Stimulant Patterns, Alone or with Other Psychotropic Classes, in Medicaid-Insured Youth Continuously Enrolled for 3-8 Years.

Objective: Little U.S. pharmacoepidemiologic study is based on treatment during continuous enrollment for periods more than a year. This study aims to show pediatric patterns of stimulant use (alone or with other psychotropic classes) from Medicaid administrative claims data for stimulant patterns of 3- to 8-year continuous enrollees. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was derived from Medicaid enrollment, pharmacy, and diagnosis claims data (2007-2014) in a mid-Atlantic state. Youth aged 2-17 years with 3-8 years of continuous enrollment treated with stimulants were compared with a date-matched comparison group treated without stimulants. Major outcomes include prevalence and duration of stimulant use and patterns of stimulant polypharmacy across relatively long enrollments (3-8 years). Results: Among 264,518 unique 2- to 17-year olds with 3-8 years of continuous enrollment, 16.5% had stimulant prescription dispensings, doubling the annual national prevalence of 8.1%. Subgroup analysis showed that the highest prevalence of stimulant use was for 6- to 11-year olds (20.4%), foster care eligible youth (42.3%), and those with 7-8 years of continuous enrollment (20.1%). Externalizing psychiatric disorders were far more common in those treated with stimulants than in those treated without stimulants. The duration of stimulant exposure overall was a median of 487 days, half that of foster care stimulant users. Stimulant polypharmacy with two or more psychotropic classes concomitantly characterized 29.8% of stimulant users. Among those with three or four or more class polypharmacy, 85% and 88%, respectively, had concomitant stimulant and antipsychotic use. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of three or more class polypharmacy significantly increased in 12- to 17-year-old age group (AOR = 1.8), foster care eligibility (AOR = 4.5), and among those with the longest enrollment (AOR = 1.7). Conclusions and Relevance: Stimulant prevalence in Medicaid-insured youth with continuous enrollment of 3-8 years was twice as common as in annual data sets. Future research should investigate three to five interclass stimulant polypharmacy effectiveness in reliably diagnosed community populations.

Psychotropic Polypharmacy in the US Pediatric Population: A Methodologic Critique and Commentary.

Background: Psychotropic concomitant medication use for the treatment of youth with emotional and behavioral disorders has grown significantly in the U.S. over the past 25 years. The use of pharmacy claims to analyze these trends requires the following: age of the selected population, overlapping days of use, and precision of the outcome itself. This review will also address the gaps in reporting of pediatric psychotropic polypharmacy. Methods: An electronic literature search was undertaken for the period 2000 through 2020 using keywords such as "pediatric," "concomitant," "polypharmacy," "multiple medications," and "concurrent psychotropic"; Relevant references in textbooks were also used. Only English language and U.S. studies were included, resulting in 35 inter-class studies. Results: Studies were organized into seven groups according to data sources and clinical topics: (1) population surveys; (2a) multi-state publicly insured populations; (2b) single/two state studies; (3) privately insured populations; (4) diagnosed populations; (5) foster care populations; (6) special settings. Across 20 years it is apparent that pediatric psychotropic polypharmacy affects substantially more children and adolescents today than had been the case. As many as 300,000 youth now receive 3 or more classes concomitantly. The duration of concomitant use is relatively long, e.g., 69-89% of annual medicated days. Finally, more adverse event reports were associated with 3-class compared with 2-class drug regimens. Discussion: Factors that contribute to the growth of pediatric psychotropic polypharmacy include: (1) predominance of the biological model in psychiatric practice; (2) invalid assumptions on efficacy of combinations, (3) limited professional awareness of metabolic and neurological adverse drug events, and (4) infrequent use of appropriate deprescribing. Conclusion: A review of publications documenting U.S. pediatric psychotropic polypharmacy written over the last 20 years supports the need to standardize the methodologies used. The design of population-based studies should maximize information on the number of youth receiving regimens of 3-, 4-, and 5 or more concomitant classes and the duration of such use. Next, far more post-marketing research is needed to address the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of complex drug regimens prescribed for youngsters.

