State Variation in the Utilization of Nurse Practitioner-Provided Home-Based Primary Care: A Medicare Claims Analysis.

Nurse practitioners (NPs) provide an increasing proportion of home-based primary care, despite restrictive scope of practice laws in approximately one half of states. We examined the relationship between scope of practice laws and state volume of NP-provided home-based primary care by performing an analysis of 2018 to 2019 Medicare claims. For each state we calculated the proportion of total home-based primary care visits by NPs and the proportion of all NPs providing home-based primary care. We used the 2018 American Association of Nurse Practitioners classification of state practice environment. We performed chi-square tests to assess the significance between volume and practice environment. We found that 42% of home-based primary care is delivered by NPs nationally, but substantial variation exists across states. We did not find a discernible or statistically significant pattern of uptake of NP-provided home-based primary care across full, reduced, or restricted states. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 49(5), 11-17.].

Financial Impact of COVID-19 on Dental Care for Pediatric Patients: a Dental Claims Review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to quantify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on private dental insurance claims for pediatric dental care. METHODS: Commercial dental insurance claims for patients in the United States ages 18 and younger were obtained and analyzed. The claims dates ranged from January 1, 2019, to August 31, 2020. Total claims paid, average paid amount per visit, and the number of visits were compared between provider specialties and patient age groups from 2019 to 2020. RESULTS: Total paid claims and total number of visits per week were significantly lower in 2020 compared to 2019 from mid-March to mid-May (P<0.001). There were generally no differences from mid-May through August (P>0.15), except for significantly lower total paid claims and visits per week for "other" specialists in 2020 (P<0.005). The average paid amount per visit was significantly higher during the COVID shutdown period for 0-5 year-olds (P<0.001) but significantly lower for all other ages. CONCLUSIONS: Dental care was greatly reduced during the COVID shutdown period and was slower to recover for "other" specialties. Younger patients ages zero to five years had more expensive dental visits during the shutdown period.

Trends in dental visits during the state of emergency for COVID-19 in Japan: a retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine national medium-term trends in dental visits during three COVID-19 emergency declaration periods in Japan and to analyse how these trends varied according to prefectural emergency measures and COVID-19 incidence. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective observational study of Japan's dental claims from January 2017 to December 2021. DATA SOURCES: Data from a monthly report by the Health Insurance Claims Review and Reimbursement Services (HICRRS) in Japan. HICRRS handles the claims of employer-based health insurance. DATA ANALYSIS: We determined the number of monthly dental claims nationwide from January 2017 to December 2021 and the percentage change in the number of monthly dental claims based on the difference in the COVID-19 alert level between the three emergency declaration periods in 2020-2021 and the corresponding periods in 2019. Results were analysed using descriptive statistics, multiple regression model, graphical figures, and narrative synthesis. OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome was the change in the number of dental visits between the emergency declaration periods in 2020-2021 and the corresponding periods in 2019. We also assessed the difference in the number of dental visits based on the COVID-19 alert level. RESULTS: The data set included a total of 736 946 088 dental claims. Until the end of 2021, the greatest decrease in monthly dental claims was in April 2020, which was 22.3% lower than that in April 2019. As indicated by the coefficient in the regression model, the percentage change in monthly dental claims decreased by 5.01% (95% CI -8.27 to -1.74) depending on the difference between the prefectures designated as being under special precautions and other prefectures. CONCLUSIONS: The decrease in dental visits was greater during the first state of emergency, ie, April-May 2020, and in prefectures designated as being under special precautions. Further efforts to promote appropriate dental visits at different alert levels are necessary.

Hospitalizations and Mortality From Non-SARS-CoV-2 Causes Among Medicare Beneficiaries at US Hospitals During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic.

