Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 30
Filter
1.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(3): e221754, 2022 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1733813

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Hospitalization/trends , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Mortality/trends , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , COVID-19/ethnology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Insurance Claim Review , Male , Socioeconomic Factors , United States/epidemiology
2.
JAMA ; 327(3): 237-247, 2022 01 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1669298

ABSTRACT

Importance: Following reductions in US ambulatory care early in the pandemic, it remains unclear whether care consistently returned to expected rates across insurance types and services. Objective: To assess whether patients with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility had significantly lower than expected return to use of ambulatory care rates than patients with commercial, Medicare Advantage, or Medicare fee-for-service insurance. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective cohort study examining ambulatory care service patterns from January 1, 2019, through February 28, 2021, claims data from multiple US payers were combined using the Milliman MedInsight research database. Using a difference-in-differences design, the extent to which utilization during the pandemic differed from expected rates had the pandemic not occurred was estimated. Changes in utilization rates between January and February 2020 and each subsequent 2-month time frame during the pandemic were compared with the changes in the corresponding months from the year prior. Age- and sex-adjusted Poisson regression models of monthly utilization counts were used, offsetting for total patient-months and stratifying by service and insurance type. Exposures: Patients with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility compared with patients with commercial, Medicare Advantage, or Medicare fee-for-service insurance, respectively. Main Outcomes and Measures: Utilization rates per 100 people for 6 services: emergency department, office and urgent care, behavioral health, screening colonoscopies, screening mammograms, and contraception counseling or HIV screening. Results: More than 14.5 million US adults were included (mean age, 52.7 years; 54.9% women). In the March-April 2020 time frame, the combined use of 6 ambulatory services declined to 67.0% (95% CI, 66.9%-67.1%) of expected rates, but returned to 96.7% (95% CI, 96.6%-96.8%) of expected rates by the November-December 2020 time frame. During the second COVID-19 wave in the January-February 2021 time frame, overall utilization again declined to 86.2% (95% CI, 86.1%-86.3%) of expected rates, with colonoscopy remaining at 65.0% (95% CI, 64.1%-65.9%) and mammography at 79.2% (95% CI, 78.5%-79.8%) of expected rates. By the January-February 2021 time frame, overall utilization returned to expected rates as follows: patients with Medicaid at 78.4% (95% CI, 78.2%-78.7%), Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility at 73.3% (95% CI, 72.8%-73.8%), commercial at 90.7% (95% CI, 90.5%-90.9%), Medicare Advantage at 83.2% (95% CI, 81.7%-82.2%), and Medicare fee-for-service at 82.0% (95% CI, 81.7%-82.2%; P < .001; comparing return to expected utilization rates among patients with Medicaid and Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility, respectively, with each of the other insurance types). Conclusions and Relevance: Between March 2020 and February 2021, aggregate use of 6 ambulatory care services increased after the preceding decrease in utilization that followed the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the rate of increase in use of these ambulatory care services was significantly lower for participants with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility than for those insured by commercial, Medicare Advantage, or Medicare fee-for-service.


Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care/trends , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data , Colonoscopy/statistics & numerical data , Colonoscopy/trends , Databases, Factual , Fee-for-Service Plans/statistics & numerical data , Fee-for-Service Plans/trends , Female , Health Services Needs and Demand/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Needs and Demand/trends , Humans , Insurance, Health/statistics & numerical data , Insurance, Health/trends , Male , Mammography/statistics & numerical data , Mammography/trends , Medicaid/statistics & numerical data , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Telemedicine/trends , Time Factors , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
3.
Crit Care Med ; 49(12): 2058-2069, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1528201