Antidepressant Use in Medicaid-Insured Youth: Trends, Covariates, and Future Research Needs.

BACKGROUND: Detailed research on long-term antidepressant (AD) trends within a single large US Medicaid population of youth has not heretofore been reported. METHODS: Administrative claims data for eight annual timepoints across 28 years (1987-2014) were organized for youth (<20 years old) who were continuously enrolled during each study year in a mid-Atlantic state Medicaid program. Total annual AD prevalence and age-, gender-, race-, eligibility group-, and diagnosis-specific prevalence were formed from bivariate analyses; logistic regression assessed the change in use (2007-2014) adjusted for covariates. AD-polypharmacy data were assessed in 2014. RESULTS: The major findings are: 1) AD use in state Medicaid enrollees grew 14-fold between 1987 and 2014. Data from 2014 revealed significantly increased odds of youth with SSRI/SNRI dispensings compared to 2007 (AOR=1.15 95% CI 1.11-1.19), representing 78% of total AD users. 2) Recent AD increases were greatest for 15-19-year olds. 3) AD use in girls passed up AD use in boys for the first time in 2014. 4) In 2014, ADs for foster care (12.7%) were 6 times greater than for their income-eligible Medicaid-counterparts. 5) In 2014, a quarter of AD-medicated youth were diagnosed with a behavior disorder. 6) More than 40 percent of AD medicated youth had >=1 other concomitant psychotropic classes for 60 or more days. CONCLUSIONS: Second-generation antidepressant use in Medicaid-insured youth has increased despite growing questions that pediatric AD benefits may not outweigh harms. These patterns support the call for publicly funded, independent investigator-conducted post-marketing outcomes research.

Continuity of Care and Mental Health Service Use Among Medicaid-enrolled Youths.

BACKGROUND: Recent reports of increased national estimates of pediatric psychiatric emergency department (ED) visits and psychiatric hospitalizations emphasize the need to research these utilization patterns. OBJECTIVES: To assess the patient-provider continuity of care (CoC) and compare the risk of psychiatric ED visits or hospitalization according to the CoC level. RESEARCH DESIGN: A cohort design was applied to Medicaid administrative claims data (2007-2014) for 3-16-year olds with a first psychiatric diagnosis between 2009 and 2013 (n=38,825). SUBJECTS: Continuously enrolled youths with (1) ≥1 outpatient psychiatric visits and (2) ≥4 pediatric outpatient visits in the prior 24 months. MEASURES: The authors assessed CoC in the 24 months before the first psychiatric outpatient visit and quantified CoC using the Alpha Index. The authors assessed patient-provider CoC before first psychiatric diagnosis and the odds of psychiatric ED visits or psychiatric hospitalizations in the year after diagnosis. RESULTS: Of the 38,825 youths, 88.9% received a first psychiatric diagnosis by age 14. The odds of ED visits were significantly higher among youths with low CoC [6.63%, adjusted odds ratio (AOR), 1.27; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.13-1.41] or moderate CoC (5.76%; AOR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.02-1.27) compared with those with high CoC (4.96%). Greater odds of psychiatric hospitalization related to low (7.53%; AOR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.06-1.29) or moderate CoC (7.01%; AOR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.03-1.27) compared with high CoC (6.06%). CONCLUSIONS: The odds of potentially disruptive clinical management and costly psychiatric ED visits or hospitalizations were lower for youths with high CoC. The findings support the need to research the impact of CoC on long-term pediatric mental health service use.

Impact of a Care Management Entity on Use of Psychiatric Services Among Youths With Severe Mental or Behavioral Disorders.

