Medicare Skilled Nursing Facility Use and Spending Before and After Introduction of the Public Health Emergency Waiver During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Medicare introduced a public health emergency (PHE) waiver in March 2020, removing a 3-day hospitalization requirement before fee-for-service beneficiaries could receive skilled nursing facility (SNF) care benefits. Objective: To assess whether there were changes in SNF episode volume and Medicare spending on SNF care before and during the PHE among long-term care (LTC) residents and other Medicare beneficiaries. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used Medicare fee-for-service claims and the Minimum Data Set for Medicare beneficiaries who were reimbursed for SNF care episodes from January 2018 to September 2021 in US SNFs. Exposures: The prepandemic period (January 2018-February 2020) vs the PHE period (March 2020-September 2021). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were SNF episode volume, characteristics, and costs. Episodes were defined as standard (with a preceding 3-day hospitalization) or waiver (with other or no acute care use). Results: Skilled nursing facility care was provided to 4 299 863 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. Medicare beneficiaries had on average 130 400 monthly SNF episodes in the prepandemic period (mean [SD] age of beneficiaries, 78.9 [11.0] years; 59% female) and 108 575 monthly episodes in the PHE period (mean [SD] age of beneficiaries, 79.0 [11.1] years; 59% female). All waiver episodes increased from 6% to 32%, and waiver episodes without preceding acute care increased from 3% to 18% (from 4% to 49% among LTC residents). Skilled nursing facility episodes provided for LTC residents increased by 77% (from 15 538 to 27 537 monthly episodes), primarily due to waiver episodes provided for residents with COVID-19 in 2020 and early 2021 (62% of waiver episodes without preceding acute care). Skilled nursing facilities in the top quartile of waiver episodes were more often for-profit (80% vs 68%) and had lower quality ratings (mean [SD] overall star rating, 2.7 [1.4] vs 3.2 [1.4]; mean [SD] staffing star rating, 2.5 [1.1] vs 3.0 [1.2]) compared with SNFs in the other quartiles. Monthly Medicare spending on SNF care was $2.1 billion before the pandemic and $2.0 billion during the PHE. For LTC residents, monthly SNF spending increased from $301 million to $585 million while spending on hospitalizations remained relatively stable. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that the PHE waiver for SNF care was associated with a marked increase in the prevalence of SNF episodes without a preceding hospitalization, especially in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. The waiver was used primarily among certain types of facilities and for LTC residents with COVID-19. Although the effect of the waiver cannot be differentiated from that of the pandemic, overall SNF care costs did not increase substantially; for LTC residents, the waiver was applied primarily for COVID-19 care, suggesting the waiver's successful implementation.

Video Telemedicine Experiences In COVID-19 Were Positive, But Physicians And Patients Prefer In-Person Care For The Future.

To help inform policy discussions about postpandemic telemedicine reimbursement and regulations, we conducted dual nationally representative surveys among primary care physicians and patients. Although majorities of both populations reported satisfaction with video visits during the pandemic, 80 percent of physicians would prefer to provide only a small share of care or no care via telemedicine in the future, and only 36 percent of patients would prefer to seek care by video or phone. Most physicians (60 percent) felt that the quality of video telemedicine care was generally inferior to the quality of in-person care, and both patients and physicians cited the lack of physical exam as a key reason (90 percent and 92 percent, respectively). Patients who were older, had less education, or were Asian were less likely to want to use video for future care. Although improvements to home-based diagnostic tools could improve both the quality of and the desire to use telemedicine, virtual primary care will likely be limited in the immediate future. Policies to enhance quality, sustain virtual care, and address inequities in the online setting may be needed.

Covid-19 Surveillance Testing and Resident Outcomes in Nursing Homes.

