ABSTRACT
Ketamine and esketamine are efficacious for treatment-resistant depression. Unlike other antidepressants, ketamine lacks a therapeutic delay and decreases the risk for suicide. This cross-sectional study geographically characterized ketamine and esketamine prescribing to United States (US) Medicaid patients. Ketamine and esketamine prescription rates and spending per state were obtained. Between 2009 and 2020, ketamine prescribing rates peaked in 2013 followed by a general decline. For ketamine and esketamine in 2019, Montana (967/million enrollees) and Indiana (425) showed significantly higher prescription rates, respectively, relative to the national average. A total of 21 states prescribed neither ketamine nor esketamine in 2019. There was a 121.3% increase in esketamine prescriptions from 2019 to 2020. North Dakota (1,423) and North Carolina (1,094) were significantly elevated relative to the average state for esketamine in 2020. Ten states prescribed neither ketamine nor esketamine in 2020. Medicaid programs in 2020 spent 72.7-fold more for esketamine ($25.3 million) than on ketamine (0.3 million). Despite the effectiveness of ketamine and esketamine for treatment-resistant depression and anti-suicidal properties, their use among Medicaid patients was limited and highly variable in many areas of the US. Further research to better understand the origins of this state-level variation is needed.
Subject(s)
Ketamine , Humans , Ketamine/therapeutic use , Antidepressive Agents , Cross-Sectional Studies , Medicaid , Indiana , Depression/drug therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Throughout US history, chronic and infectious diseases have severely impacted minority communities due to a lack of accessibility to quality healthcare and accurate information, as well as underlying racism. These fault lines in the care of minority communities in the US have been further exacerbated by the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study examined the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy by race and ethnicity, particularly among African American and Latinx communities in Eastern Pennsylvania (PA). METHODS: Survey data was collected in July 2021 in Philadelphia, Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, and Hazleton, PA. The 203 participants (38.7% Black, 27.5% Latinx) completed the 28-question survey of COVID-19 vaccination attitudes in either English or Spanish. RESULT: Out of the 203 participants, 181 participants met all the inclusion criteria, including completed surveys; of these participants, over three-fifths (63.5%) were acceptant of the COVID-19 vaccine whereas the remainder (36.5%) were hesitant. Binary logistic regression results showed that age, concern for vaccine efficacy, race, knowledge on the vaccine, and belief that the COVID-19 virus is serious significantly influenced COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Minorities were more likely to be hesitant toward vaccination (OR: 2.8, 95% CI: 1.1, 6.8) than non-Hispanic whites. Those who believed the COVID-19 vaccine was ineffective (OR: 8.3, 95% CI: 3.8, 18.2), and that the virus is not serious (OR: 8.3, 95% CI: 1.1, 61.8) showed the greatest odds of hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: Minority status, age less than 45 years, misinformation about seriousness of COVID-19 illness, and concern about vaccine efficacy were contributing factors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Therefore, understanding and addressing the barriers to COVID-19 vaccination in minority groups is essential to decreasing transmission and controlling this pandemic, and will provide lessons on how to implement public health measures in future pandemics.
