Outcomes, Healthcare Resource Utilization, and Costs of Overall, Community-Acquired, and Hospital-Acquired Acute Kidney Injury in COVID-19 Patients.

Background: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, acute kidney injury (AKI) is associated with higher mortality, but data are lacking on healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs related to AKI, community-acquired AKI (CA-AKI), and hospital-acquired AKI (HA-AKI). Objectives: To quantify the burden of AKI, CA-AKI, and HA-AKI among inpatients with COVID-19. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included inpatients with COVID-19 discharged from US hospitals in the Premier PINC AI™ Healthcare Database April 1-October 31, 2020, categorized as AKI, CA-AKI, HA-AKI, or no AKI by ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes. Outcomes were assessed during index (initial) hospitalization and 30 days postdischarge. Results: Among 208 583 COVID-19 inpatients, 30%, 25%, and 5% had AKI, CA-AKI, and HA-AKI, of whom 10%, 7%, and 23% received dialysis, respectively. Excess mortality, HRU, and costs were greater for HA-AKI than CA-AKI. In adjusted models, for patients with AKI vs no AKI and HA-AKI vs CA-AKI, odds ratios (ORs) (95% CI) were 3.70 (3.61-3.79) and 4.11 (3.92-4.31) for intensive care unit use and 3.52 (3.41-3.63) and 2.64 (2.52-2.78) for in-hospital mortality; mean length of stay (LOS) differences and LOS ratios (95% CI) were 1.8 days and 1.24 (1.23-1.25) and 5.1 days and 1.57 (1.54-1.59); and mean cost differences and cost ratios were $7163 and 1.35 (1.34-1.36) and $19 127 and 1.78 (1.75-1.81) (all P < .001). During the 30 days postdischarge, readmission LOS was ≥6% longer for AKI vs no AKI and HA-AKI vs CA-AKI; outpatient costs were ≥41% higher for HA-AKI vs CA-AKI or no AKI. Only 30-day new dialysis (among patients without index hospitalization dialysis) had similar odds for HA-AKI vs CA-AKI (2.37-2.8 times higher for AKI, HA-AKI, or CA-AKI vs no AKI). Discussion: Among inpatients with COVID-19, HA-AKI had higher excess mortality, HRU, and costs than CA-AKI. Other studies suggest that interventions to prevent HA-AKI could decrease excess morbidity, HRU, and costs among inpatients with COVID-19. Conclusions: In adjusted models among COVID-19 inpatients, AKI, especially HA-AKI, was associated with significantly higher mortality, HRU, and costs during index admission, and higher dialysis and longer readmission LOS during the 30 days postdischarge. These findings support implementation of interventions to prevent HA-AKI in COVID-19 patients.

Design and rationale of FINE-REAL: A prospective study of finerenone in clinical practice.

AIMS: Contemporary patterns of care of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and the adoption of finerenone are not known. The FINE-REAL study (NCT05348733) is a prospective observational study in patients with CKD and T2D to provide insights into the use of the nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) finerenone in clinical practice. METHODS: FINE-REAL is an international, prospective, multicenter, single-arm study enrolling approximately 5500 adults with CKD and T2D in an estimated 200 sites across 22 countries. The study is anticipated to be ongoing until 2027. RESULTS: The primary objective is to describe treatment patterns in patients with CKD and T2D treated with finerenone in routine clinical practice. Secondary objectives include assessment of safety with finerenone. Other endpoints include characterization of healthcare resource utilization and occurrence of newly diagnosed diabetic retinopathy or its progression from baseline in patients with existing disease. A biobank is being organized for future explorative analyses with inclusion of participants from the United States. CONCLUSIONS: FINE-REAL is the first prospective observational study with a nonsteroidal MRA in a population with CKD and T2D and is expected to provide meaningful insights into the treatment of CKD associated with T2D. FINE-REAL will inform decision-making with respect to initiation of finerenone in patients with CKD and T2D.

Dimethyl fumarate is associated with lower rates of infection and lower infection-related healthcare costs when compared with ocrelizumab.

