评估新墨西哥州和路易斯安那州心理学家处方的安全性和有效性。

IF 12.3 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY American Psychologist Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1037/amp0001373
Phillip M Hughes, Joshua D Niznik, Robert E McGrath, Casey R Tak, Robert B Christian, Betsy L Sleath, Kathleen C Thomas
{"title":"评估新墨西哥州和路易斯安那州心理学家处方的安全性和有效性。","authors":"Phillip M Hughes, Joshua D Niznik, Robert E McGrath, Casey R Tak, Robert B Christian, Betsy L Sleath, Kathleen C Thomas","doi":"10.1037/amp0001373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to compare patient outcomes between prescribing psychologists, psychiatrists, and primary care physicians (PCPs). Private insurance claims (2005-2021; <i>n</i> = 307,478) were used to conduct an active comparator, new user longitudinal cohort study developed using target trial emulation. Inverse propensity for treatment weighting was used to adjust for baseline differences in a range of sociodemographic, clinical, and contextual patient factors. Differences in the 1-year rate of health care visits for adverse drug events (ADEs), psychiatric emergency department (ED) utilization, medication adherence, and psychotropic polypharmacy were identified between prescribing psychologists and the other provider types using doubly robust Cox proportional hazards models. Compared to patients of psychiatrists, patients of prescribing psychologists had a 24% lower rate of ADEs (95% CI [0.60, 0.96]), a 20% lower rate of psychotropic polypharmacy (95% CI [0.74, 0.86]), and similar rates of psychiatric ED utilization and medication nonadherence. Compared to patients of PCPs, patients of prescribing psychologists had 138% higher rates of psychiatric ED utilization (95% CI [1.67, 3.39]), 175% higher rates of psychotropic polypharmacy (95% CI [2.53, 2.99]), 28% lower rates of medication nonadherence (95% CI [0.66, 0.78]), and similar rates of ADEs. Using robust pharmacoepidemiological methods, we noted that among mental health specialists, prescribing psychologists appear to be as safe and efficacious as psychiatrists in a large sample of privately insured patients. Notable differences in safety and efficacy when compared to PCPs may be attributable to differences between specialty and primary care. Future research on prescribing psychologists should move toward studies of care quality. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48468,"journal":{"name":"American Psychologist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":12.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the safety and efficacy of prescribing psychologists in New Mexico and Louisiana.\",\"authors\":\"Phillip M Hughes, Joshua D Niznik, Robert E McGrath, Casey R Tak, Robert B Christian, Betsy L Sleath, Kathleen C Thomas\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/amp0001373\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study aimed to compare patient outcomes between prescribing psychologists, psychiatrists, and primary care physicians (PCPs). Private insurance claims (2005-2021; <i>n</i> = 307,478) were used to conduct an active comparator, new user longitudinal cohort study developed using target trial emulation. Inverse propensity for treatment weighting was used to adjust for baseline differences in a range of sociodemographic, clinical, and contextual patient factors. Differences in the 1-year rate of health care visits for adverse drug events (ADEs), psychiatric emergency department (ED) utilization, medication adherence, and psychotropic polypharmacy were identified between prescribing psychologists and the other provider types using doubly robust Cox proportional hazards models. Compared to patients of psychiatrists, patients of prescribing psychologists had a 24% lower rate of ADEs (95% CI [0.60, 0.96]), a 20% lower rate of psychotropic polypharmacy (95% CI [0.74, 0.86]), and similar rates of psychiatric ED utilization and medication nonadherence. Compared to patients of PCPs, patients of prescribing psychologists had 138% higher rates of psychiatric ED utilization (95% CI [1.67, 3.39]), 175% higher rates of psychotropic polypharmacy (95% CI [2.53, 2.99]), 28% lower rates of medication nonadherence (95% CI [0.66, 0.78]), and similar rates of ADEs. Using robust pharmacoepidemiological methods, we noted that among mental health specialists, prescribing psychologists appear to be as safe and efficacious as psychiatrists in a large sample of privately insured patients. Notable differences in safety and efficacy when compared to PCPs may be attributable to differences between specialty and primary care. Future research on prescribing psychologists should move toward studies of care quality. