Dataset Information

Correlates of alcohol use disorder pharmacotherapy receipt in medically insured patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Alcohol use disorder is a highly prevalent disease with multiple medications available for treatment. The overall prevalence of patients receiving pharmacotherapy is believed to be low and the characteristics and comorbidities that affect receipt are not well-established.

Methods

We created a dataset from Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database of patients with an outpatient encounter for alcohol abuse or dependence in 2014. We subsequently identified patient characteristics, comorbid medical, psychiatric, or substance use disorders, as well as encounter provider specialties and, using multivariable logistic regression, assessed which variables correlated with increased or decreased receipt of pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorder for this population.

Results

In our dataset of 123,355 patients, patient receipt of pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorder was 3.3 %, and 9.3 % when restricted to the former diagnosis of alcohol dependence only. Male sex, younger age, alcohol-related liver disease, and cannabis use disorders correlated with decreased receipt whereas comorbid major depressive disorders and anxiety disorders correlated with increased receipt. Compared to patients seen by psychiatrists, those seen by primary medical doctors had a lower odds of receiving pharmacotherapy.

Conclusions

Pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorder is an underutilized treatment modality with a low prevalence of prescription in insured individuals. Patients with specific characteristics and comorbidities are less likely to receive this treatment and greater focus on these patients and in the primary care setting can allow for increased prescribing of these medications.

SUBMITTER: Rittenberg A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8011546 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The U.S. is facing an opioid epidemic, but despite mandates for pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder to be available at Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities, the majority of veterans with opioid use disorder do not receive these medications. In implementation research, facilities are often targeted for qualitative inquiry or quality improvement efforts based on quality measure performance during a one-year period. However, sites that experience quality performance changes from one year to the next may be highly informative because mechanisms that impact facility change may be more discoverable. The current study examined changes in receipt of pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder in a national healthcare system to determine the extent to which sites fluctuated in performance over a two-year period and illustrate how changes in quality measures over time may be useful for implementation research and healthcare surveillance of quality measures. METHODS:Using national VHA data from Fiscal Years (FY) 2016 and 2017, we calculated quality measure performance as the number of patients who received pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder (i.e., methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone) divided by the number of patients with a current non-remitted opioid use disorder diagnosis for each FY at each facility (n?=?129) and examined change from FY16 to FY17. RESULTS:The mean rate of receipt of pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder was 38% (facility range?=?3% to 74%) in FY16 and 41% (facility range?=?2% to 76%) in FY17. The average facility-level change in performance was 3% and ranged from -19% to 26%. There were 32 facilities that decreased in provision of pharmacotherapy, 12 facilities with no change, and 85 facilities that increased. CONCLUSIONS:For facilities with average or high performance, it was difficult to maintain their performance over time. Identifying and learning from facilities with recent fluctuations may be more informative to guide the design of future quality improvement efforts than studying facilities with stable high or low performance.

Project description:Only 7.8 % of individuals meeting diagnostic criteria for alcohol use disorder (AUD) receive treatment in a given year. Most individuals with AUDs are identified in primary care (PC) settings and referred to substance use disorders (SUD) clinics; however, only a minority of those referred attend treatment services. Safe and effective pharmacological treatments for AUD exist, but they are rarely prescribed by PC providers. The objective of this study is to refine, implement, and evaluate an intervention to integrate pharmacological AUD treatment options into PC settings. This paper provides a detailed description of the intervention design and the evaluation components.Three large Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities are participating in the intervention. The intervention targets stakeholder groups with tailored strategies based on implementation theory and prior research identifying barriers to implementation of AUD pharmacotherapy. Local SUD providers and primary care mental health integration (PCMHI) providers are trained to serve as local implementation/clinical champions and receive external facilitation. PC providers receive access to consultation from local and national clinical champions, educational materials, and a dashboard of patients with AUD on their caseloads for case identification. Veterans with AUD diagnoses receive educational information in the mail just prior to a scheduled PC visit. Effectiveness of the intervention will be evaluated through an interrupted time series with matched controls to monitor change in facility level AUD pharmacotherapy prescribing rates. Following Stetler's four-phase formative evaluation (FE) strategy, FE methods include (1) developmental FE (pre-implementation interviews with champions, PC providers, and Veterans), (2) implementation-focused FE (tracking attendance at facilitation meetings, academic detailing efforts by local champions, and patient dashboard utilization), (3) progress-focused FE (tracking rates of AUD pharmacotherapy prescribing and rates of referral to PCMHI and SUD specialty care), and (4) interpretive FE (post-implementation interviews with champions and PC providers). Analysis of FE data will be guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).If demonstrated to be successful, this implementation strategy will provide a replicable, feasible, and relative low-cost method for integrating AUD treatment services into PC settings, thereby increasing access to AUD treatment.

Project description:ImportanceWhether interventions to improve food access can reduce health care use is unknown.ObjectiveTo determine whether participation in a medically tailored meal intervention is associated with fewer subsequent hospitalizations.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study was conducted using near/far matching instrumental variable analysis. Data from the 2011-2015 Massachusetts All-Payer Claims database and Community Servings, a not-for-profit organization delivering medically tailored meals (MTMs), were linked. The study was conducted from December 15, 2016, to January 16, 2019. Recipients of MTMs who had at least 360 days of preintervention claims data were matched to nonrecipients on the basis of demographic, clinical, and neighborhood characteristics.InterventionsWeekly delivery of 10 ready-to-consume meals tailored to the specific medical needs of the individual under the supervision of a registered dietitian nutritionist.Main outcomes and measuresInpatient admissions were the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were admission to a skilled nursing facility and health care costs (from medical and pharmaceutical claims).ResultsThere were 807 eligible MTM recipients. After matching, there were 499 MTM recipients, matched to 521 nonrecipients for a total of 1020 study participants (mean [SD] age, 52.7 [14.5] years; 568 [55.7%] female). Prior to matching and compared with nonrecipients in the same area, health care use, health care cost, and comorbidity were all significantly higher in recipients. For example, preintervention mean (SD) inpatient admissions were 1.6 (6.5) in MTM recipients vs 0.2 (0.8) in nonrecipients (P < .001), and mean health care costs were $80 617 ($312 337) vs $16 138 ($68 738) (P < .001). Recipients compared with nonrecipients were also significantly more likely to have HIV (21.9% vs 0.7%, P < .001), cancer (37.9% vs 11.3%, P < .001), and diabetes (33.7% vs 7.0%, P < .001). In instrumental variable analyses, MTM receipt was associated with significantly fewer inpatient admissions (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.51; 95% CI, 0.22-0.80; risk difference, -519; 95% CI, -360 to -678 per 1000 person-years). Similarly, MTM receipt was associated with fewer skilled nursing facility admissions (IRR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.01-0.60; risk difference, -913; 95% CI, -689 to -1457 per 1000 person-years). The models estimated that, had everyone in the matched cohort received treatment owing to the instrument (and including the cost of program participation), mean monthly costs would have been $3838 vs $4591 if no one had received treatment owing to the instrument (difference, -$753; 95% CI, -$1225 to -$280).Conclusions and relevanceParticipation in a medically tailored meals program appears to be associated with fewer hospital and skilled nursing admissions and less overall medical spending.