BACKGROUND: Infections in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) may have a detrimental effect on disease progression, risk of hospitalization, and healthcare resource utilization (HRU). The infection risk and HRU costs may vary between disease-modifying therapies (DMTs); however, the individual risks and differences associated with DMTs are not well characterized. Some DMTs may increase the risk for infections in PwMS; however, previous studies have reported an intact humoral immune response in dimethyl fumarate (DMF)-treated patients. The objective was to compare infection-related HRU and healthcare costs (HCCs) between PwMS treated with DMF or ocrelizumab (OCR). METHODS: Eligible patients were identified from the Optum US claims database between April 2017 and September 2020 (DMF n = 1429; OCR n = 3170). Patients were followed from index date to first occurrence of: (1) end of study, (2) end of insurance eligibility, (3) discontinuation of index DMT, or (4) switch from index DMT to another DMT. Outcomes were annualized rate of infection encounters (defined as infection encounters [n] during follow-up window / days followed [n] × 365); annualized infection-related HCCs (defined as aggregated costs of infection encounters during follow-up window / days followed [n] × 365); location-specific infections, and overall infection-related events. Propensity score matching (PSM) 1:1 method was used; PS was calculated via logistic regression for probability of DMF treatment conditional on demographics and comorbidities. Mean differences (MD) were reported for infection encounter measures. RESULTS: After PSM, DMF and OCR cohorts (n = 1094 in each cohort) were balanced based on baseline characteristics (standardized MD of adjusted baseline characteristics <0.1). Mean (standard deviation) follow-up was 296 (244) days for DMF patients and 297 (243) for OCR patients. DMF patients experienced lower annualized rates of overall infection encounters vs OCR patients (MD -0.51 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.92 to -0.11], p = 0.01). When stratified by type of infection encounter, DMF patients experienced significantly lower annualized rates of outpatient (MD [95% CI]: -0.44 [-0.80 to -0.08], p = 0.02) and inpatient/hospitalization infection encounters (-0.08 [-0.14 to -0.02], p<0.01) vs OCR patients. A trend towards a shorter duration of infection-related hospitalization in the DMF vs the OCR group was observed (MD [95% CI]: -2.20 [-4.73 to 0.26] days, p = 0.08). The most common infection types in both DMT groups were urinary tract infections, sepsis, and pneumonia. DMF patients experienced lower annualized infection-related HCCs (MD [95% CI]: -$3642 [-$6380 to -$904], p < 0.01) vs OCR patients, which were driven largely by infection-related hospitalization costs (-$3639 [-$6019 to -$1259], p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: DMF-treated patients PS-matched with OCR patients experienced lower annualized rates of infection encounters and lower infection-related HCCs.

Assessment of Healthcare Resource Utilization by Anticoagulant Heparinoid Dosage Level in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19.

The aim was to describe inpatients with COVID-19 empirically prescribed heparinoid anticoagulants and compare resource utilization between prophylactic/low-dose and therapeutic/high-dose groups. Methods: This retrospective observational study used real-world data from 880 US hospitals in the PINC AI™ Healthcare Database during 4/1/2020-11/30/2020. Descriptive analysis was used to characterize patients. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, length of stay (LOS), mortality, and costs by anticoagulation dose group, adjusting for cohort characteristics. Among 122,508 inpatients, 29,225 (23.9%) received therapeutic/high-dose, and 93,283 (76.1%) received prophylactic/low-dose anticoagulation. The high-dose group had more comorbidities and worse laboratory values compared with low-dose. Respectively, ICU admission rates were 36.7% and 19.1% and LOS median (Q1, Q3) was 8 (5, 15) and 5 (3, 9) days. In separate adjusted models, high-dose anticoagulation was associated with a 45% increase in odds of ICU admission, 26% increase in odds of in-hospital mortality, 21% longer average LOS, and 28% greater average total cost compared with low-dose (each P < 0.001). Prophylactic/low-dose anticoagulation treatment was associated with decreased healthcare resource utilization (HRU) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Epidemiology, Healthcare Resource Utilization, and Mortality of Asthma and COPD in COVID-19: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analyses.

