The significant impact of education, poverty, and race on Internet-based research participant engagement

PURPOSE: Internet-based technologies are increasingly being used for research studies. However, it is not known whether Internet-based approaches will effectively engage participants from diverse racial and socioeconomic backgrounds. METHODS: A total of 967 participants were recruited and offered genetic ancestry results. We evaluated viewing Internet-based genetic ancestry results among participants who expressed high interest in obtaining the results. RESULTS: Of the participants, 64% stated that they were very or extremely interested in their genetic ancestry results. Among interested participants, individuals with a high school diploma (n = 473) viewed their results 19% of the time relative to 4% of the 145 participants without a diploma (P < 0.0001). Similarly, 22% of participants with household income above the federal poverty level (n = 286) viewed their results relative to 10% of the 314 participants living below the federal poverty level (P < 0.0001). Among interested participants both with a high school degree and living above the poverty level, self-identified Caucasians were more likely to view results than self-identified African Americans (P < 0.0001), and females were more likely to view results than males (P = 0.0007). CONCLUSION: In an underserved population, engagement in Internet-based research was low despite high reported interest. This suggests that explicit strategies should be developed to increase diversity in Internet-based research. Genet Med 19 2, 240–243

Comparison of performance of psychiatrists vs other outpatient physicians in the 2020 US Medicare Merit-Based Incentive Payment System

Importance: Medicare\u27s Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is a new, mandatory, outpatient value-based payment program that ties reimbursement to performance on cost and quality measures for many US clinicians. However, it is currently unknown how the program measures the performance of psychiatrists, who often treat a different patient case mix with different clinical considerations than do other outpatient clinicians. Objective: To compare performance scores and value-based reimbursement for psychiatrists vs other outpatient physicians in the 2020 MIPS. Design Setting and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Provider Data Catalog was used to identify outpatient Medicare physicians listed in the National Downloadable File between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020, who participated in the 2020 MIPS and received a publicly reported final performance score. Data from the 593 863 clinicians participating in the 2020 MIPS were used to compare differences in the 2020 MIPS performance scores and value-based reimbursement (based on performance in 2018) for psychiatrists vs other physicians, adjusting for physician, patient, and practice area characteristics. Exposures: Participation in MIPS. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were final MIPS performance score and negative (penalty), positive, and exceptional performance bonus payment adjustments. Secondary outcomes were scores in the MIPS performance domains: quality, promoting interoperability, improvement activities, and cost. Results: This study included 9356 psychiatrists (3407 [36.4%] female and 5 949 [63.6%] male) and 196 306 other outpatient physicians (69 221 [35.3%] female and 127 085 [64.7%] male) (data on age and race are not available). Compared with other physicians, psychiatrists were less likely to be affiliated with a safety-net hospital (2119 [22.6%] vs 64 997 [33.1%]) or a major teaching hospital (2148 [23.0%] vs 53 321 [27.2%]) and had lower annual Medicare patient volume (181 vs 437 patients) and mean patient risk scores (1.65 vs 1.78) ( Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study that compared US psychiatrists with other outpatient physicians, psychiatrists had significantly lower 2020 MIPS performance scores, were penalized more frequently, and received fewer bonuses. Policy makers should evaluate whether current MIPS performance measures appropriately assess the performance of psychiatrists

Comparative effectiveness associated with buprenorphine and naltrexone in opioid use disorder and cooccurring polysubstance use

