Dataset Information

Trends in stimulant dispensing by age, sex, state of residence, and prescriber specialty - United States, 2014-2019.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Stimulant medications are commonly prescribed for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; however, they also have high potential for diversion and misuse. We estimated national stimulant dispensing trends from 2014 to 2019 and differences in dispensing by age, sex, state, prescriber specialty, payor type, patient copay, and stimulant type.

Methods

We calculated rates of stimulant dispensing using IQVIA National Prescription Audit (NPA) New to Brand, NPA Regional, and NPA Extended Insights data, which provide dispensing estimates from approximately 49,900 pharmacies representing 92 % of prescriptions dispensed in the United States. Average annual percent change (AAPC) from 2014 to 2019 was analyzed using Joinpoint regression.

Results

From 2014 to 2019, the national annual rate of stimulant dispensing increased significantly from 5.6 to 6.1 prescriptions per 100 persons. Rates differed by prescription stimulant type, with increases occurring among both amphetamine-type stimulants and long-acting stimulants. Rates among females (AAPC = 3.6 %; P = 0.001) and adults aged 20-39 years (AAPC=6.7 %; P = 0.002), 40-59 years (AAPC=9.7 %; P < 0.001), and ≥60 years (AAPC = 6.9 %; P = 0.001) increased significantly during the study period. Stimulant dispensing rates varied substantially across states, ranging from 1.0 per 100 in Hawaii to 13.6 per 100 in Alabama.

Conclusions

National stimulant dispensing rates increased from 2014 to 2019, driven by notable increases among females and adults aged ≥20 years. These trends should be considered when prescribing stimulants given growing concerns over prescription stimulant diversion, misuse, and related health harms.

SUBMITTER: Board AR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7851748 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Although palliative care (PC) historically focused on patients with cancer and those near the end of life, evidence increasingly demonstrates a benefit to patients with a broad range of serious illnesses and to those earlier in their illness. The field of PC has expanded and evolved rapidly, resulting in a need to characterize practice over time to understand whether it reflects evolving evidence and guidelines. Objective:To characterize current practice and trends among patients cared for and outcomes achieved by inpatient specialty PC services in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants:This retrospective cohort study was performed from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2017, at 88 US hospitals in which PC teams voluntarily participate in the Palliative Care Quality Network (PCQN), a national quality improvement collaborative. A total of 135 197 patients were referred to PCQN teams during the study period. Initial analyses of the study data were conducted from March 3 to March 21, 2018. Exposure:Inpatient PC consultation. Main Outcomes and Measures:A total of 23 standardized data elements collected by PCQN teams that provided information about the characteristics of referred patients, including age, sex, Palliative Performance Scale score, and primary diagnosis leading to PC consult; reason(s) given for the consultation; and processes of care provided by the PC team, including disciplines involved, number of family meetings held, advance care planning documentation completed, and screened for and intervened on needs. Results:A total of 135 197 patients were referred to inpatient PC (51.0% female; mean age, 71.3 years [range, 57.8-82.5 years]) and were significantly debilitated (mean Palliative Performance Scale score, 34.7%; range, 14.9%-56.8%). Cancer was the most common primary diagnosis (32.0%; range, 11.3%-93.9%), although rates decreased from 2013 to 2017 (odds ratio [OR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79-0.91; P < .001). Pain and other symptoms were common and improved significantly during the consultation period (pain: χ2 = 5234.4, P < .001; anxiety: χ2 = 2020.7, P < .001; nausea: χ2 = 1311.8, P < .001; dyspnea: χ2 = 1993.5, P < .001). Most patients were discharged alive (78.7%; range, 44.7%-99.4%), and this number increased over time (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.27-1.46; P < .001). Compared with 2013, rates of discharge referral to clinic-based (OR, 4.00; 95% CI, 2.95-5.43; P < .001) and home-based PC (OR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.92-3.61; P < .001) also increased significantly by 2017, whereas referrals to hospice decreased (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.51-0.62; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance:Inpatient PC teams cared for an increasing percentage of patients with diagnoses other than cancer and saw more patients discharged alive, consistent with guidelines recommending specialty PC for all patients with serious illness earlier in their illnesses. Most patients with symptoms improved quickly. Variation in practice and outcomes among PCQN members suggests that there are opportunities for further improvements in care.