Purpose: There has been concern that asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] increase the risk of developing and exacerbating COVID-19. The effect of medications such as inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and biologics on COVID-19 is unclear. This systematic literature review analyzed the published evidence on epidemiology and the burden of illness of asthma and COPD, and the use of baseline medicines among COVID-19 populations. Patients and Methods: Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, Embase®, MEDLINE® and Cochrane were searched (January 2019-August 2021). The prevalence of asthma or COPD among COVID-19 populations was compared to the country-specific populations. Odds ratios (ORs) were estimated to compare healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) rates, and meta-analyses of outcomes were estimated from age-adjusted ORs (aORs) or hazard ratios (aHRs). Meta-analyses of COVID-19 outcomes were conducted using random effects models for binary outcomes. Results: Given the number and heterogeneity of studies, only 183 high-quality studies were analyzed, which reported hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, ventilation/intubation, or mortality. Asthma patients were not at increased risk for COVID-19-related hospitalization (OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.20), ICU admission (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.1.48), ventilation/intubation (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.62), or mortality (OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.75 to 0.96). Accounting for confounding variables, COPD patients were at higher risk of hospitalization (aOR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.30 to 1.61), ICU admission (aOR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.51), and mortality (aOR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.37 to 1.65). Sixty-five studies reported outcomes associated with ICS or biologic use. There was limited evidence that ICS or biologics significantly impacted the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, HCRU, or mortality in asthma or COPD patients. Conclusion: In high-quality studies included, patients with asthma were not at significantly higher odds for adverse COVID-19-related outcomes, while patients with COPD were at higher odds. There was no clear evidence that baseline medication affected outcomes. Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42021233963).

Trends in osteoporosis care patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic in Alberta, Canada.

PURPOSE/INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to describe osteoporosis-related care patterns during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Alberta, Canada, relative to the 3-year preceding. METHODS: A repeated cross-sectional study design encompassing 3-month periods of continuous administrative health data between March 15, 2017, and September 14, 2020, described osteoporosis-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and treatment patterns. Outcomes included patients with osteoporosis-related healthcare encounters, physician visits, diagnostic and laboratory test volumes, and treatment initiations and disruptions. The percent change between outcomes was calculated, averaged across the control periods (2017-2019), relative to the COVID-19 periods (2020). RESULTS: Relative to the average control March to June period, all HCRU declined during the corresponding COVID-19 period. There was a reduction of 14% in patients with osteoporosis healthcare encounters, 13% in general practitioner visits, 9% in specialist practitioner visits, 47% in bone mineral density tests, and 13% in vitamin D tests. Treatment initiations declined 43%, 26%, and 35% for oral bisphosphonates, intravenous bisphosphonates, and denosumab, respectively. Slight increases were observed in the proportion of patients with treatment disruptions. In the subsequent June to September period, HCRU either returned to or surpassed pre-pandemic levels, when including telehealth visits accounting for 33-45% of healthcare encounters during the COVID periods. Oral bisphosphonate treatment initiations remained lower than pre-pandemic levels. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the COVID-19 pandemic and corresponding public health lockdowns further heightened the "crisis" around the known gap in osteoporosis care and altered the provision of care (e.g., use of telehealth and initiation of treatment). Osteoporosis has a known substantial care and management disparity, which has been classified as a crisis. The COVID-19 pandemic created additional burden on osteoporosis patient care with healthcare encounters, physician visits, diagnostic and laboratory tests, and treatment initiations all declining during the initial pandemic period, relative to previous years.

In-hospital mortality, length of stay, and hospitalization cost of COVID-19 patients with and without hyperkalemia.