OBJECTIVE: Care management entity models have a positive impact on functioning and symptom control among youths with serious emotional and behavioral disorders. However, little is known about whether treatment benefits are sustained after discharge. The study objective was to examine the association between enrollment in a care management entity and mental health outcomes during the year after discharge. METHODS: Data from care management entity administrative claims were linked with Medicaid claims for youths enrolled in a care management entity anytime from December 2009 through December 2013. Inverse probability treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics between the youths enrolled in the care management entity and a comparison group. Study outcomes were psychiatry-related hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits during the year after discharge. Two models were used to compare the two groups, one modeling the probability of using any psychiatric service and one modeling the number of visits for each outcome among users of either service. RESULTS: After adjustment with inverse probability treatment weighting, 2,381 youths (care management, N=488; comparison, N=1,893) were identified. Care management was associated with a significantly lower likelihood of any psychiatry-related ED visit (odds ratio [OR]=.65, p=.017) and any psychiatric hospitalization (OR=.60, p=.011). No significant differences in outcomes were observed when the comparison was limited to users of services. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced use of psychiatric inpatient and ED services among youths enrolled in a care management entity was sustainable after discharge. Multiagency collaboration is needed to enrich the ability to assess outcomes across broader domains.

Cardiovascular Events Following Treatment Initiation with Atypical Antipsychotic Medications in Publicly Insured U.S. Youth.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk of incident cardiovascular events that led to hospitalizations or emergency department visits following atypical antipsychotic (AAP) treatment initiation in youth according to dose, duration of use, and concomitant use of leading psychotropic medication classes. METHODS: We used computerized Medicaid claims to conduct a retrospective cohort study of youth (5-20 years) who initiated AAP treatment. AAP use was operationalized in a time-dependent manner according to current vs. former use, average daily dose (in risperidone dose equivalents), and duration of use. In a secondary analysis, concomitant use of (1) stimulants and (2) serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRI/SNRIs) with AAPs was also assessed. To account for confounding, disease risk score methodology was used in discrete time failure models. RESULTS: There were 74,700 youth who initiated AAP treatment (average follow-up = 24.8 months). During follow-up, the risk of cardiovascular events was significantly greater during current than former AAP use (RR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.09-2.21). Furthermore, for current users of AAPs, the risk of cardiovascular events intensified with average daily dose (RR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.11-3.77 for >3.75 mg/day vs. ≤1.25 mg/day). The risk of cardiovascular events did not significantly differ according to duration of AAP use. In AAP-treated youth, concomitant SSRI/SNRI use was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events (RR = 1.61, 95% CI = 1.01-2.57). By contrast, stimulant use concomitant with AAPs was not significantly associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: In publicly insured U.S. youth, current AAP use was associated with an increased risk of incident cardiovascular events, which intensified with increasing dose and with concomitant SSRI/SNRI use. Prudent interpretation of these findings suggests that further research is needed to identify youth subpopulations with the greatest risk of developing AAP treatment-emergent cardiovascular events.

Patterns of Early Mental Health Diagnosis and Medication Treatment in a Medicaid-Insured Birth Cohort.

Importance: The increased use of psychiatric services in the US pediatric population raises concerns about the appropriate use of psychotropic medications for very young children. Objective: To assess the longitudinal patterns of psychotropic medication use in association with diagnosis and duration of use in a Medicaid-insured birth cohort. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cohort design was applied to computerized Medicaid administrative claims data for 35 244 children born in a mid-Atlantic state in 2007 and followed up for up to 96 months through December 31, 2014. Children were included in the birth cohort if they had an enrollment record at birth or within 3 months of birth and at least 6 months of continuous enrollment from birth. The cohort represents 92.2% of 38 225 Medicaid-insured newborns in 2007. Exposures: Mental health treatments from birth through age 7 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cumulative incidence of first psychiatric diagnosis and psychotropic medication use (monotherapy or concomitant use of psychotropic medications) from birth through age 7 years, total and by sex, and the cumulative incidence of the use of psychosocial services (age, 0-7 years) as well as the annual duration of medication use (ie, number of days of psychotropic medication use among children 3-7 years of age). Results: Of the 35 244 children in the cohort, 17 267 were girls and 17 977 were boys. By age 8 years, 4550 children in the birth cohort (19.7% [percentage adjusted for right censoring]) had received a psychiatric diagnosis (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes 290-319); 2624 of these diagnoses (57.7%) were behavioral (codes 312, 313, or 314). Girls were more likely than boys to receive an incident psychiatric diagnosis of adjustment disorder (355 of 1598 [22.2%] vs 427 of 2952 [14.5%]; P < .001) or anxiety disorder (114 of 1598 [7.1%] vs 120 of 2952 [4.1%]; P < .001). By age 8 years, 2196 children in the cohort (10.2% [percentage adjusted for right censoring]) had received a psychotropic medication. Among medication users, 1763 of 2196 (80.5% [percentage adjusted for right censoring]) received monotherapy, 343 of 2196 (16.4% [percentage adjusted for right censoring]) received 2 medication classes concomitantly, and 90 of 2196 (4.3% [percentage adjusted for right censoring]) received 3 or more medication classes concomitantly for 60 days or more (range, 78-180 days). The annual median number of days of psychotropic medication use among medicated children increased with age, reaching 210 of 365 days for children 7 years of age. Among children 7 years of age, the median number of days of use of an antipsychotic (193 days [interquartile range, 60-266 days]), stimulant (183 days [interquartile range, 86-295 days]), or α-agonist (199 days [interquartile range, 85-305 days]) exceeded half of the year. Conclusions and Relevance: Medicaid-insured children received substantial mental health services and had prolonged exposure to psychotropic medications in the early years of life. These findings highlight the need for outcomes research in pediatric populations.