Importance: The increased hospital mortality rates from non-SARS-CoV-2 causes during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic are incompletely characterized. Objective: To describe changes in mortality rates after hospitalization for non-SARS-CoV-2 conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic and how mortality varies by characteristics of the admission and hospital. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study from January 2019 through September 2021 using 100% of national Medicare claims, including 4626 US hospitals. Participants included 8 448 758 individuals with non-COVID-19 medical admissions with fee-for-service Medicare insurance. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcome was mortality in the 30 days after admission with adjusted odds generated from a 3-level (admission, hospital, and county) logistic regression model that included diagnosis, demographic variables, comorbidities, hospital characteristics, and hospital prevalence of SARS-CoV-2. Results: There were 8 448 758 non-SARS-CoV-2 medical admissions in 2019 and from April 2020 to September 2021 (mean [SD] age, 73.66 [12.88] years; 52.82% women; 821 569 [11.87%] Black, 438 453 [6.34%] Hispanic, 5 351 956 [77.35%] White, and 307 218 [4.44%] categorized as other). Mortality in the 30 days after admission increased from 9.43% in 2019 to 11.48% from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021 (odds ratio [OR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.19-1.21) in multilevel logistic regression analyses including admission and hospital characteristics. The increase in mortality was maintained throughout the first 18 months of the pandemic and varied by race and ethnicity (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.23-1.30 for Black enrollees; OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.23-1.27 for Hispanic enrollees; and OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.17-1.19 for White enrollees); Medicaid eligibility (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.24-1.27 for Medicaid eligible vs OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.16-1.18 for noneligible); and hospital quality score, measured on a scale of 1 to 5 stars with 1 being the worst and 5 being the best (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.22-1.31 for 1 star vs OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.08-1.15 for 5 stars). Greater hospital prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was associated with greater increases in odds of death from the prepandemic period to the pandemic period; for example, comparing mortality in October through December 2020 with October through December 2019, the OR was 1.44 (95% CI, 1.39-1.49) for hospitals in the top quartile of SARS-CoV-2 admissions vs an OR of 1.19 (95% CI, 1.16-1.22) for admissions to hospitals in the lowest quartile. This association was mostly limited to admissions with high-severity diagnoses. Conclusions and Relevance: The prolonged elevation in mortality rates after hospital admission in 2020 and 2021 for non-SARS-CoV-2 diagnoses contrasts with reports of improvement in hospital mortality during 2020 for SARS-CoV-2. The results of this cohort study suggest that, with the continued impact of SARS-CoV-2, it is important to implement interventions to improve access to high-quality hospital care for those with non-SARS-CoV-2 diseases.

Substitution of Nonpharmacologic Therapy With Opioid Prescribing for Pain During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: During the pandemic, access to medical care unrelated to COVID-19 was limited because of concerns about viral spread and corresponding policies. It is critical to assess how these conditions affected modes of pain treatment, given the addiction risks of prescription opioids. Objective: To assess the trends in opioid prescription and nonpharmacologic therapy (ie, physical therapy and complementary medicine) for pain management during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 compared with the patterns in 2019. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, cross-sectional study used weekly claims data from 24 million US patients in a nationwide commercial insurance database (Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database) from January 1, 2019, to September 31, 2020. Among patients with diagnoses of limb, extremity, or joint pain, back pain, and neck pain for each week, patterns of treatment use were identified and evaluated. Data analysis was performed from April 1, 2021, to September 31, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes of interest were weekly rates of opioid prescriptions, the strength and duration of related opioid prescriptions, and the use of nonpharmacologic therapy. Transition rates between different treatment options before the outbreak and during the early months of the pandemic were also assessed. Results: A total of 21 430 339 patients (mean [SD] age, 48.6 [24.0] years; 10 960 507 [51.1%] female; 909 061 [4.2%] Asian, 1 688 690 [7.9%] Black, 2 276 075 [10.6%] Hispanic, 11 192 789 [52.2%] White, and 5 363 724 [25.0%] unknown) were enrolled during the first 3 quarters in 2019 and 20 759 788 (mean [SD] age, 47.0 [23.8] years; 10 695 690 [51.5%] female; 798 037 [3.8%] Asian; 1 508 023 [7.3%] Black, 1 976 248 [9.5%] Hispanic, 10 059 597 [48.5%] White, and 6 417 883 [30.9%] unknown) in the first 3 quarters of 2020. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the proportion of patients receiving a pain diagnosis was smaller than that for the same period in 2019 (mean difference, -15.9%; 95% CI, -16.1% to -15.8%). Patients with pain were more likely to receive opioids (mean difference, 3.5%; 95% CI, 3.3%-3.7%) and less likely to receive nonpharmacologic therapy (mean difference, -6.0%; 95% CI, -6.3% to -5.8%), and opioid prescriptions were longer and more potent during the early pandemic in 2020 relative to 2019 (mean difference, 1.07 days; 95% CI, 1.02-1.17 days; mean difference, 0.96 morphine milligram equivalents; 95% CI, 0.76-1.20). Analysis of individuals' transitions between treatment options for pain found that patients were more likely to transition out of nonpharmacologic therapy, replacing it with opioid prescriptions for pain management during the COVID-19 pandemic than in the year before. Conclusions and Relevance: Nonpharmacologic therapy is a benign treatment for pain often recommended instead of opioid therapy. The decrease in nonpharmacologic therapy and increase in opioid prescription during the COVID-19 pandemic found in this cross-sectional study, especially given longer days of prescription and more potent doses, may exacerbate the US opioid epidemic. These findings suggest that it is imperative to investigate the implications of limited medical access on treatment substitution, which may increase patient risk, and implement policies and guidelines to prevent those substitutions.