Project description:BackgroundMuch of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and subsequent US health care policies were designed to address deficiencies in health care access and enhance primary care services. How residency positions and physician incomes have changed in the post-ACA era is not well characterized.ObjectiveWe evaluated the growth of US trainee positions and physician income, in the pre- vs post-ACA environment by specialty and among primary care vs specialty care.MethodsTotal resident complement by specialty and year was extracted from the National Graduate Medical Education (GME) Census and stratified into primary care vs specialty care. Median incomes were extracted from Medical Group Management Association surveys. Piecewise linear regression with interaction terms (pre-ACA, 2001-2010, vs post-ACA, 2011-2019) assessed growth rate by specialty and growth rate differences between primary care and specialty care. Sensitivity analyses were performed by focusing on family medicine and excluding additional GME positions contributed by the introduction of the 2015 single GME accreditation system.ResultsResident complements increased for primary care (+0.16%/year pre-ACA to +2.06%/year post-ACA, P < .001) and specialty care (+1.49%/year to +2.07%/year, P = .005). Specialty care growth outpaced primary care pre-ACA (P < .001) but not post-ACA (P = .10). Family medicine had the largest increase in the pre- vs post-ACA era (-0.77%/year vs +2.09%/year, P < .001). Excluding positions contributed by the single GME accreditation system transition did not result in any statistically significant changes to the findings. Income growth increased for primary care (+0.84%/year to +1.37%/year, P = .044), but decreased for specialty care (+1.44%/year to +0.49%/year, P = .011). Specialty care income growth outpaced primary care pre-ACA (P < .001), but not post-ACA (P = .22).ConclusionsWe found significant growth differences in resident complement and income among primary care versus specialty care in the pre-/post-ACA eras.

Project description:IntroductionPhysicians are a critical clinical resource for patient care. Yet physician recruitment has been considerably understudied, particularly in substance use disorder (SUD) settings. This study proposes a conceptual model called the "Physician Recruitment Descriptive Factors Framework" to investigate the role of environmental, organizational, and individual factors in the use of physician recruitment strategies.MethodsThe study setting was 75 sites that provided outpatient SUD treatment services in Florida, Ohio, and Wisconsin from 2016 to 2019. Central to the analysis is the use of five targeted physician recruitment strategies. The study investigated whether financial conditions, location (urban v. non-urban), external implementation coaching, and recruiters' roles influenced use of the targeted physician recruitment strategies.ResultsDuring the study period, a formal plan to recruit physicians was the most common strategy used (n = 67.6 %). The director or chief executive officer (CEO) was most likely to conduct physician recruitment (n = 58.7 %). During the study, use of four of the five recruitment strategies significantly declined (at p ≤ 0.01), while the perceived need for new prescribing capacity significantly declined (p ≤ 0.01), and prescribers per site increased from 1.54 to 3.21. Sixty-four percent of this increase in prescribers was due to more physician prescribers, while 36 % was due to the onset of the ability of advanced nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe buprenorphine. In year 3 of the study, the strategies most closely aligned with the current number of prescribers were conducting weekly outreach to prescriber candidates (p = .018), having a dedicated prescriber recruiter (p = .011), and having a dedicated budget for prescriber recruiting (p = .002).ConclusionsThe study describes which physician recruitment strategies SUD treatment sites used and how the need to recruit physicians for specialty treatment SUD clinics declined as prescriber capacity increased. The proposed multi-level framework provides the scaffolding for future physician recruitment research and practice.