Heterogeneity in Antidepressant Treatment and Major Depressive Disorder Outcomes Among Clinicians.

IF 22.5 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Sarah Rathnam, Kamber L Hart, Abhishek Sharma, Pilar F Verhaak, Thomas H McCoy, Finale Doshi-Velez, Roy H Perlis
{"title":"Heterogeneity in Antidepressant Treatment and Major Depressive Disorder Outcomes Among Clinicians.","authors":"Sarah Rathnam, Kamber L Hart, Abhishek Sharma, Pilar F Verhaak, Thomas H McCoy, Finale Doshi-Velez, Roy H Perlis","doi":"10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2024.1778","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>While abundant work has examined patient-level differences in antidepressant treatment outcomes, little is known about the extent of clinician-level differences. Understanding these differences may be important in the development of risk models, precision treatment strategies, and more efficient systems of care.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To characterize differences between outpatient clinicians in treatment selection and outcomes for their patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder across academic medical centers, community hospitals, and affiliated clinics.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This was a longitudinal cohort study using data derived from electronic health records at 2 large academic medical centers and 6 community hospitals, and their affiliated outpatient networks, in eastern Massachusetts. Participants were deidentified clinicians who billed at least 10 International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) or Tenth Revision (ICD-10) diagnoses of major depressive disorder per year between 2008 and 2022. Data analysis occurred between September 2023 and January 2024.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Heterogeneity of prescribing, defined as the number of distinct antidepressants accounting for 75% of prescriptions by a given clinician; proportion of patients who did not return for follow-up after an index prescription; and proportion of patients receiving stable, ongoing antidepressant treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 11 934 clinicians treating major depressive disorder, unsupervised learning identified 10 distinct clusters on the basis of ICD codes, corresponding to outpatient psychiatry as well as oncology, obstetrics, and primary care. Between these clusters, substantial variability was identified in the proportion of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, and tricyclic antidepressants prescribed, as well as in the number of distinct antidepressants prescribed. Variability was also detected between clinician clusters in loss to follow-up and achievement of stable treatment, with the former ranging from 27% to 69% and the latter from 22% to 42%. Clinician clusters were significantly associated with treatment outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>Groups of clinicians treating individuals diagnosed with major depressive disorder exhibit marked differences in prescribing patterns as well as longitudinal patient outcomes defined by electronic health records. Incorporating these group identifiers yielded similar prediction to more complex models incorporating individual codes, suggesting the importance of considering treatment context in efforts at risk stratification.</p>","PeriodicalId":14800,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"1003-1009"},"PeriodicalIF":22.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11238069/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2024.1778","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: While abundant work has examined patient-level differences in antidepressant treatment outcomes, little is known about the extent of clinician-level differences. Understanding these differences may be important in the development of risk models, precision treatment strategies, and more efficient systems of care.

Objective: To characterize differences between outpatient clinicians in treatment selection and outcomes for their patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder across academic medical centers, community hospitals, and affiliated clinics.

Design, setting, and participants: This was a longitudinal cohort study using data derived from electronic health records at 2 large academic medical centers and 6 community hospitals, and their affiliated outpatient networks, in eastern Massachusetts. Participants were deidentified clinicians who billed at least 10 International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) or Tenth Revision (ICD-10) diagnoses of major depressive disorder per year between 2008 and 2022. Data analysis occurred between September 2023 and January 2024.

Main outcomes and measures: Heterogeneity of prescribing, defined as the number of distinct antidepressants accounting for 75% of prescriptions by a given clinician; proportion of patients who did not return for follow-up after an index prescription; and proportion of patients receiving stable, ongoing antidepressant treatment.

Results: Among 11 934 clinicians treating major depressive disorder, unsupervised learning identified 10 distinct clusters on the basis of ICD codes, corresponding to outpatient psychiatry as well as oncology, obstetrics, and primary care. Between these clusters, substantial variability was identified in the proportion of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, and tricyclic antidepressants prescribed, as well as in the number of distinct antidepressants prescribed. Variability was also detected between clinician clusters in loss to follow-up and achievement of stable treatment, with the former ranging from 27% to 69% and the latter from 22% to 42%. Clinician clusters were significantly associated with treatment outcomes.

Conclusions and relevance: Groups of clinicians treating individuals diagnosed with major depressive disorder exhibit marked differences in prescribing patterns as well as longitudinal patient outcomes defined by electronic health records. Incorporating these group identifiers yielded similar prediction to more complex models incorporating individual codes, suggesting the importance of considering treatment context in efforts at risk stratification.

临床医生在抗抑郁治疗和重度抑郁障碍结果方面的异质性。
重要性:尽管已有大量工作研究了抗抑郁治疗结果中患者层面的差异,但对临床医生层面的差异程度却知之甚少。了解这些差异可能对开发风险模型、精准治疗策略和更有效的护理系统非常重要:目的:描述学术医疗中心、社区医院和附属诊所的门诊临床医生在为诊断为重度抑郁障碍的患者选择治疗方法和治疗结果方面的差异:这是一项纵向队列研究,使用的数据来自马萨诸塞州东部 2 家大型学术医疗中心和 6 家社区医院及其附属门诊网络的电子健康记录。参与者是2008年至2022年期间每年至少开具10份《国际疾病分类第九版》(ICD-9)或《国际疾病分类第十版》(ICD-10)重度抑郁障碍诊断账单的身份已被识别的临床医生。数据分析时间为 2023 年 9 月至 2024 年 1 月:处方的异质性,即某一临床医生开出的处方中75%的处方都使用了不同的抗抑郁药;开出指数处方后不再复诊的患者比例;接受稳定、持续的抗抑郁药治疗的患者比例:在治疗重度抑郁障碍的 11 934 名临床医生中,无监督学习根据 ICD 代码识别出了 10 个不同的群组,分别对应于精神科门诊、肿瘤科、产科和初级保健科。在这些群组之间,选择性血清素再摄取抑制剂、选择性去甲肾上腺素再摄取抑制剂和三环类抗抑郁药的处方比例以及不同抗抑郁药的处方数量存在很大差异。各临床医生群组之间的随访损失率和稳定治疗率也存在差异,前者从27%到69%不等,后者从22%到42%不等。临床医生群组与治疗结果有明显关联:治疗重度抑郁障碍患者的临床医生群体在处方模式以及电子健康记录所定义的患者纵向治疗结果方面存在明显差异。纳入这些群体标识符后,预测结果与纳入个体代码的更复杂模型相似,这表明在进行风险分层时考虑治疗背景非常重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JAMA Psychiatry
JAMA Psychiatry PSYCHIATRY-
CiteScore
30.60
自引率
1.90%
发文量
233
期刊介绍: JAMA Psychiatry is a global, peer-reviewed journal catering to clinicians, scholars, and research scientists in psychiatry, mental health, behavioral science, and related fields. The Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry originated in 1919, splitting into two journals in 1959: Archives of Neurology and Archives of General Psychiatry. In 2013, these evolved into JAMA Neurology and JAMA Psychiatry, respectively. JAMA Psychiatry is affiliated with the JAMA Network, a group of peer-reviewed medical and specialty publications.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信