Significance and Factors Associated with Antipsychotic Polypharmacy Utilization Among Publicly Insured US Adults.

Antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) lacks evidence of effectiveness in the care of schizophrenia or other disorders for which antipsychotic drugs are indicated, also exposing patients to more risks. Authors assessed APP prevalence and APP association with beneficiary race/ethnicity and payer among publicly-insured adults regardless of diagnosis. Retrospective repeated panel study of fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare, Medicaid, and dually-eligible white, black, and Latino adults residing in California, Georgia, Iowa, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Dakota, or West Virginia, filling antipsychotic prescriptions between July 2008 and June 2013. Primary outcome was any monthly APP utilization. Across states and payers, 11% to 21% of 397,533 antipsychotic users and 12% to 19% of 9,396,741 person-months had some APP utilization. Less than 50% of person-months had a schizophrenia diagnosis and up to 19% had no diagnosed mental illness. Payer modified race/ethnicity effects on APP utilization only in CA; however, the odds of APP utilization remained lower for minorities than for whites. Elsewhere, the odds varied by race/ethnicity only in OK, with Latinos having lower odds than whites (odds ratio 0.76; 95% confidence interval 0.60-0.96). The odds of APP utilization varied by payer in several study states, with odds generally higher for Dual eligibles, although the differences were generally small; the odds also varied by year (lower at study end). APP was frequently utilized but mostly declined over time. APP utilization patterns varied across states, with no consistent association with race/ethnicity and small payer effects. Greater use of APP-reducing strategies are needed, particularly among non-schizophrenia populations.

Factors Associated With Off-Label Utilization of Second-Generation Antipsychotics Among Publicly Insured Adults.

OBJECTIVE: Off-label utilization of second-generation antipsychotic medications may expose patients to significant risks. The authors examined the prevalence, temporal trends, and factors associated with off-label utilization of second-generation antipsychotics among publicly insured adults. METHODS: A retrospective repeated panel was used to examine monthly off-label utilization of second-generation antipsychotics among fee-for-service Medicare, Medicaid, and dually eligible White, Black, and Latino adult beneficiaries filling prescriptions for second-generation antipsychotics in California, Georgia, Mississippi, and Oklahoma from July 2008 through June 2013. RESULTS: Among 301,367 users of second-generation antipsychotics, between 36.5% and 41.9% had utilization that was always off-label. Payer did not modify effects of race-ethnicity on off-label utilization. Compared with Whites, Blacks had lower monthly odds of off-label utilization in all four states, and Latinos had lower odds of utilization in California and Georgia. Payer was associated with off-label utilization in California, Mississippi, and Oklahoma. California Medicaid beneficiaries were 1.12 (95% confidence interval=1.10-1.13) times as likely as dually eligible beneficiaries to have off-label utilization. Off-label utilization increased relative to the baseline year in all states, but a downward trend followed in three states. CONCLUSIONS: Off-label utilization of second-generation antipsychotics was prevalent despite the drugs' cardiometabolic risks and little evidence of their effectiveness. The lower likelihood of off-label utilization among patients from racial-ethnic minority groups might stem from prescribers' efforts to minimize risks, given a higher baseline risk for these groups, or from disparities-associated factors. Variation among payers suggests that payer policies can affect off-label utilization.

Facility-Level Variation and Clinical Outcomes in Use of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy With and Without an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about real-world facility-level preferences for cardiac resynchronization therapy devices with (CRT-D) and without (CRT-P) defibrillator backup. We quantify this variation at the facility level and exploit this variation to compare outcomes of patients receiving these 2 devices. METHODS AND RESULTS: Claims data from fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries were used to identify new CRT-P and CRT-D implants, 2006 to 2012. We modeled factors associated with receipt of each device, and compared mortality, hospitalizations, and reoperations for patients receiving each using both logistic regression and instrumental variable analysis to account for confounding. Among 71 459 device recipients (CRT-P, 11 925; CRT-D, 59 534; 31% women), CRT-P recipients were older, more likely to be women, and had more comorbidities. Variation in device selection among facilities was substantial: After adjustment for patient characteristics, the odds of receiving a CRT-P (versus CRT-D) device were 7.6× higher for a patient treated at a facility in the highest CRT-P use quartile versus a facility in the lowest CRT-P use quartile. Logistic modeling suggested a survival advantage for CRT-D devices but with falsification end points indicating residual confounding. By contrast, in the instrumental variable analysis using facility variability as the proposed instrument, clinical characteristics and falsification end points were well balanced, and 1-year mortality in patients who received CRT-P versus CRT-D implants did not differ, while CRT-P patients had a lower probability of hospitalizations and reoperations in the year following implant. CONCLUSIONS: CRT-P versus CRT-D selection varies substantially among facilities, adjusted for clinical factors. After instrumental variable adjustment for clinical covariates and facility preference, survival was no different between the devices. Therefore, CRT-P may be preferred for Medicare beneficiaries considering new CRT implantation.

Geographic and Temporal Variation in Cardiac Implanted Electric Devices to Treat Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac implantable electric devices are commonly used to treat heart failure. Little is known about temporal and geographic variation in use of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices in usual care settings. METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified new CRT with pacemaker (CRT-P) or defibrillator generators (CRT-D) implanted between 2008 and 2013 in the United States from a commercial claims database. For each implant, we characterized prior medication use, comorbidities, and geography. Among 17 780 patients with CRT devices (median age 69, 31% women), CRT-Ps were a small and increasing share of CRT devices, growing from 12% to 20% in this study period. Compared to CRT-D recipients, CRT-P recipients were older (median age 76 versus 67), and more likely to be female (40% versus 30%). Pre-implant use of ß-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers was low in both CRT-D (46%) and CRT-P (31%) patients. The fraction of CRT-P devices among all new implants varied widely across states. Compared to the increasing national trend, the share of CRT-P implants was relatively increasing in Kansas and relatively decreasing in Minnesota and Oregon. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, contemporary heart failure population, CRT-D use dwarfed CRT-P, though the latter nearly doubled over 6 years. Practice patterns vary substantially across states and over time. Medical therapy appears suboptimal in real-world practice.

