The Medication Recommendation Tracking Form: A novel tool for tracking changes in prescribed medication, clinical decision making, and use in comparative effectiveness research. Journal of psychiatric research Reilly-Harrington, N. A., Sylvia, L. G., Leon, A. C., Shesler, L. W., Ketter, T. A., Bowden, C. L., Calabrese, J. R., Friedman, E. S., Ostacher, M. J., Iosifescu, D. V., Rabideau, D. J., Thase, M. E., Nierenberg, A. A. 2013; 47 (11): 1686-1693

Abstract

This paper describes the development and use of the Medication Recommendation Tracking Form (MRTF), a novel method for capturing physician prescribing behavior and clinical decision making. The Bipolar Trials Network developed and implemented the MRTF in a comparative effectiveness study for bipolar disorder (LiTMUS). The MRTF was used to assess the frequency, types, and reasons for medication adjustments. Changes in treatment were operationalized by the metric Necessary Clinical Adjustments (NCA), defined as medication adjustments to reduce symptoms, optimize treatment response and functioning, or to address intolerable side effects. Randomized treatment groups did not differ in rates of NCAs, however, responders had significantly fewer NCAs than non-responders. Patients who had more NCAs during their previous visit had significantly lower odds of responding at the current visit. For each one-unit increase in previous CGI-BP depression score and CGI-BP overall severity score, patients had an increased NCA rate of 13% and 15%, respectively at the present visit. Ten-unit increases in previous Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) scores resulted in an 18% and 14% increase in rates of NCAs, respectively. Patients with fewer NCAs had increased quality of life and decreased functional impairment. The MRTF standardizes the reporting and rationale for medication adjustments and provides an innovative metric for clinical effectiveness. As the first tool in psychiatry to track the types and reasons for medication changes, it has important implications for training new clinicians and examining clinical decision making. (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00667745).

View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2013.07.009

View details for PubMedID 23911057