Literature DB >> 29485947

Differences in Medicaid Antipsychotic Medication Measures Among Children with SSI, Foster Care, and Income-Based Aid.

Emily Leckman-Westin1, Molly Finnerty2, Sarah Hudson Scholle3, Riti Pritam4, Deborah Layman4, Edith Kealey4, Sepheen Byron3, Emily Morden3, Scott Bilder5, Sheree Neese-Todd5, Sarah Horwitz6, Kimberly Hoagwood6, Stephen Crystal5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Concerns about antipsychotic prescribing for children, particularly those enrolled in Medicaid and with Supplemental Security Income (SSI), continue despite recent calls for selective use within established guidelines.
OBJECTIVES: To (a) examine the application of 6 quality measures for antipsychotic medication prescribing in children and adolescents receiving Medicaid and (b) understand distinctive patterns across eligibility categories in order to inform ongoing quality management efforts to support judicious antipsychotic use.
METHODS: Using data for 10 states from the 2008 Medicaid Analytic Extract (MAX), a cross-sectional assessment of 144,200 Medicaid beneficiaries aged < 21 years who received antipsychotics was conducted to calculate the prevalence of 6 quality measures for antipsychotic medication management, which were developed in 2012-2014 by the National Collaborative for Innovation in Quality Measurement. These measures addressed antipsychotic polypharmacy, higher-than-recommended doses of antipsychotics, use of psychosocial services before antipsychotic initiation, follow-up after initiation, baseline metabolic screening, and ongoing metabolic monitoring.
RESULTS: Compared with children eligble for income-based Medicaid, children receiving SSI and in foster care were twice as likely to receive higher-than-recommended doses of antipsychotics (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.4, 95% CI = 2.3-2.6; AOR = 2.5, 95% CI = 2.4-2.6, respectively) and multiple concurrent antipsychotic medications (AOR = 2.2, 95% CI = 2.0-2.4; AOR = 2.2, 95% CI = 2.0-2.4, respectively). However, children receiving SSI and in foster care were more likely to have appropriate management, including psychosocial visits before initiating antipsychotic treatment and ongoing metabolic monitoring. While children in foster care were more likely to experience baseline metabolic screening, SSI children were no more likely than children eligible for income-based aid to receive baseline screening.
CONCLUSIONS: While indicators of overuse were more common in SSI and foster care groups, access to follow-up, metabolic monitoring, and psychosocial services was somewhat better for these children. However, substantial quality shortfalls existed for all groups, particularly metabolic screening and monitoring. Renewed efforts are needed to improve antipsychotic medication management for all children. DISCLOSURES: This project was supported by grant number U18HS020503 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Additional support for Rutgers-based participants was provided from AHRQ grants R18 HS019937 and U19HS021112, as well as the New York State Office of Mental Health. The content of this study is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of AHRQ, CMS, or the New York State Office of Mental Health. Finnerty has been the principle investigator on research grants/contracts from Bristol Myers Squibb and Sunovion, but her time on these projects is fully supported by the New York State Office of Mental Health. Scholle, Byron, and Morden work for the National Committee for Quality Assurance, a not-for-profit organization that develops and maintains quality measures. Neese-Todd was at Rutgers University at the time of this study and is now employed by the National Committee for Quality Assurance. The other authors have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose. Study concept and design were contributed by Finnerty, Neese-Todd, and Crystal, assisted by Scholle, Leckman-Westin, Horowitz, and Hoagwood. Scholle, Byron, Morden, and Hoagwood collected the data, and data interpretation was performed by Pritam, Bilder, Leckman-Westin, and Finnerty, with assistance from Scholle, Byron, Crystal, Kealey, and Neese-Todd. The manuscript was written by Leckman-Westin, Kealey, and Horowitz and revised by Layman, Crystal, Leckman-Westin, Finnerty, Scholle, Neese-Todd, and Horowitz, along with the other authors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29485947     DOI: 10.18553/jmcp.2018.24.3.238

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Manag Care Spec Pharm


  8 in total

Review 1.  National Child Mental Health Quality Measures: Adherence Rates and Extent of Evidence for Clinical Validity.

Authors:  Bonnie T Zima; Juliet B Edgcomb; Samantha A Shugarman
Journal:  Curr Psychiatry Rep       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 5.285

Review 2.  Research Participation of Minor Adolescents in Foster Care.

Authors:  Jenny K R Francis; Jane A Andresen; Alexis Guzman; Jill D McLeigh; Heidi M Kloster; Susan L Rosenthal
Journal:  J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol       Date:  2020-12-15       Impact factor: 1.814

3.  Provider Specialty and Receipt of Metabolic Monitoring for Children Taking Antipsychotics.

Authors:  Elizabeth Shenkman; Lindsay Thompson; Regina Bussing; Christopher B Forrest; Jennifer Woodard; Yijun Sun; Jasmine Mack; Kamila B Mistry; Matthew J Gurka
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 7.124

4.  Guideline Adherence of Monitoring Antipsychotic Use for Nonpsychotic Indications in Children and Adolescents: A Patient Record Review.

Authors:  Mariken Dinnissen; Andrea Dietrich; Judith H van der Molen; Anne M Verhallen; Ynske Buiteveld; Suzanne Jongejan; Pieter W Troost; Jan K Buitelaar; Barbara J van den Hoofdakker; Pieter J Hoekstra
Journal:  J Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2021 Jan/Feb 01       Impact factor: 3.118

5.  A best-worst scaling experiment to identify patient-centered claims-based outcomes for evaluation of pediatric antipsychotic monitoring programs.

Authors:  Thomas I Mackie; Katherine M Kovacs; Cassandra Simmel; Stephen Crystal; Sheree Neese-Todd; Ayse Akincigil
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2020-12-28       Impact factor: 3.402

6.  Trends Over Time in Antipsychotic Initiation at a Large Children's Health Care System.

Authors:  Laura J Chavez; Kelly J Kelleher; Arne Beck; Gregory N Clarke; Robert B Penfold
Journal:  J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 3.031

7.  CYP2D6 genotype and adverse events to risperidone in children and adolescents.

Authors:  Kazeem A Oshikoya; Katelyn M Neely; Robert J Carroll; Ida T Aka; Angela C Maxwell-Horn; Dan M Roden; Sara L Van Driest
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2019-01-19       Impact factor: 3.756

8.  Enhancing Quality Measurement With Clinical Information: A Use Case of Body Mass Index Change Among Children Taking Second Generation Antipsychotics.

Authors:  Tianyao Huo; Qian Li; Michelle I Cardel; Regina Bussing; Almut G Winterstein; Dominick J Lemas; Hongzhi Xu; Jennifer Woodard; Kamila Mistry; Sarah Scholle; Keith E Muller; Elizabeth A Shenkman
Journal:  Acad Pediatr       Date:  2022-04       Impact factor: 2.993

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.