BACKGROUND: Despite widespread adoption of surveillance testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) among staff members in skilled nursing facilities, evidence is limited regarding its relationship with outcomes among facility residents. METHODS: Using data obtained from 2020 to 2022, we performed a retrospective cohort study of testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among staff members in 13,424 skilled nursing facilities during three pandemic periods: before vaccine approval, before the B.1.1.529 (omicron) variant wave, and during the omicron wave. We assessed staff testing volumes during weeks without Covid-19 cases relative to other skilled nursing facilities in the same county, along with Covid-19 cases and deaths among residents during potential outbreaks (defined as the occurrence of a case after 2 weeks with no cases). We reported adjusted differences in outcomes between high-testing facilities (90th percentile of test volume) and low-testing facilities (10th percentile). The two primary outcomes were the weekly cumulative number of Covid-19 cases and related deaths among residents during potential outbreaks. RESULTS: During the overall study period, 519.7 cases of Covid-19 per 100 potential outbreaks were reported among residents of high-testing facilities as compared with 591.2 cases among residents of low-testing facilities (adjusted difference, -71.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], -91.3 to -51.6). During the same period, 42.7 deaths per 100 potential outbreaks occurred in high-testing facilities as compared with 49.8 deaths in low-testing facilities (adjusted difference, -7.1; 95% CI, -11.0 to -3.2). Before vaccine availability, high- and low-testing facilities had 759.9 cases and 1060.2 cases, respectively, per 100 potential outbreaks (adjusted difference, -300.3; 95% CI, -377.1 to -223.5), along with 125.2 and 166.8 deaths (adjusted difference, -41.6; 95% CI, -57.8 to -25.5). Before the omicron wave, the numbers of cases and deaths were similar in high- and low-testing facilities; during the omicron wave, high-testing facilities had fewer cases among residents, but deaths were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Greater surveillance testing of staff members at skilled nursing facilities was associated with clinically meaningful reductions in Covid-19 cases and deaths among residents, particularly before vaccine availability.

Changes in Physician Work Hours and Implications for Workforce Capacity and Work-Life Balance, 2001-2021.

Importance: Physician work hours are an underexplored facet of the physician workforce that can inform policy for the rapidly changing health care labor market. Objective: To examine trends in individual physician work hours and their contribution to clinical workforce changes over a 20-year period. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study focused on active US physicians between January 2001 and December 2021 who were included in the Current Population Survey. Outcomes for physicians, advanced practice professionals (APPs), and nonphysician holders of doctoral degrees were compared, and generalized linear models were used to estimate differences in time trends for weekly work hours across subgroups. Main Outcomes and Measures: Physician and APP workforce size, defined as the number of active clinicians, 3-year moving averages of weekly work hours by individual physicians, and weekly hours contributed by the physician and APP workforce per 100 000 US residents. Results: A total of 87 297 monthly surveys of physicians from 17 599 unique households were included in the analysis. The number of active physicians grew 32.9% from 2001 to 2021, peaking in 2019 at 989 684, then falling 6.7% to 923 419 by 2021, with disproportionate loss of physicians in rural areas. Average weekly work hours for individual physicians declined by 7.6% (95% CI, -9.1% to -6.1%), from 52.6 to 48.6 hours per week from 2001 to 2021. The downward trend was driven by decreasing hours among male physicians, particularly fathers (11.9% decline in work hours), rural physicians (-9.7%), and physicians aged 45 to 54 years (-9.8%). Physician mothers were the only examined subgroup to experience a statistically significant increase in work hours (3.0%). Total weekly hours contributed by the physician workforce per 10 000 US residents increased by 7.0%, from 13 006 hours in 2001 to 2003 to 13 920 hours in 2019 to 2021, compared with 16.6% growth in the US population over that time period. Weekly hours contributed by the APP workforce per 100 000 US residents grew 71.2% from 2010 through 2012 to 2019 through 2021. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study showed that physician work hours consistently declined in the past 20 years, such that physician workforce hours per capita lagged behind US population growth. This trend was offset by rapid growth in hours contributed by the APP workforce. The gap in physician work hours between men and women narrowed considerably, with diverging potential implications for gender equity. Increasing physician retirement combined with a drop in active physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic may further slow growth in physician workforce hours per capita in the US.

Epidemic responses under uncertainty.

We examine how policymakers react to a pandemic with uncertainty around key epidemiological and economic policy parameters by embedding a macroeconomic SIR model in a robust control framework. Uncertainty about disease virulence and severity leads to stricter and more persistent quarantines, while uncertainty about the economic costs of mitigation leads to less stringent quarantines. On net, an uncertainty-averse planner adopts stronger mitigation measures. Intuitively, the cost of underestimating the pandemic is out-of-control growth and permanent loss of life, while the cost of underestimating the economic consequences of quarantine is more transitory.

