(C) 2012 AZD6244 cost American Institute of Physics. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3700226]“
“Background: Monitoring mental health treatment
outcomes for populations requires an understanding as to which patient information is needed in electronic format and is feasible to obtain in routine care.\n\nObjective: To examine whether bipolar disorder outcomes can be accurately predicted and how much clinical detail is needed to do so.\n\nResearch Design, Data Sources, and Participants: Longitudinal study of bipolar disorder patients treated during 2000 to 2004 in the 19-site Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder observational study arm (N=3168). Clinical data were obtained at baseline and quarterly for over 1 year. We fit a “gold standard” longitudinal random-effects regression model using a detailed clinical information and estimated the area under the receiver operating RepSox manufacturer characteristic curve (AUC) to predict accuracy using a validation
sample. The model was then modified to include patient characteristics feasible in routinely collected electronic data (eg, administrative data). We compared the AUCs for the “limited-detail” and gold standard models, testing for differences between the AUCs using the validation sample.\n\nMeasure: Remission, defined as Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale score<5 and Young Mania Rating Scale score <4.\n\nResults: The gold standard models had baseline AUC=0.80 (95% confidence interval=0.74 to 0.86) and 0.75(0.64 to 0.86) at 1-year follow-up. The predicted accuracies of the limited-detail model were lower at baseline [AUC=0.67(0.60 to 0.75)]; correlated test chi(2)=14.25, P=0.002] and not statistically
different from the gold standard model at 1 year [AUC=0.67(0.54-0.80); correlated test chi(2)=2.88, P=0.090].\n\nConclusions: Future work is needed to develop clinically accurate and feasible models to predict bipolar disorder outcomes. Clinically detailed and limited models performed similarly for shorter-term prediction at 1-year; however, there is room for improvement in prediction accuracy.”
“Objective: To compare the completeness of medication and blood pressure monitoring CCI-779 nmr among patients requesting medication refills through the pharmacist-managed medication refill and laboratory monitoring program (MRLMP) versus usual care.\n\nDesign: Quasiexperimental study.\n\nSetting: Kaiser Permanente Colorado between November 2011 and June 2012.\n\nPatients: Patients requesting chronic medication prescription refills.\n\nIntervention: Community pharmacists managed the refill authorization request (RAR) process at the intervention site. For each RAR, the pharmacist reviewed patient medication monitoring needs and ordered laboratory test(s) or a clinic visit, as needed, before approval.