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Psychologist\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":12.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Psychologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001373\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Psychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001373","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在比较开处方的心理学家、精神科医生和初级保健医生(PCP)对患者的治疗效果。私人保险索赔(2005-2021 年;n = 307,478)被用于开展一项主动比较研究,该研究是利用目标试验仿真技术开发的新用户纵向队列研究。采用反倾向治疗加权法来调整一系列社会人口、临床和患者背景因素的基线差异。采用双重稳健的 Cox 比例危险模型,确定了开具处方的心理学家与其他医疗服务提供者之间在 1 年药物不良事件(ADEs)就诊率、精神科急诊室(ED)使用率、用药依从性和精神药物多药性方面的差异。与精神科医生的患者相比,心理医生处方患者的 ADEs 发生率低 24%(95% CI [0.60,0.96]),精神药物多重用药率低 20%(95% CI [0.74,0.86]),精神科急诊室使用率和用药不依从率相似。与初级保健医生的患者相比,开处方的心理学家的患者的精神科急诊使用率高 138%(95% CI [1.67,3.39]),精神药物多重用药率高 175%(95% CI [2.53,2.99]),用药不依从率低 28%(95% CI [0.66,0.78]),ADEs 发生率相似。通过使用可靠的药物流行病学方法,我们注意到,在大量私人保险患者样本中,开具处方的心理学家似乎与精神科医生一样安全有效。与初级保健医生相比,在安全性和有效性方面的显著差异可能归因于专科和初级保健之间的差异。未来对心理医生处方的研究应转向对护理质量的研究。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessing the safety and efficacy of prescribing psychologists in New Mexico and Louisiana.

This study aimed to compare patient outcomes between prescribing psychologists, psychiatrists, and primary care physicians (PCPs). Private insurance claims (2005-2021; n = 307,478) were used to conduct an active comparator, new user longitudinal cohort study developed using target trial emulation. Inverse propensity for treatment weighting was used to adjust for baseline differences in a range of sociodemographic, clinical, and contextual patient factors. Differences in the 1-year rate of health care visits for adverse drug events (ADEs), psychiatric emergency department (ED) utilization, medication adherence, and psychotropic polypharmacy were identified between prescribing psychologists and the other provider types using doubly robust Cox proportional hazards models. Compared to patients of psychiatrists, patients of prescribing psychologists had a 24% lower rate of ADEs (95% CI [0.60, 0.96]), a 20% lower rate of psychotropic polypharmacy (95% CI [0.74, 0.86]), and similar rates of psychiatric ED utilization and medication nonadherence. Compared to patients of PCPs, patients of prescribing psychologists had 138% higher rates of psychiatric ED utilization (95% CI [1.67, 3.39]), 175% higher rates of psychotropic polypharmacy (95% CI [2.53, 2.99]), 28% lower rates of medication nonadherence (95% CI [0.66, 0.78]), and similar rates of ADEs. Using robust pharmacoepidemiological methods, we noted that among mental health specialists, prescribing psychologists appear to be as safe and efficacious as psychiatrists in a large sample of privately insured patients. Notable differences in safety and efficacy when compared to PCPs may be attributable to differences between specialty and primary care. Future research on prescribing psychologists should move toward studies of care quality. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Psychologist
American Psychologist PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
18.50
自引率
1.20%
发文量
145
期刊介绍: Established in 1946, American Psychologist® is the flagship peer-reviewed scholarly journal of the American Psychological Association. It publishes high-impact papers of broad interest, including empirical reports, meta-analyses, and scholarly reviews, covering psychological science, practice, education, and policy. Articles often address issues of national and international significance within the field of psychology and its relationship to society. Published in an accessible style, contributions in American Psychologist are designed to be understood by both psychologists and the general public.
期刊最新文献
Daniel Kahneman (1934-2024). Jean Maria Arrigo (1944-2024). A quasi-experimental study examining the efficacy of multimodal bot screening tools and recommendations to preserve data integrity in online psychological research. Ascribing understanding to ourselves and others. The free will capacity: A uniquely human adaption.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1