Wyatt P Bensken1, Suparna M Navale1, Angeline S Andrew2, Barbara C Jobst2, Martha Sajatovic3, Siran M Koroukian1. 1. Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH. 2. Department of Neurology, Geisel School of Medicine and Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH. 3. Departments of Neurology and Psychiatry, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center and School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For newly diagnosed people with epilepsy (PWE), proper treatment is important to improve outcomes, yet limited data exist on markers of quality care. OBJECTIVE: Examine markers of quality care for newly diagnosed PWE. METHODS: Using Medicaid claims data (2010-2014) for 15 states we identified adults 18-64 years of age diagnosed with incident epilepsy in 2012 or 2013. We built 5 sequential logistic regression models to evaluate: (1) seeing a neurologist; (2) diagnostic evaluation; (3) antiepileptic medication adherence; (4) serum drug levels checked; and (5) being in the top quartile of number of negative health events (NHEs). We adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, county-level factors, and the outcomes from all prior models. RESULTS: Of 25,663 PWE, 37.3% saw a neurologist, with decreased odds for those of older age, those residing in counties with low-density of neurologists, and certain race/ethnicities; about 57% of PWE received at least 1 diagnostic test; and nearly 62% of PWE were adherent to their medication. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (37.1%) and psychoses (26.9%). PWE with comorbidities had higher odds of seeing a neurologist and to have NHEs. Substance use disorders were negatively associated with medication adherence and positively associated with high NHEs. CONCLUSIONS: There are notable differences in demographics among people with incident epilepsy who do or do not see a neurologist. Differences in NHEs persist, even after controlling for neurologist care and diagnostic evaluation. Continued attention to these disparities and comorbidities is needed in the evaluation of newly diagnosed PWE.
BACKGROUND: For newly diagnosed people with epilepsy (PWE), proper treatment is important to improve outcomes, yet limited data exist on markers of quality care. OBJECTIVE: Examine markers of quality care for newly diagnosed PWE. METHODS: Using Medicaid claims data (2010-2014) for 15 states we identified adults 18-64 years of age diagnosed with incident epilepsy in 2012 or 2013. We built 5 sequential logistic regression models to evaluate: (1) seeing a neurologist; (2) diagnostic evaluation; (3) antiepileptic medication adherence; (4) serum drug levels checked; and (5) being in the top quartile of number of negative health events (NHEs). We adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, county-level factors, and the outcomes from all prior models. RESULTS: Of 25,663 PWE, 37.3% saw a neurologist, with decreased odds for those of older age, those residing in counties with low-density of neurologists, and certain race/ethnicities; about 57% of PWE received at least 1 diagnostic test; and nearly 62% of PWE were adherent to their medication. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (37.1%) and psychoses (26.9%). PWE with comorbidities had higher odds of seeing a neurologist and to have NHEs. Substance use disorders were negatively associated with medication adherence and positively associated with high NHEs. CONCLUSIONS: There are notable differences in demographics among people with incident epilepsy who do or do not see a neurologist. Differences in NHEs persist, even after controlling for neurologist care and diagnostic evaluation. Continued attention to these disparities and comorbidities is needed in the evaluation of newly diagnosed PWE.
Authors: Nicholas K Schiltz; Siran M Koroukian; Mendel E Singer; Thomas E Love; Kitti Kaiboriboon Journal: Epilepsy Res Date: 2013-08-16 Impact factor: 3.045
Authors: Leah J Blank; James A G Crispo; Dylan P Thibault; Kathryn A Davis; Brian Litt; Allison W Willis Journal: Neurology Date: 2018-12-21 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Chloe E Hill; Chun Chieh Lin; James F Burke; Kevin A Kerber; Lesli E Skolarus; Gregory J Esper; Brandon Magliocco; Brian C Callaghan Journal: Neurology Date: 2019-01-23 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Nancy J Thompson; Robin E McGee; Amanda Garcia-Williams; Linda M Selwa; Shelley C Stoll; Erica K Johnson; Robert T Fraser Journal: Epilepsy Behav Date: 2019-10-22 Impact factor: 2.937
Authors: Paul M Bakaki; Siran M Koroukian; Leila W Jackson; Jeffrey M Albert; Kitti Kaiboriboon Journal: Epilepsy Res Date: 2013-06-20 Impact factor: 3.045
Authors: Sudeep Karve; Mario A Cleves; Mark Helm; Teresa J Hudson; Donna S West; Bradley C Martin Journal: Curr Med Res Opin Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 2.580
Authors: Jerzy P Szaflarski; Angela Y Rackley; Christopher J Lindsell; Magdalena Szaflarski; Stephen L Yates Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2008-12-18 Impact factor: 2.655