Importance: Despite prevalent polysubstance use, treatment patterns and outcomes for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) and cooccurring substance use disorders (SUD) are understudied. Objective: To evaluate the distribution of buprenorphine and naltrexone initiation among individuals with OUD with vs without cooccurring SUD and to assess the comparative effectiveness associated with buprenorphine and naltrexone against drug-related poisonings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational comparative effectiveness study used insurance claims from 2011 to 2016 from the US IBM MarketScan databases to study initiation of medications for OUD (MOUD) among treatment-seeking individuals aged 12 to 64 years with a primary diagnosis of OUD. Cooccurring SUD was defined as SUD diagnosed concurrent with or in the 6 months prior to OUD treatment initiation. Treatment was codified as psychosocial treatment without MOUD or initiation or buprenorphine or naltrexone (including extended-release or oral). Methadone recipients were excluded from analysis. Data were analyzed from February 3, 2021, through February 26, 2022. Exposures: MOUD. Main Outcomes and Measures: Associations between cooccurring SUD diagnoses with treatment type were assessed with multivariable regression. The association of drug-related poisoning admissions with days covered with buprenorphine or naltrexone prescriptions vs days without prescriptions was assessed among MOUD initiators. Odds ratios from within-person fixed effects models were estimated as a function of MOUD and stratified by cooccurring SUDs. Results: Among 179 280 individuals with OUD (mean [SD] age, 33.2 [11.0] years; 90 196 [50.5%] men), 102 930 (57.4%) received psychosocial treatment without MOUD. Across 47 488 individuals with cooccurring SUDs, 33 449 (70.4%) did not receive MOUD, whereas across 131 792 individuals without cooccurring SUDs, 69 481 (52.7%) did not receive MOUD. Cooccurring SUD was associated with decreased odds of initiating buprenorphine (risk ratio [RR], 0.55 [95% CI, 0.54-0.56]) but increased odds of initiating naltrexone (extended release: RR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.05-1.20]; oral: RR, 1.95 [95% CI, 1.86-2.03]). Among 12 485 individuals initiating MOUD who experienced at least 1 drug-related poisoning during insurance enrollment, buprenorphine treatment days were associated with decreased poisonings compared with days without MOUD for individuals with cooccurring SUD (odds ratio [OR], 0.56 [95% CI, 0.48-0.65]) and individuals without cooccurring SUD (OR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.53-0.63]), with comparable associations observed for extended-release naltrexone. No protective association was observed for oral naltrexone. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that individuals with OUD and polysubstance use were less likely to initiate buprenorphine and naltrexone than individuals without polysubstance use. Among individuals initiating MOUD, polysubstance use was associated with decreased buprenorphine and increased naltrexone initiation, despite buprenorphine\u27s protective associations against drug-related poisoning

Association between benzodiazepine use with or without opioid use and all-cause mortality in the United States, 1999-2015

Importance: Although overall rates of opioid use have been plateauing, coprescriptions of benzodiazepines and opioids have increased greatly in recent years. It is unknown whether this combination is an independent risk factor for all-cause mortality as opposed to being more frequently used by persons with a baseline elevated risk of death. Objective: To evaluate whether benzodiazepine use, with or without opioid use, is associated with increased all-cause mortality relative to the use of low-risk antidepressants. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used a large, nationally representative US data set (the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys [NHANES]) from 1999 to 2015. Eight cycles of NHANES data were used, spanning 37 610 person-years of follow-up time among 5212 individuals. Statistical analysis was performed from August 24, 2019, through May 23, 2020. Exposures: The primary exposure variable was benzodiazepine and opioid coprescriptions. Individuals taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) served as an active comparator reference group. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause mortality was obtained via linkage of NHANES to the National Death Index. Propensity scores were calculated from covariates associated with sociodemographic factors, comorbidities, and medication use for more than 1000 prescription types. Propensity score-weighted mortality hazards were calculated from Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: Of 5212 participants aged 20 years or older (1993 men [38.2%]; mean [SD] age, 54.8 [16.9] years) followed up for a median of 6.7 years (range, 0.2-16.8 years), 101 deaths (33.0 per 1000 person-years) occurred among those receiving cotreatment, 236 deaths (26.5 per 1000 person-years) occurred among those receiving only benzodiazepines, and 227 deaths (20.2 per 1000 person-years) occurred among SSRI recipients taking neither opioids nor benzodiazepines. After propensity score weighting, a significant increase in all-cause mortality was associated with benzodiazepine and opioid cotreatment (hazard ratio, 2.04 [95% CI, 1.65-2.52]) and benzodiazepines without opioids (hazard ratio, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.33-1.92]). Subgroup analyses revealed an increased risk of mortality for individuals receiving cotreatment who were 65 years or younger but not for those older than 65 years; similar findings were observed for those receiving benzodiazepines without opioids. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found a significant increase in all-cause mortality associated with benzodiazepine use with or without opioid use in comparison with SSRI use. Benzodiazepine and opioid cotreatment, in particular, was associated with a 2-fold increase in all-cause mortality even after taking into account medical comorbidities and polypharmacy burden