Providers' Behaviors and Beliefs on Prescribing Antipsychotic Medication to Children: A Qualitative Study

Antipsychotic treatment for youth in foster care: Perspectives on improving youths' experiences in providing informed consent

The disproportionate prescribing of high-risk antipsychotic medication for youth in foster care is a significant social problem across the U.S. This qualitative study examined stakeholder perceptions of prescribing, being prescribed, or overseeing prescriptions for youth in foster care. Interviews and focus groups were conducted with clinicians, child welfare caseworkers, foster caregivers, and foster care alumni. The overall aim was to systematically explore their understanding of and experiences with the Informed Consent to treatment and shared decision-making processes related to prescribing and monitoring of antipsychotic medications for youth in foster care. Participants were recruited from around the country; data collection using structured interview or focus group guides occurred via telephone and web-based formats. This study is rooted in the lived experiences of stakeholders in addressing recent federal legislative mandates and guidelines for the oversight and co-ordination of mental health service delivery to youth in foster care. Numerous themes emerged that provide context in employing a team-based approach for youth engaged with multiple child-serving systems. Eight themes emerged that illustrate the necessary components of successfully implementing Informed Consent and shared decision-making as well as the barriers and concerns germane to this process. The findings address the nuanced complexity of and tensions with the trade-offs inherent in delivering mental health care to youth involved in foster care. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

High-level psychotropic polypharmacy: a retrospective comparison of children in foster care to their peers on Medicaid

BACKGROUND

The use of antipsychotic medication and psychotropic polypharmacy has increased in the United States over the last two decades especially for children from low-income families and those in foster care. Although attention has been paid to providing greater insight, prescribing patterns remain concerning since there is a lack of evidence related to safety and efficacy. High-level psychotropic polypharmacy has not been described. We aim to compare the use of HLPP for children receiving Medicaid services and those in foster care and identify factors associated with the duration of use of high-level psychotropic polypharmacy. Additionally, we will examine the frequency of laboratory metabolic screening and emergency department, inpatient, and outpatient visits.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, secondary analysis of statewide data describes trends in high-level psychotropic polypharmacy from 2012 to 2017 and the prevalence and predictors of high-level psychotropic polypharmacy duration and resource use in 2017 for all children on Medicaid and those in foster care. High-level psychotropic polypharmacy included concurrent use, at least four classes of medications including an antipsychotic, and at least 30 days duration.

RESULTS

High-level psychotropic polypharmacy increased from 2012 to 2014 for both groups but stabilized in 2015-2016. Children in foster care showed a slight increase compared to their peers in 2017. There was no association between duration and demographic characteristics or foster care status. Diagnoses predicted duration. Neither group received metabolic monitoring at an acceptable rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Concerning patterns of high-level psychotropic polypharmacy and metabolic monitoring were identified. Cautious use of high-level psychotropic polypharmacy and greater oversight to ensure that these children are receiving comprehensive services like behavioral health, primary care, and primary prevention.

Antipsychotics in Inpatient Children and Adolescents with Seclusion and Restraint: A Preliminary Exploratory Retrospective Chart Review

Objective: This study is a retrospective review of patients 5-17 years of age experiencing seclusion and/or restraint (S&R) in a pediatric psychiatric inpatient setting and an exploratory analysis of antipsychotic use on S&R duration. We examined whether administration of antipsychotics would possibly decrease the time spent in S&R. Methods: Reports of patients who underwent S&R in an acute care inpatient child and adolescent psychiatric unit from 2012 to 2014 were reviewed. Demographic information related to age, gender, and race as well as information on diagnosis, current medications (including antipsychotics) were obtained. Independent samples t-tests were used to determine whether there were differences in how much time patients spent in S&R based on whether they were administered antipsychotics or not. Odds ratios (ORs) of being administered antipsychotics during S&R were computed for factors such as gender, race, and diagnosis group. Results: Ninety-six patients (68 males, age range 5-17 years) were involved in 232 S&R events that occurred between 2012 and 2014. Results indicate that patients who were administered antipsychotics during S&R still spent significantly more time in S&R compared with those who were given medications other than antipsychotics (e.g., Benadryl) (t = 3.161; p = 0.002) and those who were not administered any medication (t = 3.54; p = 0.001). Binary logistic regression showed that female patients were at more than two times (OR(adjusted) = 2.86; 95% confidence interval = 1.234-6.655) higher risk of being administered antipsychotics while in S&R compared with their male counterparts within this particular sample. Conclusions: The results of our study indicate that, contrary to our hypothesis, antipsychotic administration did not appear to reduce the time spent in S&R compared with groups that were administered medications other than antipsychotics and those that were not administered any medication during S&R. We also found an increased risk of antipsychotic administration in female patients compared with male patients in S&R events, indicating the need for larger studies examining these effects in greater detail.

Psychotropic Polypharmacy Among Children and Youth Receiving Medicaid, 2012-2015

BACKGROUND

The rates of mental health diagnoses in children have increased. Children in poverty have the highest rates. The use of psychotropic medication for children has been increasing, which is concerning because of the unknown long-term effects and the increased burden on the health care system. The state of Kentucky ranks among the highest in the United States for children with mental health problems, children living in poverty, and children receiving psychotropic medication.