Telemedicine Use and Quality of Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in the US During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Little is known about the potential implications of the rapid transition to telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic for treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). Objective: To examine the association between telemedicine adoption during the COVID-19 pandemic and indicators of OUD treatment quality. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed deidentified administrative claims data from OptumLabs Data Warehouse. Claims for telemedicine visits were included for both the prepandemic period (March 14, 2019, to March 13, 2020) and pandemic period (March 14, 2020, to March 13, 2021). Patients with OUD and continuous enrollment in either commercial insurance or Medicare Advantage plans were included. Clinicians who provided office-based OUD care were included and categorized into low, medium, or high telemedicine use groups. Patients were attributed to the clinician (and corresponding telemedicine use group) from whom they received a plurality of OUD visits. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 4 outcomes were all outpatient visits, OUD visits (in person vs telemedicine) within 90 days of an index visit, medications for OUD (MOUD) prescribing, and OUD-related clinical events (including drug overdose, inpatient detoxification and rehabilitation center stay, or injection drug use-related infections). Results: The analysis included 11 801 patients (mean [SD] age, 53.9 [15.7] years; 5902 males [50.0%]) who were treated by 1768 clinicians. Clinicians with low vs high telemedicine use conducted a mean (SD) of 2.1% (2.5%) vs 69.5% (18.6%) of their office visits virtually in the pandemic period. While telemedicine use for OUD increased significantly from the prepandemic to pandemic periods, total OUD visit volume (in person plus telemedicine) per patient episode remained stable among both high (2.6 to 2.7 visits per patient episode) and low (3.1 to 3.3 visits per patient episode) telemedicine use groups. In adjusted analyses comparing the prepandemic with pandemic periods, there was no differential change in MOUD initiation (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.84-1.19), MOUD days' supply (differential change in days' supply, -0.27; 95% CI, -1.84 to 1.30), or OUD-related clinical events (adjusted OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.73-1.24) among patients who were treated by clinicians in low vs high telemedicine use groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study revealed that clinical outcomes were similar among patients who were treated by clinicians with high and low telemedicine use during the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting that telemedicine is a comparable alternative to in-person OUD care. There was no evidence that telemedicine was associated with increased access to or improved quality of OUD treatment.

Vaccine-based clinical protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and the humoral immune response: A 1-year follow-up study of patients with multiple sclerosis receiving ocrelizumab.

Introduction: Given the varying severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the rapid spread of Severe-Acute-Respiratory-Syndrome-Corona-Virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), vaccine-mediated protection of particularly vulnerable individuals has gained increasing attention during the course of the pandemic. Methods: We performed a 1-year follow-up study of 51 ocrelizumab-treated patients with multiple sclerosis (OCR-pwMS) who received COVID-19 vaccination in 2021. We retrospectively identified 37 additional OCR-pwMS, 42 pwMS receiving natalizumab, 27 pwMS receiving sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor modulators, 59 pwMS without a disease-modifying therapy, and 61 controls without MS (HC). In OCR-pwMS, anti-SARS-CoV-2(S)-antibody titers were measured prior to the first and after the second, third, and fourth vaccine doses (pv2/3/4). The SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response was analyzed pv2. SARS-CoV-2 infection status, COVID-19 disease severity, and vaccination-related adverse events were assessed in all pwMS and HC. Results: We found a pronounced and increasing anti-SARS-CoV-2(S)-antibody response after COVID-19 booster vaccinations in OCR-pwMS (pv2: 30.4%, pv3: 56.5%, and pv4 90.0% were antibody positive). More than one third of OCR-pwMS without detectable antibodies pv2 developed positive antibodies pv3. 23.5% of OCR-pwMS had a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, of which 84.2% were symptomatic. Infection rates were comparable between OCR-pwMS and control groups. None of the pwMS had severe COVID-19. An attenuated humoral immune response was not associated with a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Discussion: Additional COVID-19 vaccinations can boost the humoral immune response in OCR-pwMS and improve clinical protection against COVID-19. Vaccines effectively protect even OCR-pwMS without a detectable COVID-19 specific humoral immune response, indicating compensatory, e.g., T cell-mediated immunological mechanisms.

Trends In Mental Health Care Delivery By Psychiatrists And Nurse Practitioners In Medicare, 2011-19.

The supply of psychiatrists in the United States is inadequate to address the unmet demand for mental health care. Psychiatric mental health nurse practitioners (PMHNPs) may fill the widening gap between supply of and demand for mental health specialists with prescribing privileges. Using Medicare claims for a 100 percent sample of fee-for-service beneficiaries (average age, sixty-one years) who had an office visit for either a psychiatrist or a PMHNP during the period 2011-19, we examined how the supply and use of psychiatrists and PMHNPs changed over time, and we compared their practice patterns. Psychiatrists and PMHNPs treated roughly comparable patient populations with similar services and prescriptions. From 2011 to 2019 the number of PMHNPs treating Medicare beneficiaries grew 162 percent, compared with a 6 percent relative decrease in the number of psychiatrists doing so. During the same period, total annual mental health office visits per 100 beneficiaries decreased 11.5 percent from 27.4 to 24.2, the net result of a 29.0 percent drop in psychiatrist visits being offset by a 111.3 percent increase in PMHNP visits. The proportion of all mental health prescriber visits provided by PMHNPs increased from 12.5 percent to 29.8 percent during 2011-19, exceeding 50 percent in rural, full-scope-of-practice regions. PMHNPs are a rapidly growing workforce that may be instrumental in improving mental health care access.