Comparing Nurse Practitioner and Physician Prescribing of Psychotropic Medications for Medicaid-Insured Youths.

Objective: To describe psychotropic medication prescribing practices of nurse practitioners (NP) and physicians for Medicaid-insured youths in 2012-2014 in a mid-Atlantic state where NP independent prescribing is authorized. Method: From annual computerized administrative claims data in a mid-Atlantic state, we analyzed 1,034,798 dispensed psychotropic medications prescribed by NPs and physicians for 61,526 continuously enrolled Medicaid-insured youths aged 2-17 years. Demographic and clinical characteristics of psychotropic medication users were compared for youths who received psychotropic medication dispensings by NP-only, physician-only, or by both providers using descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations. We then characterized psychotropic medication prescribing practices by providers within each specialty. Results: From 2012 to 2014, the number of psychotropic medication dispensings increased from 346,922 to 349,080. There was a 50.9% increase in the proportion of psychotropic medications prescribed by psychiatric NPs (from 5.9% to 8.8%) and a 28.6% proportional increase by non-psychiatric NPs (from 4.9% to 6.3%). By contrast, the proportion of psychotropic medications prescribed by psychiatrists and by non-psychiatric physicians declined (56.9%-53.0% and 32.3%-31.8%, respectively). Youths diagnosed with depression or anxiety were more commonly treated by NP-only than by physician-only (AOR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.24-1.43), whereas youths with two or more psychiatric comorbidities were significantly more commonly treated by both NP and physician providers (AOR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.39-1.50). Psychiatric specialists prescribed the bulk of antidepressants (82.0%) and lithium (92.3%), with much lower prescribing by non-psychiatric specialists (18.0% and 7.7%, respectively). Antipsychotic orders originated from psychiatric specialists 7.4 times more than from their non-psychiatric specialty counterparts, whether physician or NP. Conclusions: NPs, relative to physicians, have taken an increasing role in prescribing psychotropic medications for Medicaid-insured youths. The quality of NP prescribing practices deserves further attention.

Impact of Coordinated Behavioral Health Management on Quality Measures of Antipsychotic Use.

A state Care Management Entity (CME) using the wraparound practice model provided intensive care coordination for youth with severe mental illness, those most likely to receive antipsychotics. The model has led to improved clinical/functional outcomes, but little is known about the impact on antipsychotic prescribing and safety monitoring. A pre-post study was conducted to evaluate antipsychotic dosing, concomitant antipsychotic use, and metabolic monitoring among CME-enrolled and non-CME-enrolled comparison groups. CME-enrolled youth had greater decrease in concomitant antipsychotic use than non-CME-enrolled youth, but no difference in dosing or metabolic monitoring. More education of prescribing antipsychotics and team-based engagement in care coordination are needed.

A multi-national comparison of antipsychotic drug use in children and adolescents, 2005-2012.

