Katharine R. Levit
Truven Health Analytics
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Katharine R. Levit.
Drug and Alcohol Dependence | 2009
Tami L. Mark; Cheryl A. Kassed; Rita Vandivort-Warren; Katharine R. Levit; Henry R. Kranzler
Over the past decade, advances in addiction neurobiology have led to the approval of new medications to treat alcohol and opioid dependence. This study examined data from the IMS National Prescription Audit (NPA) Plus database of retail pharmacy transactions to evaluate trends in U.S. retail sales and prescriptions of FDA-approved medications to treat substance use disorders. Data reveal that prescriptions for alcoholism medications grew from 393,000 in 2003 (
Psychiatric Services | 2009
M.B.A. Tami L. Mark; Katharine R. Levit; Jeffrey A. Buck
30 million in sales) to an estimated 720,000 (
Health Affairs | 2008
Katharine R. Levit; Cheryl A. Kassed; Rosanna M. Coffey; Tami L. Mark; Elizabeth Stranges; Jeffrey A. Buck; Rita Vandivort-Warren
78 million in sales) in 2007. The growth was largely driven by the introduction of acamprosate in 2005, which soon became the market leader (
Health Affairs | 2013
Katharine R. Levit; Tami L. Mark; Rosanna M. Coffey; Sasha Frankel; Patricia Santora; Rita Vandivort-Warren; Kevin Malone
35 million in sales). Prescriptions for the two buprenorphine formulations increased from 48,000 prescriptions (
Health Services Research | 2013
Katharine R. Levit; Bernard Friedman; Herbert S. Wong
5 million in sales) in the year of their introduction (2003) to 1.9 million prescriptions (
Psychiatric Services | 2012
Tami L. Mark; Cheryl A. Kassed; Katharine R. Levit; Rita Vandivort-Warren
327 million in sales) in 2007. While acamprosate and buprenorphine grew rapidly after market entry, overall substance abuse retail medication sales remain small relative to the size of the population that could benefit from treatment and relative to sales for other medications, such as antidepressants. The extent to which substance dependence medications will be adopted by physicians and patients, and marketed by industry, remains uncertain.
Drug and Alcohol Dependence | 2016
Cindy Parks Thomas; Dominic Hodgkin; Katharine R. Levit; Tami L. Mark
1167 T important role of general practitioners in prescribing antidepressant medications and treating depression has been documented. However, the extent to which general practitioners are prescribing other types of psychotropic medications has received less emphasis. This study used data from August 2006 to July 2007 from the National Prescription Audit (NPA) Plus database of IMS to examine this question. IMS collects transaction information each month from approximately 36,000 retail pharmacies, representing about 70% of all retail pharmacies, which when weighted represent all prescriptions filled in retail outlets in the United States. Using a separate sample of retail pharmacy transactions that includes the physician’s Drug Enforcement Administration number, IMS assigns physician specialty information to obtain an estimate of the total number of prescriptions filled in retail pharmacies by medical specialty. As shown Figure 1, of the 472 million prescriptions for psychotropic medications, 59% were written by general practitioners, 23% by psychiatrists, and 19% by other physicians and nonphysician providers. General practitioners wrote prescriptions for 65% of the anxiolytics in the sample, 62% of the antidepressants, 52% of the stimulants, 37% of the antipsychotics, and 22% of the antimania medications. Conversely, psychiatrists and addiction specialists wrote prescriptions for 66% of the antimania medications, 49% of the antipsychotics, 34% of the stimulants, 21% of the antidepressants, and 13% of the anxiolytics. Pediatricians were included as general practitioners and wrote 25% of all stimulant prescriptions but only 3% of all other types of psychotropic medications (data not shown). Prescribing of psychotropic medications by nonpsychiatrists improves access to treatment. However, concerns remain about whether patients treated in the general medical setting are receiving treatment concordant with evidence-based guidelines, psychotherapy, adequate medication monitoring, and appropriate intensity of treatment. Psychotropic Drug Prescriptions by Medical Specialty
Medical Care Research and Review | 2018
Rachel Mosher Henke; Zeynal Karaca; Teresa B. Gibson; Eli Cutler; Marguerite L Barrett; Katharine R. Levit; Jayne Johann; Lauren Hersch Nicholas; Herbert S. Wong
Spending on mental health (MH) and substance abuse (SA) treatment is expected to double between 2003 and 2014, to
Psychiatric Services | 2016
Tami L. Mark; Dominic Hodgkin; Katharine R. Levit; Cindy Parks Thomas
239 billion, and is anticipated to continue falling as a share of all health spending. By 2014, our projections of SA spending show increasing responsibility for state and local governments (45 percent); deteriorating shares financed by private insurance (7 percent); and 42 percent of SA spending going to specialty SA centers. For MH, Medicaid is forecasted to fund an increasingly larger share of treatment costs (27 percent), and prescription medications are expected to capture 30 percent of MH spending by 2014.
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice | 2015
Cindy Parks Thomas; Tami L. Mark; Dominic Hodgkin; Katharine R. Levit
The 2007-09 recession had a dramatic effect on behavioral health spending, with the effect most prominent for private, state, and local payers. During the recession behavioral health spending increased at a 4.6 percent average annual rate, down from 6.1 percent in 2004-07. Average annual growth in private behavioral health spending during the recession slowed to 2.7 percent from 7.2 percent in 2004-07. State and local behavioral health spending showed negative average annual growth, -1.2 percent, during the recession, compared with 3.7 percent increases in 2004-07. In contrast, federal behavioral health spending growth accelerated to 11.1 percent during the recession, up from 7.2 percent in 2004-07. These behavioral health spending trends were driven largely by increased federal spending in Medicaid, declining private insurance enrollment, and severe state budget constraints. An increased federal Medicaid match reduced the state share of Medicaid spending, which prevented more drastic cuts in state-funded behavioral health programs during the recession. Federal Medicaid served as a critical safety net for people with behavioral health treatment needs during the recession.
Collaboration
Dive into the Katharine R. Levit's collaboration.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
View shared research outputsSubstance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
View shared research outputsSubstance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
View shared research outputs