MRI and laboratory monitoring of disease-modifying therapy efficacy and risks.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Increasingly, therapeutic strategy in multiple sclerosis (MS) is informed by imaging and laboratory biomarkers, in addition to traditional clinical factors. Here, we review aspects of monitoring the efficacy and risks of disease-modifying therapy (DMT) with both conventional and emerging MRI and laboratory measures. RECENT FINDINGS: The adoption of consensus-driven, stable MRI acquisition protocols and artificial intelligence-based, quantitative image analysis is heralding an era of precision monitoring of DMT efficacy. New MRI measures of compartmentalized inflammation, neuro-degeneration and repair complement traditional metrics but require validation before use in individual patients. Laboratory markers of brain cellular injury, such as neurofilament light, are robust outcomes in DMT efficacy trials; their use in clinical practice is being refined. DMT-specific laboratory monitoring for safety is critical and may include lymphocytes, immunoglobulins, autoimmunity surveillance, John Cunningham virus serology and COVID-19 vaccination seroresponse. SUMMARY: A biomarker-enhanced monitoring strategy has immediate clinical application, with growing evidence of long-term reductions in disability accrual when both clinically symptomatic and asymptomatic inflammatory activity is fully suppressed; and amelioration of the risks associated with therapy. Emerging MRI and blood-based measures will also become important tools for monitoring agents that target the innate immune system and promote neuro-repair.

Trends in Outpatient Telemedicine Utilization Among Rural Medicare Beneficiaries, 2010 to 2019.

Importance: Little is known about how telemedicine use was evolving before the broad changes that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Understanding prepandemic patterns of telemedicine use can inform ongoing debates on the future of telemedicine policy. Objective: To describe trends in telemedicine utilization among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries before the COVID-19 pandemic and the specialties of clinicians providing telemedicine. Design Setting and Participants: This was a cross-sectional study and descriptive analysis of telemedicine utilization by 10.4 million fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries from 2010 to 2019. Data analysis was performed from June 6, 2019, to July 30, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates of telemedicine utilization, characteristics of beneficiaries who received telemedicine in 2010 to 2019, and specialties of clinicians delivering telemedicine. Results: Of 10.4 million rural Medicare beneficiaries, telemedicine was used by 91 483 individuals (age ≥65 years, 47 135 [51.5%]; women, 51 476 [56.3%]; and White, 76 467 [83.6%] individuals) in 2019. In 2010 to 2019, telemedicine visits grew by 23.1% annually. A total of 0.9% of all fee-for-service rural beneficiaries had a telemedicine visit in 2019 compared with 0.2% in 2010. In 2019, there were 257 979 telemedicine visits or 34.8 visits per 1000 rural beneficiaries and most (75.9%) of these visits were for mental health conditions. Patients with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia (3.0% of rural beneficiaries) received 40% of all telemedicine visits in 2019. Some traditionally disadvantaged and underserved groups comprised a larger share of telemedicine users than nonusers in 2019, such as those dually insured with Medicaid (56.9% of users vs 18.6% of nonusers; adjusted odd ratio, 3.83; 95% CI, 3.77-3.89). In 2010 to 2019, telemedicine for mental health conditions shifted away from psychiatrists (71.2% to 35.8% of all telemedicine visits) to nonphysician clinicians, eg, nurse practitioners, psychologists, and social workers (21.4% to 57.2%). There was wide variation in telemedicine utilization in 2019 across counties: median (IQR), 16.0 (2.5-51.4) telemedicine users per 1000 beneficiaries). In 891 counties (29% of all US counties), at least 10% of beneficiaries with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia used a telemedicine service in 2019. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of telemedicine utilization before the COVID-19 pandemic, there was sustained growth in telemedicine visits among rural beneficiaries covered by the Medicare program, especially care delivered by nurse practitioners and other nonphysician clinicians. The prepandemic model of telemedicine provided in local health care settings may be a viable modality to maintain in rural communities.