Over the last decades, an increase in antipsychotic (AP) prescribing and a shift from first-generation antipsychotics (FGA) to second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) among youth have been reported. However, most AP prescriptions for youth are off-label, and there are worrying long-term safety data in youth. The objective of this study was to assess multinational trends in AP use among children and adolescents. A repeated cross-sectional design was applied to cohorts from varied sources from Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US) for calendar years 2005/2006-2012. The annual prevalence of AP use was assessed, stratified by age group, sex and subclass (FGA/SGA). The prevalence of AP use increased from 0.78 to 1.03% in the Netherlands' data, from 0.26 to 0.48% in the Danish cohort, from 0.23 to 0.32% in the German cohort, and from 0.1 to 0.14% in the UK cohort. In the US cohort, AP use decreased from 0.94 to 0.79%. In the US cohort, nearly all ATP dispensings were for SGA, while among the European cohorts the proportion of SGA dispensings grew to nearly 75% of all AP dispensings. With the exception of the Netherlands, AP use prevalence was highest in 15-19 year-olds. So, from 2005/6 to 2012, AP use prevalence increased in all youth cohorts from European countries and decreased in the US cohort. SGA were favoured in all countries' cohorts.

Association of Antidepressant Medications With Incident Type 2 Diabetes Among Medicaid-Insured Youths.

Importance: Antidepressants are one of the most commonly prescribed classes of psychotropic medications among US youths. For adults, there is emerging evidence on the increased risk of type 2 diabetes in association with antidepressant use. However, little is known about the antidepressant treatment-emergent risk of type 2 diabetes among youths. Objective: To assess the association between antidepressant use and the risk of incident type 2 diabetes in youths by antidepressant subclass and according to duration of use, cumulative dose, and average daily dose. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using Medicaid claims data from 4 geographically diverse, large states of youths 5 to 20 years of age who initiated antidepressant treatment from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2009. Exposures: Antidepressant use (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs] or serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors [SNRIs], tricyclic or other cyclic antidepressants, and other antidepressants) was assessed using the following 4 time-varying measures: current or former use, duration of use, cumulative dose, and average daily dose. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incident type 2 diabetes was assessed using discrete-time failure models, adjusting for disease risk score estimated using more than 125 baseline and time-dependent covariates. Results: In this cohort of 119 608 youths aged 5 to 20 years who initiated antidepressant treatment (59 087 female youths and 60 521 male youths; 54.7% between 5 and 14 years of age) with a mean follow-up of 22.8 months, 79 285 [66.3%] had SSRI or SNRI exposure. The risk of type 2 diabetes was significantly greater during current use than former use of SSRIs or SNRIs (absolute risk, 1.29 per 10 000 person-months vs 0.64 per 10 000 person-months; adjusted relative risk [RR], 1.88; 95% CI, 1.34-2.64) and tricyclic or other cyclic antidepressants (absolute risk, 0.89 per 10 000 person-months vs 0.48 per 10 000 person-months; RR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.06-4.36), but not of other antidepressants (absolute risk, 1.15 per 10 000 person-months vs 1.12 per 10 000 person-months; RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.66-1.50). Furthermore, for youths currently using SSRIs or SNRIs, the risk of type 2 diabetes increased with the duration of use (RR, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.45-4.88 for >210 days and RR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.29-5.08 for 151-210 days compared with 1-90 days) and with the cumulative dose (RR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.35-4.43 for >4500 mg and RR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.07-4.40 for 3001-4500 mg compared with 1-1500 mg in fluoxetine hydrochloride dose equivalents). By contrast, neither the duration nor the cumulative dose of other antidepressants was associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. The risk of type 2 diabetes increased significantly with the average daily dose among youths with more than 150 days of SSRI or SNRI use (RR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.04-5.52 for >15.0 vs ≤15.0 mg/d) but not among youths with 1 to 150 days of SSRI or SNRI use. Conclusions and Relevance: In a large cohort of youths insured by Medicaid, the use of SSRIs or SNRIs-the most commonly used antidepressant subclass-was associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes that intensified with increasing duration of use, cumulative dose, and average daily dose.