The Association between Noninfectious Uveitis and Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outcomes: An Analysis of United States Claims-Based Data.

PURPOSE: To identify if noninfectious uveitis (NIU) is associated with a greater risk of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection, hospitalization, and death. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study from January 20, 2020 to December 31, 2020, using a national claims-based database. PARTICIPANTS: Enrollees who had continuous enrollment with both medical and pharmacy coverage for 3 years before January 20, 2020. Patients with an NIU diagnosis within 3 years of the start of the study were included in the NIU cohort. Those with infectious uveitis codes or new NIU diagnoses during the risk period were excluded. METHODS: Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify unadjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and adjusted HRs for all covariates for each outcome measure. Adjusted models accounted for patient demographics, health status, and immunosuppressive medication use during the risk period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of COVID-19 infection, COVID-19-related hospitalization, and COVID-19-related in-hospital death identified with International Classification of Disease 10th revision codes. RESULTS: This study included 5 806 227 patients, of whom 29 869 (0.5%) had a diagnosis of NIU. On unadjusted analysis, patients with NIU had a higher rate of COVID-19 infection (5.7% vs. 4.5%, P < 0.001), COVID-19-related hospitalization (1.2% vs. 0.6%, P < 0.001), and COVID-19-related death (0.3% vs. 0.1%, P < 0.001). However, in adjusted models, NIU was not associated with a greater risk of COVID-19 infection (HR, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.10; P = 0.04), hospitalization (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.88-1.09; P = 0.67), or death (HR, 0.90, 95% CI, 0.72-1.13, P = 0.37). Use of systemic corticosteroids was significantly associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and death. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with NIU were significantly more likely to be infected with COVID-19 and experience severe disease outcomes. However, this association was due to the demographics, comorbidities, and medications of patients with NIU, rather than NIU alone. Patients using systemic corticosteroids were significantly more likely to be infected with COVID-19 and were at greater risk of hospitalization and in-hospital death. Additional investigation is necessary to identify the impact of corticosteroid exposure on COVID-19-related outcomes.

Hospitalisations for emergency-sensitive conditions in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic: insights from the German-wide Helios hospital network.

BACKGROUND: While there are numerous reports that describe emergency care during the early COVID-19 pandemic, there is scarcity of data for later stages. This study analyses hospitalisation rates for 37 emergency-sensitive conditions in the largest German-wide hospital network during different pandemic phases. METHODS: Using claims data of 80 hospitals, consecutive cases between 1 January and 17 November 2020 were analysed and compared with a corresponding period in 2019. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) comparing the two periods were calculated using Poisson regression to model the number of hospitalisations per day. RESULTS: There was a reduction in hospitalisations between 12 March and 13 June 2020 (coinciding with the first pandemic wave) with 32 807 hospitalisations (349.0/day) as opposed to 39 379 (419.0/day) in 2019 (IRR 0.83, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.85, p<0.01). During the following period (14 June-17 November 2020, including the start of second wave), hospitalisations were reduced from 63 799 (406.4/day) in 2019 to 59 910 (381.6/day) in 2020, but this reduction was not as pronounced (IRR 0.94, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.95, p<0.01). During the first wave hospitalisations for acute myocardial infarction, aortic aneurysm/dissection, pneumonitis, paralytic ileus/intestinal obstruction and pulmonary embolism declined but subsequently increased compared with the corresponding periods in 2019. In contrast, hospitalisations for sepsis, pneumonia, obstructive pulmonary disease and intracranial injuries were reduced during the entire observation period. CONCLUSIONS: There was an overall reduction of absolute hospitalisations for emergency-sensitive conditions in Germany during the first 10 months of the COVID-19 pandemic with heterogeneous effects on different disease categories. The increase in hospitalisations for acute myocardial infarction, aortic aneurysm/dissection and pulmonary embolism requires attention and further studies.

