Disruption of Pharmacotherapy During the Transition from Adolescence to Early Adulthood in Patients with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Claims Database Analysis Across the USA
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatment rates in adults are low, possibly owing to discontinuation of pediatric care due to various circumstances (including inadequate health insurance coverage, poor disease insight, and patient/family resistance, as well as those who manage their ADHD independent of pharmacologic intervention) during the transition from adolescence to adulthood. To improve the understanding of treatment patterns during this transition, this study characterized pharmacotherapy use in patients with ADHD aged 16-21 years. METHODS: Commercial Databases, which represent all census regions of the USA, included patients aged 16-21 years with two or more ADHD diagnoses between 1/1/2008 and 12/31/2017 (one or more diagnoses during the year of age 17) who were continuously enrolled from ages 16-21 years and prescribed ADHD medication for ≥ 6 months at age 17 years. Pharmacotherapy use was assessed longitudinally. Comparisons between ages were conducted using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and McNemar tests. Treatment discontinuation was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analyses. RESULTS: The analysis included 10,292 patients. The overall percentage of patients receiving pharmacotherapy significantly decreased (p < 0.001, regardless of treatment type and presence of co-occurring psychiatric disorders) as patients aged, with a median time to treatment discontinuation of 2.94 years. Among patients using pharmacotherapy at the age of 17 years, more than 30% were no longer using pharmacotherapy at age 21 years. As patients aged, the percentage using long-acting amphetamines or methylphenidates decreased, and the percentage receiving no treatment increased. The percentage of patients with disrupted treatment from age 18 to 21 years ranged from 17.9 to 24.1%. After transitioning to disrupted treatment or no treatment, low percentages of patients returned to pharmacotherapy use (disrupted treatment: 15.7-21.5% per year; no treatment, 2.7-3.8% per year). Across all age groups, statistically significantly greater (p < 0.05) percentages of patients with co-occurring psychiatric disorders used lisdexamfetamine, dextroamphetamine-amphetamine mix short acting, and non-stimulants compared with patients without co-occurring psychiatric disorders. Patients with co-occurring psychiatric disorders remained on ADHD pharmacotherapy longer and switched or augmented their pharmacotherapy more frequently than patients without co-occurring psychiatric comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Patients rarely reinitiated treatment after pharmacotherapy was disrupted or discontinued, emphasizing the need for increased focus on the management of ADHD as patients transition from adolescence to adulthood.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».