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To provide updated information on the burdens of sepsis during acute inpatient admissions for Medicare beneficiaries. DESIGN: Analysis of paid Medicare claims via the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services DataLink Project. SETTING: All U.S. acute-care hospitals, excluding federally operated hospitals (Veterans Administration and Defense Health Agency). PATIENTS: All Medicare beneficiaries, January 2012-February 2020, with an explicit sepsis diagnostic code assigned during an inpatient admission. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The count of Medicare Part A/B (fee-for-service) plus Medicare Advantage inpatient sepsis admissions rose from 981,027 (CY2012) to 1,700,433 (CY 2019). The proportion of total admissions with sepsis in the Medicare Advantage population rose from 21.43% to 35.39%, reflecting the increasing beneficiary proportion enrolled in Medicare Advantage. In CY2019, 6-month mortality rates in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries for sepsis continued to decline, but remained high: 59.9% for septic shock, 35.5% for severe sepsis, 30.8% for sepsis attributed to a specific organism, and 26.5% for unspecified sepsis. Total fee-for-service-only inpatient hospital costs rose from $17.79B (CY2012) to $22.98B (CY2019). We estimated that the aggregate cost of sepsis hospital care for the entire U.S. population was at least $57.47B in 2019. Inclusion of 14 months' (January 2019-February 2020) newer data exposed new trends: the cost per patient, number of admissions, and fraction of patients with sepsis labeled as present on admission inflected around November 2015, coincident with the change to International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition, and introduction of the Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) metric. CONCLUSIONS: Sepsis among Medicare beneficiaries precoronavirus disease 2019 imposed immense burdens upon patients, their families, and the taxpayers.


Subject(s)
Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Sepsis/diagnosis , Fee-for-Service Plans/economics , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Sepsis/economics , Sepsis/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology
4.
Lancet ; 397(10279): 1127-1138, 2021 03 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525996

ABSTRACT

In 2010, the US health insurance system underwent one of its most substantial transformations with the passage of the Affordable Care Act, which increased coverage for millions of people in the USA, including those with and at risk of HIV. Even so, the system of HIV care and prevention services in the USA is a complex patchwork of payers, providers, and financing mechanisms. People with HIV are primarily covered by Medicaid, Medicare, private insurance, or a combination of these; many get care through other programmes, particularly the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program, which serves as the nation's safety net for people with HIV who remain uninsured or underinsured but offers modest to no support for prevention services. While uninsurance has drastically declined over the past decade, the USA trails other high-income countries in key HIV-specific metrics, including rates of viral suppression. In this paper in the Series, we provide an overview of the coverage and financing landscape for HIV treatment and prevention in the USA, discuss how the Affordable Care Act has changed the domestic health-care system, examine the major programmes that provide coverage and services, and identify remaining challenges.


Subject(s)
Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/epidemiology , COVID-19/economics , HIV Infections/drug therapy , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Insurance Coverage/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance, Health/legislation & jurisprudence , Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Anti-Retroviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Female , Gender Identity , HIV Infections/economics , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Male , Medicaid/statistics & numerical data , Medically Uninsured/statistics & numerical data , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , United States/epidemiology
6.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 69(12): 3358-3364, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1440772

ABSTRACT

The current policy environment for rehabilitation in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) is complex and dynamic, and SNFs are facing the dual challenges of recent Medicare payment policy change that disproportionately impacts rehabilitation for older adults and the COVID-19 pandemic. This article introduces an adapted framework based on Donabedian's model for evaluating quality of care and applies it to decades of Medicare payment policy to provide a historical view of how payment policy changes have impacted rehabilitation processes and patient outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries in SNFs. This review demonstrates how SNF responses to Medicare payment policy have historically varied based on organizational factors, highlighting the importance of considering such organizational factors in monitoring policy response and patient outcomes. This historical perspective underscores the mixed success of previous Medicare policies impacting rehabilitation and patient outcomes for older adults receiving care in SNFs and can help in predicting SNF industry response to current and future Medicare policy changes.


