Variation of Clozapine Use for Treatment of Schizophrenia: Evidence from Pennsylvania Medicaid and Dually Eligible Enrollees.

While clozapine is the most effective antipsychotic treatment for treatment-resistant schizophrenia, it remains underutilized across the United States, warranting a more comprehensive understanding of variation in use at the county level, as well as characterization of existing prescribing patterns. Here, we examined both Medicaid and Medicare databases to (1) characterize temporal and geographic variation in clozapine prescribing and, (2) identify patient-level characteristics associated with clozapine use. We included Medicaid and Fee for Service Medicare data in the state of Pennsylvania from January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2019. We focused on individuals with continuous enrollment, schizophrenia diagnosis, and multiple antipsychotic trials. Geographic variation was examined across counties of Pennsylvania. Regression models were constructed to determine demographic and clinical characteristics associated with clozapine use. Out of 8,255 individuals who may benefit from clozapine, 642 received treatment. We observed high medication burden, overall, including multiple antipsychotic trials. We also identified variation in clozapine use across regions in Pennsylvania with a disproportionate number of prescribers in urban areas and several counties with no identified clozapine prescribers. Finally, demographic, and clinical determinants of clozapine use were observed including less use in people identified as non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, or with a substance use disorder. In addition, greater medical comorbidity was associated with increased clozapine use. Our work leveraged both Medicaid and Medicare data to characterize and surveil clozapine prescribing. Our findings support efforts monitor disparities and opportunities for the optimization of clozapine within municipalities to enhance clinical outcomes.

Effects of Ending the Use of Seclusion and Mechanical Restraint in the Pennsylvania State Hospital System, 2011-2020.

The Pennsylvania State Hospital System's use of containment procedures has been studied for >30 years. This prospective study assessed the effects of ending the use of seclusion and mechanical restraint in the system's six civil hospitals and two forensic centers from 2011 to 2020. The study examined the effect of this change on key safety measures: physical restraint, assaults, aggression, and self-injurious behavior. In total, 68,153 incidents, including 9,518 episodes of physical restraint involving 1,811 individuals, were entered into a database along with patients' demographic and diagnostic information. All data were calculated per 1,000 days to control for census changes. During the study, mechanical restraint was used 128 times and seclusion four times. Physical restraint use decreased from a high of 2.62 uses per 1,000 days in 2013 to 2.02 in 2020. The average length of time a person was held in physical restraint was reduced by 64%, from 6.6 minutes in 2011 to 2.4 minutes in 2020 (p<0.001). All safety measures improved or were unchanged. Use of unscheduled medication did not change. The hospital system safely ended the use of mechanical restraint and seclusion by using a recovery approach and by following the six core strategies for seclusion and restraint reduction.

Relationship Between Seclusion and Restraint Reduction and Assaults in Pennsylvania's Forensic Services Centers: 2001-2010.

OBJECTIVE: This prospective study assessed the use of seclusion and restraint in Pennsylvania forensic centers from 2001 through 2010. It also examined the correlation between declining use of containment procedures and patient-to-patient and patient-to-staff assaults. METHODS: The 2,741 episodes of restraint or seclusion involving 801 unique individuals served in state forensic centers during the study period were entered into a uniform database. Included in this data set were demographic and diagnostic data as well as the causes and injuries associated with each use of these procedures. These data were correlated with rates of patient-to-patient and patient-to-staff assaults with any injury for each month of this study. RESULTS: From 2001 to 2010, the rate of use of mechanical restraint significantly declined from 1.63 to .04 episodes per 1,000 days (p<.001), and the rate of use of seclusion significantly declined from .89 to .04 episodes per 1,000 days (p<.001). There was a nonsignificant decline in the use of physical restraint during this span. During this decade, the rate of patient-to-staff assaults declined, and the rate of patient-to-patient assaults was unaffected. CONCLUSIONS: Decreasing the use of containment procedures had a positive effect on reducing assaults. Leadership, data transparency, use of clinical alerts, workforce development, policy changes, and discontinuation of psychiatric use of PRN orders were all contributing factors. A philosophical change toward a recovery model of psychiatric care and services was the driving force behind this transformation.