OBJECTIVE

To examine recent trends and determinants of interclass psychotropic polypharmacy (PP) use for children and youth receiving Medicaid to inform intervention development.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using 2012-2015 Kentucky Medicaid claims for children aged 0-17 years, with continuous enrollment for ≥ 90 days with at least 1 behavioral health diagnosis (N = 237,393). Interclass PP was defined as the presence of at least 2 psychotropic medication prescription fills for at least 2 different classes of medication that, if taken as directed, would be used concurrently for at least 90 consecutive days (allowing for a single 15-day lag). The outcome variables were the presence of any interclass PP and the number of months a child received interclass PP. We conducted a descriptive analysis and developed 2 separate generalized linear regression models to test for associations between individual characteristics of children treated with psychotropic medication for ≥ 90 days (n = 75,639) and each outcome of interest.

RESULTS

For the sample of children with at least 90 days of psychotropic medication treatment, 38% had at least 3 covered months of PP over the 4 years studied. Children in foster care received alpha agonists (116 vs. 69 per 1,000 children) or antidepressants (225 vs. 176 per 1,000) at a higher rate than other children receiving Medicaid but received stimulants at a lower rate (403 vs. 638 per 1,000). The primary 2-drug class combinations were stimulants with either alpha agonists or antidepressants. Children in foster care (OR = 1.7, 95% CI = 1.58, 1.84, P < 0.001), with a bipolar disorder (OR = 2.24, 95% CI = 2.10, 2.38, P < 0.001), mood disorder not otherwise specified (OR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.04, 1.17, P < 0.001), or autism spectrum disorders (OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.08, 1.26, P < 0.001) had increased the odds of ever receiving PP. Black children had lower odds (OR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.67, 0.77, P < 0.001) of ever receiving PP. Children aged 6-11 years (beta = 3.08, 95% CI = 2.87, 3.29) and 12-17 years (beta = 1.61, 95% CI = 1.38, 1.83) had more covered months with PP compared with those aged 0-5 years. Black children had fewer covered months of PP compared with white children (beta = -1.36, 95% CI = -1.61, -1.11]. Children in foster care (beta = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.53, 2.13) had more covered months with PP. Children residing in nonurban areas had fewer months with PP (beta = -0.4, 95% CI = -0.54, -0.26) compared with those residing in urban areas, as did those children with depression (beta = -3.32, 95% CI = -3.55, -3.1), impulse control disorder (beta = -2.07, 95% CI = -2.28, -1.85), and conduct disorder (beta = -1.34, 95% CI = -1.64, -1.05). Children with bipolar disorder (beta = 3.62, 95% CI = 3.38, 3.86) and autism (beta = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.75, 2.33) had more covered months with PP. As comorbidity increased, the duration of PP treatment increased (beta = 2.49, 95% CI = 2.36, 2.62).

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of PP are concerning, especially for children in foster care and children aged 6-11 years. Efforts to safeguard medication use are needed, as well as future exploration of racial differences in PP.

DISCLOSURES

This project was supported by the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services, Department for Medicaid; Norton Healthcare; and the School of Medicine, Department of Pediatrics; School of Public Health and Information Sciences; and Kent School of Social Work at the University of Louisville. Kentucky Medicaid approved the use of the data and granted permission to publish but played no role in the interpretation of data. Lui is employed by Kentucky Medicaid. The other authors report no potential conflicts of interest. An earlier version of this study was presented at the Pediatric Academic Societies' Annual Meeting in Baltimore, MD, on April 30-May 3, 2016. A poster presentation was given at the Society for Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics in Cleveland, OH, on October 14-16, 2017.

Not a magic pill: a qualitative exploration of provider perspectives on antibiotic prescribing in the outpatient setting

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics poses an urgent public health threat. Limited research has examined factors associated with antibiotic prescribing practices in outpatient settings. The goals of this study were to explore elements influencing provider decisions to prescribe antibiotics, identify provider recommendations for interventions to reduce inappropriate antibiotic use, and inform the clinical management of patients in the outpatient environment for infections that do not require antibiotics.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with key informants. Seventeen outpatient providers (10 medical doctors and 7 advanced care practitioners) within a large healthcare system in Charlotte, North Carolina, participated. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for themes.

RESULTS

Primary barriers to reducing inappropriate antibiotic prescribing included patient education and expectations, system-level factors, and time constraints. Providers indicated they would be interested in having system-wide, evidence-based guidelines to inform their prescribing decisions and that they would also be receptive to efforts to improve their awareness of their own prescribing practices. Results further suggested that providers experience a high demand for antibiotic prescriptions; consequently, patient education around appropriate use would be beneficial.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that antibiotic prescribing in the outpatient setting is influenced by many pressures, including patient demand and patient satisfaction. Training on appropriate antibiotic prescribing, guideline-based decision support, feedback on prescribing practices, and patient education are recommended interventions to improve levels of appropriate prescribing.