Subject(s)
Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Prospective Payment System/legislation & jurisprudence , Rehabilitation/economics , Skilled Nursing Facilities/economics , Skilled Nursing Facilities/organization & administration , Aged , COVID-19 , Humans , Medicare/legislation & jurisprudence , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
8.
Ophthalmology ; 129(1): 15-25, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1412002

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To identify disparities in the use of telemedicine during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study of completed clinical encounters in an academic ophthalmology center from March 2020 through August 2020. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 5023 patients comprising 8116 ophthalmic clinical encounters. METHODS: Medical charts were abstracted for demographic information. We identified zip code-level socioeconomic characteristics, which were drawn from the 2019 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The completion of a synchronous video encounter, the completion of a telephone (audio-only) encounter in the absence of any video encounters, or the completion of in-person encounters only. RESULTS: During the study period, 8116 total clinical encounters were completed for 5023 unique patients. Of these patients, 446 (8.9%) participated in a video encounter, 642 (12.8%) completed a telephone encounter, and 3935 (78.3%) attended clinical appointments in person only. In adjusted analysis, patients who were Black (odds ratio [OR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-0.80; P < 0.001) or Hispanic/Latino (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.85; P = 0.002) were significantly less likely to complete a video or telephone appointment. Older patients (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-0.99; P < 0.001), patients whose primary language was not English (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.28-0.82; P = 0.01), Black patients (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.32-0.62; P < 0.001), and Hispanic/Latino patients (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37-0.83; P = 0.005) were significantly less likely to complete a video encounter. Finally, among patients completing any type of telemedicine encounter, older age, (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P < 0.001), Medicare insurance (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.11-2.17; P = 0.01), and Black race (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.33-2.94; P < 0.001) were associated with using only phone visits. CONCLUSIONS: Ethnic/racial minorities, older patients, and non-English-speaking individuals were significantly less likely to complete a video telehealth encounter. With the expansion of telemedicine and the need to reduce the disparate impact of COVID-19 on minorities, it will be increasingly important to identify barriers to telehealth use and opportunities to improve access.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Ophthalmology/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Appointments and Schedules , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Minority Groups/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Telephone , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
9.
Cancer ; 127(21): 4072-4080, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1320064

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to spread, it remains unclear how vulnerable populations with preexisting health conditions like cancer have been affected. METHODS: Between July and September of 2020, the authors conducted a cross-sectional study that surveyed 2661 patients with breast cancer who were registered in the Chicago Multiethnic Epidemiologic Breast Cancer Cohort and received 1300 responses (71.5% White patients and 22.4% Black patients). The survey measured the psychosocial well-being of participants before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and examined whether they experienced any type of financial challenges or treatment disruption. RESULTS: The results indicated that feelings of isolation increased significantly during the pandemic. Meanwhile, the overall median isolation/stress score was 1.2 on a scale from 0 (never) to 4 (always), which was not significantly different between White patients and Black patients. One-third of patients experienced some type of financial challenge during this time. Medicaid recipients, of whom almost 80% were Black, were more likely to experience financial challenges. In addition, approximately one-fourth of patients experienced difficulty getting treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that the quality of life of patients with breast cancer and their scheduled treatments have been adversely affected during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings suggest that more support should be provided by hospital centers and the medical research community to patients with cancer during this challenging pandemic. LAY SUMMARY: The authors surveyed patients with breast cancer in Chicago using a questionnaire to examine how their lives have been affected during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The results indicate that the lives of patients with breast cancer and their scheduled treatments have been adversely affected during the pandemic. In addition, patients who were covered by Medicaid, most of whom were Black, were more likely to experience financial challenges. The findings suggest that hospital centers and the medical research community should reach out and provide more information to support patients with cancer during this challenging pandemic.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Quality of Life , Withholding Treatment , Aged , /statistics & numerical data , Breast Neoplasms/ethnology , Chicago/epidemiology , Chicago/ethnology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Financial Stress/epidemiology , Financial Stress/ethnology , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Health Surveys/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/ethnology , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Prevalence , Social Isolation/psychology , United States , /statistics & numerical data
10.
Prev Chronic Dis ; 18: E65, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1291281