Improving the Care of Diverse Patient Populations: Let's Advance the Dialogue for Strategies to Address and Navigate the Elephant in the Room (P05)

Outcomes 1. Understand the development of cultural humility by completing a real-time self-assessment of implicit biases 2. Demonstrate recognition of individual implicit biases and exercise cultural curiosity via use of 1 or 2 components of the 5 “R”s tool, which includes cultural humility, mindfulness and compassion 3. Recognize 1 or 2 strategies intended to improve understanding of the cultural values and preferences of those from other cultures Cultural beliefs shape perceptions of illness, prognosis, and suffering and inform preferences for palliative and end-of-life care. Cultural identification encompasses many things: age, gender identity, ethnicity, ability, language, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, and socioeconomic status. Cultural identification and beliefs of patients often differ from those of their clinicians. This range of beliefs, values, and preferences in the clinician-patient relationship creates potential for discord, mistrust, and diminished quality of care. Studies suggest that clinicians and patients and families find interactions where cultural discordance exists challenging. Cultural humility has been found to enhance trust, increase the likelihood of clinically competent care, and increase satisfaction. Increasing clinicians’ cultural humility has been suggested as a mechanism for reducing healthcare disparities. Profound disparities in care have been exposed and exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, which may relate to differences in cultural beliefs and mistrust in the healthcare system. Intentionally recognizing, evaluating, and addressing implicit bias and cultural humility, as well as honoring cultural values and preferences, are strategies that promote access to equitable, high quality, patient-centered care. This session will provide practical strategies and tools for clinicians caring for culturally diverse patients and their families. It will include facilitator-guided experiential learning within small groups using videos, role play, and discussion. Participants will learn and practice strategies to explore cultural beliefs, values, and preferences of those with serious illness and the impact on care preferences;develop shared understanding and exercise respect for individuals regardless of potential cultural-discordant dynamics;and enhance clinician resilience by understanding one's own implicit biases and practicing cultural humility strategies. The session will challenge individual beliefs and assumptions to facilitate personal and professional growth and will increase awareness of implicit biases, enhance confidence, and improve comfort in communication while promoting respect for those from cultural communities discordant with our own.

Vaccination and immunotherapies in neuroimmunological diseases.

Neuroimmunological diseases and their treatment compromise the immune system, thereby increasing the risk of infections and serious illness. Consequently, vaccinations to protect against infections are an important part of the clinical management of these diseases. However, the wide variety of immunotherapies that are currently used to treat neuroimmunological disease - particularly multiple sclerosis and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders - can also impair immunological responses to vaccinations. In this Review, we discuss what is known about the effects of various immunotherapies on immunological responses to vaccines and what these effects mean for the safe and effective use of vaccines in patients with a neuroimmunological disease. The success of vaccination in patients receiving immunotherapy largely depends on the specific mode of action of the immunotherapy. To minimize the risk of infection when using immunotherapy, assessment of immune status and exclusion of underlying chronic infections before initiation of therapy are essential. Selection of the required vaccinations and leaving appropriate time intervals between vaccination and administration of immunotherapy can help to safeguard patients. We also discuss the rapidly evolving knowledge of how immunotherapies affect responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and how these effects should influence the management of patients on these therapies during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in relation to peripheral immune cell profiles among patients with multiple sclerosis receiving ocrelizumab.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination has proven to be effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission and severe disease courses. However, immunocompromised patients have not been included in clinical trials and real-world clinical data point to an attenuated immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines among patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) receiving immunomodulatory therapies. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study including 59 ocrelizumab (OCR)-treated patients with MS who received SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Anti-SARS-CoV-2-antibody titres, routine blood parameters and peripheral immune cell profiles were measured prior to the first (baseline) and at a median of 4 weeks after the second vaccine dose (follow-up). Moreover, the SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response and peripheral B cell subsets were analysed at follow-up. Finally, vaccination-related adverse events were assessed. RESULTS: After vaccination, we found anti-SARS-CoV-2(S) antibodies in 27.1% and a SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response in 92.7% of MS cases. T cell-mediated interferon (IFN)-γ release was more pronounced in patients without anti-SARS-CoV-2(S) antibodies. Antibody titres positively correlated with peripheral B cell counts, time since last infusion and total IgM levels. They negatively correlated with the number of previous infusion cycles. Peripheral plasma cells were increased in antibody-positive patients. A positive correlation between T cell response and peripheral lymphocyte counts was observed. Moreover, IFN-γ release was negatively correlated with the time since the last infusion. CONCLUSION: In OCR-treated patients with MS, the humoral immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is attenuated while the T cell response is preserved. However, it is still unclear whether T or B cell-mediated immunity is required for effective clinical protection. Nonetheless, given the long-lasting clinical effects of OCR, monitoring of peripheral B cell counts could facilitate individualised treatment regimens and might be used to identify the optimal time to vaccinate.