Dataset Information

Rising co-payments and continuity of healthcare for Dutch patients with bipolar disorder: retrospective longitudinal cohort study

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Netherlands has few financial barriers to access mental healthcare. However, in 2012, a sharp rise in co-payments was introduced.

Aims

We tested whether these increased co-payments coincided with less guideline-recommended continuous out-patient psychiatric care and more crisis interventions for patients with bipolar disorder.

Method

A retrospective longitudinal cohort study on a health insurance registry was performed to examine trends, and deviations from these trends, in the healthcare received by patients with bipolar disorder. Deviations of trends were tested by time-series analyses (autoregressive integrated moving average). Subsequently, the relationship between significant deviations of trends and rise in co-payments was examined. Outcome measures were the level of standard out-patient care (out-patient psychiatric care and/or medication), crisis psychiatric care and somatic care.

Results

The cohort comprised 3210 patients. During follow-up, the use of psychiatric care decreased and somatic care increased. The high rise in co-payments from 2012 onward coincided with decreases in standard out-patient care and increases in medication-only treatment, crisis psychiatric care and somatic care. Crisis intervention was highest when patients received only bipolar disorder medication. Patients receiving continuous standard out-patient care (62%) had less crisis intervention compared with the other patients.

Conclusions

Our data suggest that the rise of co-payments decreased guideline-recommended continuous out-patient psychiatric care among patients with bipolar disorder, and increased crisis psychiatric care.

SUBMITTER: van der Lee A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8444049 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:The authors sought to identify diagnostic risk factors of manic, mixed, or hypomanic episodes in the offspring of parents with bipolar disorder ("high-risk offspring"). METHOD:High-risk offspring 6-18 years old (N=391) and demographically matched offspring (N=248) of community parents without bipolar disorder were assessed longitudinally with standardized diagnostic instruments by staff blind to parental diagnoses. Follow-up assessments were completed in 91% of the offspring (mean follow-up interval, 2.5 years; mean follow-up duration, 6.8 years). RESULTS:Compared with community offspring, high-risk offspring had significantly higher rates of subthreshold mania or hypomania (13.3% compared with 1.2%), manic, mixed, or hypomanic episodes (9.2% compared with 0.8%), and major depressive episodes (32.0% compared with 14.9%). They also had higher rates of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (30.7% compared with 18.1%), disruptive behavior disorders (27.4% compared with 15.3%), anxiety disorders (39.9% compared with 21.8%), and substance use disorders (19.9% compared with 10.1%), but not unipolar major depressive disorder (major depression with no bipolarity; 18.9% compared with 13.7%). Multivariate Cox regressions showed that in the high-risk offspring, subthreshold manic or hypomanic episodes (hazard ratio=2.29), major depressive episodes (hazard ratio=1.99), and disruptive behavior disorders (hazard ratio=2.12) were associated with subsequent manic, mixed, or hypomanic episodes. Only subthreshold manic or hypomanic episodes (hazard ratio=7.57) were associated when analyses were restricted to prospective data. CONCLUSIONS:Subthreshold manic or hypomanic episodes were a diagnostic risk factor for the development of manic, mixed, or hypomanic episodes in the offspring of parents with bipolar disorder and should be a target for clinical assessment and treatment research. Major depressive episodes and disruptive behavior disorders are also indications for close clinical monitoring of emergent bipolarity in high-risk offspring.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Little is known regarding the impact of transitions in frailty on healthcare use and payment in older Mexican Americans. We address this gap in knowledge by investigating the effect of early transitions in physical frailty on the use of healthcare services and Medicare payments involving older Mexican Americans. METHODS:Longitudinal analyses were conducted using the Hispanic Established Populations for the Epidemiological Study of the Elderly (Hispanic-EPESE) survey data from five Southwest states linked to the Medicare claims files from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Seven hundred and eighty-eight community-dwelling Mexican Americans 72?years and older in 2000/01 were studied. We used a modified Frailty Phenotype (unintentional weight loss, weakness, self-reported exhaustion and slow walking speed) to classify frailty status (non-frail, pre-frail or frail). Each participant was placed into one of 5 frailty transition groups: 1) remain non-frail, 2) remain pre-frail, 3) remain frail, 4) improve (pre-frail to non-frail, frail to non-frail, frail to pre-frail) and 5) worse (non-frail to pre-frail, non-frail to frail, pre-frail to frail). The outcomes for the one-year follow-up period (2000-2001) were: (a) healthcare use (hospitalization, emergency room [ER] admission and physician visit); and (b) Medicare payments (total payment and outpatient payment). RESULTS:Mean age was 78.8 (SD?=?5.1) years and 60.3% were female in 1998/99. Males who remained pre-frail (Odds Ratio [OR]?=?3.49, 1.13-10.8, remained frail OR?=?6.92, 1.61-29.7) and transitioned to worse frail status (OR?=?4.49, 1.74-11.6) had significantly higher hospitalization risk compared to individuals who remained non-frail. Males in the 'worsened' groups, and females in the 'improved' groups, had significantly higher Medicare payments than individuals who remained non-frail (Cost Ratio [CR]?=?2.00, 1.30-3.09; CR?=?1.53, 1.12-2.09, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS:Healthcare use and Medicare payments differed by frailty transition status. The differences varied by sex. Research is necessary to elucidate the relationship between frailty transitions and outcomes, sex difference and Medicare payment for older Mexican Americans living in the community.

Project description:ImportanceRising pharmaceutical costs in the United States are an increasing source of financial burden for payers and patients. Although topical steroids are among the most commonly prescribed medications in dermatology, there are limited data on steroid-related spending and utilization.ObjectiveTo characterize Medicare and patient out-of-pocket costs for topical steroids, and to model potential savings that could result from substitution of the cheapest topical steroid from the corresponding potency class.Design, setting, and participantsThis study was a retrospective cost analysis of the Medicare Part D Prescriber Public Use File, which details annual drug utilization and spending on both generic and branded drugs from 2011 to 2015 by Medicare Part D participants who filled prescriptions for topical steroids.Main outcomes and measuresTotal and potential Medicare and out-of-pocket patient spending. Costs were adjusted for inflation and reported in 2015 dollars.ResultsMedicare Part D expenditures on topical steroids between 2011 and 2015 were $2.3 billion. Patients' out-of-pocket spending for topical steroids over the same period was $333.7 million. The total annual spending increased from $237.6 million to $775.9 million, an increase of 226.5%. Patients' annual out-of-pocket spending increased from $41.4 million to $101.8 million, an increase of 145.9%. The total number of prescriptions were 7.7 million in 2011 and 10.6 million in 2015, an increase of 37.0%. Generic medication costs accounted for 97.8% of the total spending during this time period. The potential health care savings and out-of-pocket patient savings from substitution of the cheapest topical steroid within the corresponding potency class were $944.8 million and $66.6 million, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceMost topical steroids prescribed were generic drugs. There has been a sharp increase in Medicare and out-of-pocket spending on topical steroids that is driven by higher costs for generics. Use of clinical decision support tools to enable substitution of the most affordable generic topical steroid from the corresponding potency class may reduce drug expenditures.