Location Isn't Everything: Proximity, Hospital Characteristics, Choice of Hospital, and Disparities for Breast Cancer Surgery Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the relative importance of proximity and other hospital characteristics in the choice of hospital for breast cancer surgery by race/ethnicity. DATA: SEER-Medicare data. STUDY DESIGN: Observational study of women aged >65 years receiving surgery for stage I/II/III breast cancer diagnosed in 1992-2007 in Detroit (N = 10,746 white/black), Atlanta (N = 4,018 white/black), Los Angeles (N = 9,433 white/black/Asian/Hispanic), and San Francisco (N = 4,856 white/black/Asian). We calculated the distance from each patient's census tract of residence to each area hospital. We estimated discrete choice models for the probability of receiving surgery at each hospital based on distance and assessed whether deviations from these predictions entailed interactions of hospital characteristics with the patient's race/ethnicity. We identified high-quality hospitals by rates of adjuvant radiation therapy and by survey measures of patient experiences, and we assessed how observed surgery rates at high-quality hospitals deviated from those predicted based on distance alone. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Proximity was significantly associated with hospital choice in all areas. Minority more often than white breast cancer patients had surgery at hospitals with more minority patients, those treating more Medicaid patients, and in some areas, lower quality hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Residential location alone does not explain concentration of racial/ethnic-minority breast cancer surgery patients in certain hospitals that are sometimes of lower quality.

Where You Live Matters: Quality and Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Schizophrenia Care in Four State Medicaid Programs.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether (a) quality in schizophrenia care varies by race/ethnicity and over time and (b) these patterns differ across counties within states. DATA SOURCES: Medicaid claims data from California, Florida, New York, and North Carolina during 2002-2008. STUDY DESIGN: We studied black, Latino, and white Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia. Hierarchical regression models, by state, quantified person and county effects of race/ethnicity and year on a composite quality measure, adjusting for person-level characteristics. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Overall, our cohort included 164,014 person-years (41-61 percent non-whites), corresponding to 98,400 beneficiaries. Relative to whites, quality was lower for blacks in every state and also lower for Latinos except in North Carolina. Temporal improvements were observed in California and North Carolina only. Within each state, counties differed in quality and disparities. Between-county variation in the black disparity was larger than between-county variation in the Latino disparity in California, and smaller in North Carolina; Latino disparities did not vary by county in Florida. In every state, counties differed in annual changes in quality; by 2008, no county had narrowed the initial disparities. CONCLUSIONS: For Medicaid beneficiaries living in the same state, quality and disparities in schizophrenia care are influenced by county of residence for reasons beyond patients' characteristics.

Disparities in quality of care among publicly insured adults with schizophrenia in four large U.S. states, 2002-2008.

OBJECTIVE: To examine racial/ethnic disparities in quality of schizophrenia care and assess the size of observed disparities across states and over time. DATA SOURCES: Medicaid claims data from CA, FL, NY, and NC. STUDY DESIGN: Observational repeated cross-sectional panel cohort study of white, black, and Latino fee-for-service adult beneficiaries with schizophrenia. Main outcome was the relationship of race/ethnicity and year with a composite measure of quality of schizophrenia care derived from 14 evidence-based quality indicators. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Quality was assessed for 325,373 twelve-month person-episodes between 2002 and 2008, corresponding to 123,496 Medicaid beneficiaries. In 2002, quality was lowest for blacks in all states. With the exception of FL, quality was lower for Latinos than whites. In CA, blacks had about 43 percent of the individual indicators met compared to 58 percent for whites. Quality improved annually for all groups in CA, NY, and NC. While in CA the improvement was slightly larger for Latinos, in FL quality improved for blacks but declined for Latinos and whites. CONCLUSIONS: Quality of schizophrenia care is poor and racial/ethnic disparities exist among Medicaid beneficiaries from four states. The size of the disparities varied across the states, and most of the initial disparities were unchanged by 2008.

Outcomes following local therapy for early-stage breast cancer in non-trial populations.

Recent studies suggest trends toward more mastectomies for primary breast cancer treatment. We assessed survival after mastectomy and breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with radiation for early-stage breast cancer among non-selected populations of women and among women similar to those in clinical trials. Using population-based data from Surveillance Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries linked with Medicare administrative data from 1992 to 2005, we conducted propensity score analysis of survival following primary therapy for early-stage breast cancer, including BCS with radiation, BCS without radiation, mastectomy with radiation, and mastectomy without radiation. Adjusted survival was greatest among women who had BCS with radiation (median survival = 10.98 years). Compared with this group, mortality was higher among women who had mastectomy without radiation (median survival 10.04 years, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.14-1.23), mastectomy with radiation (median survival 10.02 years, HR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.14-1.27), and BCS without radiation (median survival 7.63 years, HR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.70-1.92). Among women representative of those eligible for clinical trials (age ≤70 years, Charlson comorbidity score = 0/1, and stage 1 tumors), there were no differences in survival for women who underwent BCS with radiation or mastectomy. In conclusion, after careful adjustment for differences in patient, physician, and hospital characteristics, we found better survival for BCS with radiation versus mastectomy among older early-stage breast cancer patients, with no difference in survival for BCS with radiation versus mastectomy among women representative of those in clinical trials. These findings are reassuring in light of recent trends towards more aggressive primary breast cancer therapy.