BACKGROUND: Hyperkalemia (HK) may be associated with poor clinical outcomes among COVID-19 patients. This study aimed to describe the prevalence of HK and evaluate the associations between HK and in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, length of hospital stay (LOS), and hospitalization cost among COVID-19 inpatients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using a large hospital discharge database (PINC AI Healthcare Database) for COVID-19 inpatients discharged between April 1 and August 31, 2020. HK was defined with discharge diagnosis and potassium binder use. RESULTS: Of 192,182 COVID-19 inpatients, 12% (n = 22,702) had HK. HK patients were more likely to be older (median age 67 vs 63 years), male (63% vs 50%), black (30% vs 22%), and have a history of chronic kidney disease (45% vs 16%) or diabetes mellitus (55% vs 35%) than non-HK patients (all p<.001). A significantly higher proportion of patients with HK had in-hospital mortality (42% vs 11%, p<.001) than those without HK; this was persistent after adjusting for confounders (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]1.62-1.77). Patients with HK were also more likely to be admitted to ICU (aOR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.09), incur higher cost of care (adjusted mean difference $5,389) and have longer LOS (adjusted mean difference 1.3 days) than non-HK patients. CONCLUSIONS: Presence of HK was independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality, LOS, and cost of care among COVID-19 inpatients. Detecting and closely monitoring HK are recommended to improve clinical outcomes and reduce LOS and healthcare cost among COVID-19 patients.

Healthcare Resource Utilization of Patients With COVID-19 Visiting US Hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: Severe cases of COVID-19 have overwhelmed hospital systems across the nation. This study aimed to describe the healthcare resource utilization of patients with COVID-19 from hospital visit to 30 days after discharge for inpatients and hospital-based outpatients in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using Premier Healthcare Database COVID-19 Special Release, a large geographically diverse all-payer hospital administrative database. Adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) were identified by their first, or "index," visit between April 1, 2020, and February 28, 2021, with a principal or secondary discharge diagnosis of COVID-19. RESULTS: Of 1 454 780 adult patients with COVID-19, 33% (n = 481 216) were inpatients and 67% (n = 973 564) were outpatients. Among inpatients, mean age was 64.4 years and comorbidities were common. Most patients (80%) originated from home, 10% from another acute care facility, and 95% were admitted through the emergency department. Of these patients, 23% (n = 108 120) were admitted to intensive care unit and 14% (n = 66 706) died during index hospitalization; 44% were discharged home, 15% to nursing or rehabilitation facility, and 12% to home health. Among outpatients, mean age was 48.8 years, 44% were male, and 60% were emergency department outpatients (n = 586 537). During index outpatient visit, 79% were sent home but 10% had another outpatient visit and 4% were hospitalized within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 is associated with high level of healthcare resource utilization and in-hospital mortality. More than one-third of inpatients required post hospital healthcare services. Such information may help healthcare providers better allocate resources for patients with COVID-19 during the pandemic.

Impact of telehealth on health care resource utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Aim: To assess healthcare utilization (HCRU) among patients with incident telehealth visit during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials & methods: Retrospective pre-post analyses was conducted using HealthJump data. Adults continuously enrolled with an incident telehealth visit between Feb and April 2020 were identified. Demographics, clinical characteristics, proportion of patients with ≥1 HCRU visits and post-index trends in HCRU were analyzed. Results: Sample constituted 2799 patients, 60.34% female and 46.23% white with mean age 59.70. Significant increase in patients with outpatient visits (5.36%, p < 0.005; only established), non-face-to-face visits (99.50%, p < 0.005) and prescription use (12.86%, p < 0.005) was reported. Conclusion: Among patients utilizing telehealth during COVID-19 pandemic, HCRU changed significantly. Better deployment policies and adoption techniques of telehealth could potentially act as a strong tool to revolutionize the healthcare delivery, with or without the pandemic.