Healthcare Resource Use in Patients with Immune-Mediated Conditions Treated with Targeted Immunomodulators During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective Claims Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on routine medical care may result in altered healthcare resource use in patients with immune-mediated conditions. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of treatment interruptions in patients with and without COVID-19 infections who were treated with targeted immunomodulators (TIMs) in the USA. METHODS: Data from the IBM® MarketScan® Research Databases were analyzed in patients with immune-mediated conditions from January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2020. Healthcare resource use (HCRU) including hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, in-person outpatient visits, and respiratory outcomes was assessed in a cohort of patients without COVID-19 who had uninterrupted versus interrupted TIM use. The impact of treatment interruption on HCRU and respiratory outcomes was also evaluated in a cohort of patients with COVID-19. Results from adjusted logistic regression were reported as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Approximately 25% of patients in both the COVID-19 (N = 787) and non-COVID-19 cohorts (N = 77,178) experienced interruptions in TIM therapy. In the non-COVID-19 cohort, the likelihood of being hospitalized was 20% less in patients with uninterrupted versus interrupted TIM use (aOR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.71-0.90). Patients with uninterrupted TIM use had a similar likelihood of an ED visit (aOR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.91-1.08) and respiratory outcome (aOR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.71-1.31) versus patients with interrupted TIM use. The likelihood of having an in-person outpatient visit was 87% greater in patients with uninterrupted versus interrupted TIM use (aOR = 1.87, 95% CI 1.81-1.94). Similar findings were observed in the COVID-19 cohort. CONCLUSION: This analysis of real-world claims data showed that uninterrupted TIM use was not associated with an increased likelihood of hospitalizations, ED visits, or negative respiratory outcomes compared to interrupted TIM use among patients with immune-mediated conditions, regardless of COVID-19 diagnosis.

Socioeconomic disparities in Korea by health insurance type during the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide study.

OBJECTIVES: This study explored socioeconomic disparities in Korea using health insurance type as a proxy during the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using Korea's nationwide healthcare database, which contained all individuals who received a diagnostic test for COVID-19 (n=232,390) as of May 15, 2020. We classified our cohort by health insurance type into beneficiaries of the National Health Insurance (NHI) or Medicaid programs. Our study outcomes were infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and COVID-19-related outcomes, a composite of all-cause death, intensive care unit admission, and mechanical ventilation use. We estimated age-, sex-, and Charlson comorbidity index score-adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 218,070 NHI and 14,320 Medicaid beneficiaries who received COVID-19 tests, 7,777 and 738 tested positive, respectively. The Medicaid beneficiaries were older (mean age, 57.5 vs. 47.8 years), more likely to be males (47.2 vs. 40.2%), and had a higher comorbidity burden (mean CCI, 2.0 vs. 1.7) than NHI beneficiaries. Compared to NHI beneficiaries, Medicaid beneficiaries had a 22% increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (aOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.38), but had no significantly elevated risk of COVID-19-related outcomes (aOR 1.10, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.57); the individual events of the composite outcome yielded similar findings. CONCLUSIONS: As socioeconomic factors, with health insurance as a proxy, could serve as determinants during the current pandemic, pre-emptive support is needed for high-risk groups to slow its spread.

Real-World Evidence for Assessing Pharmaceutical Treatments in the Context of COVID-19.

The emergence and global spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has resulted in an urgent need for evidence on medical interventions and outcomes of the resulting disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating treatments and vaccines for COVID-19 are already in progress, the number of clinical questions of interest greatly outpaces the available resources to conduct RCTs. Therefore, there is growing interest in whether nonrandomized real-world evidence (RWE) can be used to supplement RCT evidence and aid in clinical decision making, but concerns about nonrandomized RWE have been highlighted by a proliferation of RWE studies on medications and COVID-19 outcomes with widely varying conclusions. The objective of this paper is to review some clinical questions of interest, potential data types, challenges, and merits of RWE in COVID-19, resulting in recommendations for nonrandomized RWE designs and analyses based on established RWE principles.

Influence of COVID-19 confinement measures on appendectomies in Germany-a claims data analysis of 9797 patients.

