder advisor panel contributed regular feedback on study issues. These multiple engagement modes drew inputs of varying intensity from diverse community segments. Efforts to include new voices must acknowledge individuals' distinct interests and barriers to research participation. Strong engagement leadership roles ensure productive communication between researchers and stakeholders. The involvement of people with direct experience of care is especially necessary in research that uses secondary data. Longitudinal, adaptable partnerships enable colearning and higher-quality research that captures the manifold dimensions of patient experiences.

The Anesthesia Perioperative "Call for Help"-Experience at a Quaternary Pediatric Medical Center: Analysis of 67,564 Anesthesia Encounters.

BACKGROUND: During the past several decades, anesthesia has become increasingly safe. Truly major adverse events are rare, and anesthesia quality researchers have instituted programs to evaluate "near miss" or less critical adverse events to evaluate the safety of anesthesia delivery. In this study, we aimed to evaluate calls for emergency help in our institution as a surrogate for pending critical events. We hypothesized that calls would be more common in patients with high American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status, history of prematurity, and children with recent respiratory illness compared to those without these characteristics. METHODS: We analyzed emergent calls for help initiated by perioperative personnel ("STAT" calls) between August 2011 and September 2015 at Boston Children's Hospital. Our analysis had 2 phases: (1) All 193 STAT calls that occurred during this time period were analyzed for demographic variables (age, ASA physical status, gender) and specific features of the STAT calls (provider who initiated the call, anesthetic phase, presence of recent respiratory illness, location). We further categorized the STAT calls as "complicated" or "uncomplicated" based on an unexpected change in patient disposition, and analyzed how demographic factors and specific features related to the likelihood of a STAT call being complicated. (2) A subset of the total calls (108), captured after introduction of electronic intraoperative medical record in July 2012, were analyzed for the incidence of STAT calls by comparing the number and nature of the STAT calls to the number of surgical/diagnostic procedures performed. RESULTS: Univariable and multivariable analysis of the entire cohort of STAT calls (193 cases) identified several characteristics that were more likely to be associated with a complicated STAT call: higher ASA physical status; history of respiratory illness; cardiac inciting event; occurrence during induction phase of general anesthesia; postanesthesia care unit location; and calls initiated by an attending physician or a pediatric anesthesia fellow. Multivariable analysis of the subset of 108 indicated that age <1 year and a history of prematurity were independent predictors of a higher incidence of STAT calls. Offsite anesthesia services were associated with a lower frequency of STAT calls independent of the other variables. CONCLUSIONS: Our study offers the most comprehensive analysis of emergent perioperative calls for help in pediatric anesthesia to date. We identified several characteristics, independently associated with more complicated and frequent perioperative STAT calls. Further research is required to evaluate the utility of this information in preventing and treating adverse events in children undergoing surgery and anesthesia.