Healthcare Resource Utilization and Healthcare Costs of COVID-19 Patients in A Tertiary Care Public Hospital: A Retrospective Cohort Study in Thailand

Objective: Health care costs (HCCs) are a significant concern in developing countries. The authors investigated the healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and HCCs for patients with COVID-19 based on disease severity and infection site. Materials and Methods: The authors reviewed data from the electronic medical records of COVID-19 patients admitted to the present study hospital between January 2020 and April 2020. The authors used comorbidities and patient characteristics as covariates. Analyses were conducted using simple linear regression and generalized linear regression models with a log-link and gamma distribution. Results: Two hundred two patients had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Total costs per patient were 6,626 USD (756 to 45,586). Personal protection equipment costs were the most significant cost for COVID-19 patients with a mean of 3,778 USD. The mean treatment cost per patient was 326 USD. Patients with severe symptoms and lower respiratory tract infection (LRI) had a higher cost and resource utilization value before and after adjusting for covariates. Conclusion: COVID-19 patients with severe symptoms and LRI had higher HCRU. Length of stay, severity of symptoms, and LRI were associated with higher cost of treatment. © JOURNAL OF THE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION OF THAILAND ;2021

Comparison of Healthcare Resource Utilization Between Patients Who Engaged or Did Not Engage With a Prescription Digital Therapeutic for Opioid Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND: A prescription digital therapeutic (PDT) (reSET-O®) may expand access to behavioral treatment for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) treated with buprenorphine, but long-term data on effectiveness are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To compare real-world healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) among patients who engaged with reSET-O and buprenorphine compared to similar patients in recovery treated with buprenorphine who did not fill their reSET-O script or engage with the PDT beyond week one. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of facility and clinical service claims data was conducted in adults with PDT initiation and between 12 weeks and 9 months of continuous enrollment in a health plan after initiation. Patients who filled their prescription and engaged with the therapeutic were compared to patients who filled the prescription but did not engage beyond week one (NE), and patients who did not fill the prescription (NR) (the latter two groups combined into one group hereafter referred to as "non-engagers"). Comparisons were analyzed using a repeated-measures negative binomial model of encounters/procedures, adjusted for number of days in each period. Associated cost trends assessed using current Medicare reimbursement rates. RESULTS: A total of 444 patients redeemed a prescription and engaged with the PDT (mean age 37.5 years, 63.1% female, 84% Medicaid), and 64 patients did not engage with the PDT (mean age 39.5 years, 32.8% female, 73.4% Medicaid). Total cost of hospital facility encounters was $2693 for engaged patients vs $6130 for non-engaged patients. Engaged patients had somewhat higher rates of certain clinician services. Total facility and clinician services costs for engaged vs non-engaged patients were $8733 vs $11,441, for a net cost savings over 9 months of $2708 per patient who engaged with reSET-O. CONCLUSION: Patients who engaged with an OUD-specific PDT had a net cost reduction for inpatient and outpatient services of $2708 per patient over 9 months compared to patients who did not engage with the PDT, despite similar levels of buprenorphine adherence.

High-dose methylprednisolone in nonintubated patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Recent trials with dexamethasone and hydrocortisone have demonstrated benefit in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Data on methylprednisolone are limited. METHODS: Retrospective cohort of consecutive adults with severe COVID-19 pneumonia on high-flow oxygen (FiO2  ≥ 50%) admitted to an academic centre in New York, from 1 March to 15 April 2020. We used inverse probability of treatment weights to estimate the effect of methylprednisolone on clinical outcomes and intensive care resource utilization. RESULTS: Of 447 patients, 153 (34.2%) received methylprednisolone and 294 (65.8%) received no corticosteroids. At 28 days, 102 patients (22.8%) had died and 115 (25.7%) received mechanical ventilation. In weighted analyses, risk for death or mechanical ventilation was 37% lower with methylprednisolone (hazard ratio 0.63; 95% CI 0.47-0.86; P = .003), driven by less frequent mechanical ventilation (subhazard ratio 0.56; 95% CI 0.40-0.79; P = .001); mortality did not differ between groups. The methylprednisolone group had 2.8 more ventilator-free days (95% CI 0.5-5.1; P = .017) and 2.6 more intensive care-free days (95% CI 0.2-4.9; P = .033) during the first 28 days. Complication rates were not higher with methylprednisolone. CONCLUSIONS: In nonintubated patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia, methylprednisolone was associated with reduced need for mechanical ventilation and less-intensive care resource utilization without excess complications.