PURPOSE: COVID-19 pandemic had multiple influences on the social, industrial, and medical situation in all affected countries. Measures of obligatory medical confinement were suspensions of scheduled non-emergent surgical procedures and outpatients' clinics as well as overall access restrictions to hospitals and medical practices. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess if the obligatory confinement (lockdown) had an effect on the number of appendectomies (during and after the period of lockdown). METHODS: This retrospective study was based on anonymized nationwide administrative claims data of the German Local General Sickness Fund (AOK). Patients admitted for diseases of the appendix (ICD-10: K35-K38) or abdominal and pelvic pain (ICD-10: R10) who underwent an appendectomy (OPS: 5-470) were included. The study period included 6 weeks of German lockdown (16 March-26 April 2020) as well as 6 weeks before (03 February-15 March 2020) and after (27 April-07 June 2020). These periods were compared to the respective one in 2018 and 2019. RESULTS: The overall number of appendectomies was significantly reduced during the lockdown time in 2020 compared to that in 2018 and 2019. This decrease affects only appendectomies due to acute simple (ICD-10: K35.30, K35.8) and non-acute appendicitis (ICD-10: K36-K38, R10). Numbers for appendectomies in acute complex appendicitis remained unchanged. Female patients and in the age group 1-18 years showed the strongest decrease in number of cases. CONCLUSION: The lockdown in Germany resulted in a decreased number of appendectomies. This affected mainly appendectomies in simple acute and non-acute appendicitis, but not complicated acute appendicitis. The study gives no evidence that the confinement measures resulted in a deterioration of medical care for appendicitis.

Private practice metropolitan telepsychiatry in smaller Australian jurisdictions during the COVID-19 pandemic: preliminary analysis of the introduction of new Medicare Benefits Schedule items.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the smaller Australian state/territory service impact of the introduction of new COVID-19 psychiatrist video and telephone telehealth Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) items. METHOD: MBS item service data were extracted for COVID-19 psychiatrist video and telephone telehealth item numbers corresponding to the pre-existing in-person consultations for the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), Northern Territory (NT), South Australia (SA) and Tasmania. RESULTS: The overall rate of consultations (face-to-face and telehealth) increased during March and April 2020, compared to the monthly face-to-face consultation average, excepting Tasmania. Compared to an annual monthly average of in-person consultations for July 2018-June 2019, total telepsychiatry consultations were higher for April than May. For total video and telephone telehealth consultations combined, video consultations were lower in April and higher in May. As a percentage of combined telehealth and in-person consultations, telehealth was greater for April and lower for May compared to the monthly face-to-face consultation average. CONCLUSIONS: In the smaller states/territories, the private practice workforce rapidly adopted COVID-19 MBS telehealth items, with the majority of psychiatric consultation shifting to telehealth initially, and then returning to face-to-face. With a second wave of COVID-19 in Australia, telehealth is likely to remain a vital part of the national mental health strategy.

Private practice metropolitan telepsychiatry in larger Australian states during the COVID-19 pandemic: an analysis of the first 2 months of new MBS telehealth item psychiatrist services.

OBJECTIVE: Private practice psychiatry in Australia was largely office-based until the Commonwealth Government introduced new psychiatrist Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) telehealth items in response to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigate the uptake of (1) video and telephone telehealth consultations in April-May 2020, and (2) the overall changing rates of consultation, i.e. total telehealth and in-person consultations across the larger states of Australia. METHOD: MBS item service data were extracted for COVID-19 psychiatrist video- and telephone-telehealth item numbers and compared with a baseline of the 2018-2019-financial-year monthly average of in-person consultations for New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, and Western Australia. RESULTS: Total psychiatry consultations (telehealth and in-person) rose during the first wave of the pandemic by 10%-20% compared to the previous year. The majority of private practice was conducted by telehealth in April but was lower in May as new COVID-19 case rates fell. Most telehealth provision was by telephone for short consultations of ⩽15-30 min. Video consultations increased from April into May. CONCLUSIONS: For large states, there has been a rapid adoption of the MBS telehealth psychiatrist items, followed by a trend back to face-to-face as COVID-19 new case rates reduced. There was an overall increased consultation rate (in-person plus telehealth) for April-May 2020.

Analysis of Risk Factors on Readmission Cases of COVID-19 in the Republic of Korea: Using Nationwide Health Claims Data.

In South Korea, 4.5% patients of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were readmitted to hospitals after discharge. However, there is insufficient research on risk factors for readmission and management of patients after discharge is poor. In this study, 7590 confirmed coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients were defined as a target for analysis using nationwide medical claims data. The demographic characteristics, underlying diseases, and the use of medical resources were used to examine the association with readmission through the chi-square test and then logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze factors affecting readmission. Of the 7590 subjects analyzed, 328 patients were readmitted. The readmission rates of men, older age and patients with medical benefits showed a high risk of readmission. The Charlson Comorbidity Index score was also related to COVID-19 readmission. Concerning requiring medical attention, there was a higher risk of readmission for the patients with chest radiographs, computed tomography scans taken and lopinavir/ritonavir at the time of their first admission. Considering the risk factors presented in this study, classifying patients with a high risk of readmission and managing patients before and after discharge based on priority can make patient management and medical resource utilization more efficient. This study also indicates the importance of lifestyle management after discharge.