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Telehealth plays a role in the continuum of care, especially for older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our objective was to examine factors associated with the accessibility of telehealth services during the COVID-19 pandemic among older adults. METHODS: We analyzed the nationally representative Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey COVID-19 Rapid Response Supplement Questionnaire of beneficiaries aged 65 years or older. Two weighted multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine associations between usual providers who offered telehealth 1) during the COVID-19 pandemic and 2) to replace a regularly scheduled appointment. We examined factors including sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, and digital access and literacy. RESULTS: Of the beneficiaries (n = 6,172, weighted n = 32.4 million), 81.2% reported that their usual providers offered telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Among those offered telehealth services, 56.8% reported that their usual providers offered telehealth to replace a regularly scheduled appointment. Disparities in accessibility of telehealth services by sex, residing area (metropolitan vs nonmetropolitan), income level, and US Census region were observed. Beneficiaries who reported having internet access (vs no access) (OR, 1.75, P < .001) and who reported ever having participated in video, voice, or conference calls over the internet before (vs not) (OR, 2.18, P < .001) were more likely to report having access to telehealth. Non-Hispanic Black beneficiaries (versus White) (OR, 1.57, P = .007) and beneficiaries with comorbidities (vs none) (eg, 2 or 3 comorbidities, OR, 1.25, 95% P = .044) were more likely to have their usual provider offer telehealth to replace a regularly scheduled appointment. CONCLUSION: Although accessibility of telehealth has increased, inequities raise concern. Educational outreach and training, such as installing and launching an online web conferencing platform, should be considered for improving accessibility of telehealth to vulnerable populations beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Services Accessibility , Healthcare Disparities , Infection Control/methods , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Telemedicine , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Comorbidity , Cross-Sectional Studies , Demography , Female , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/ethnology , Healthcare Disparities/organization & administration , Humans , Internet Access/statistics & numerical data , Male , Needs Assessment , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors , Telemedicine/methods , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology
13.
Clin Transl Sci ; 14(5): 1799-1809, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1160763

ABSTRACT

Drug safety is generally established from clinical trials, by pharmacovigilance programs and during observational phase IV safety studies according to drug intended or approved indications. The objective of this study was to estimate the risk of potential adverse drug events (ADEs) associated with drugs repurposed for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment in a large-scale population. Drug claims were used to calculate a baseline medication risk score (MRS) indicative of ADE risk level. Fictitious claims of repurposed drugs were added, one at a time, to patients' drug regimens to calculate a new MRS and compute a level of risk. Drug claims data from enrollees with Regence health insurance were used and sub-payer analyses were performed with Medicare and commercial insured groups. Simulated interventions were conducted with hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, alone or combined with azithromycin, and lopinavir/ritonavir, along with terfenadine and fexofenadine as positive and negative controls for drug-induced Long QT Syndrome (LQTS). There were 527,471 subjects (56.6% women; mean [SD] age, 47 years [21]) were studied. The simulated addition of each repurposed drug caused an increased risk of ADEs (median MRS increased by two-to-seven points, p < 0.001). The increase in ADE risk was mainly driven by an increase in CYP450 drug interaction risk score and by drug-induced LQTS risk score. The Medicare group presented a greater risk overall compared to the commercial group. All repurposed drugs were associated with an increased risk of ADEs. Our simulation strategy could be used as a blueprint to preemptively assess safety associated with future repurposed or new drugs.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/drug therapy , Drug Repositioning , Long QT Syndrome/epidemiology , Administrative Claims, Healthcare/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Antiviral Agents/pharmacokinetics , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , Child , Child, Preschool , Computer Simulation , Cytochrome P-450 Enzyme System/metabolism , Drug Interactions , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Long QT Syndrome/chemically induced , Male , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Pharmacovigilance , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Assessment/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
14.
J Infect Dis ; 223(6): 945-956, 2021 03 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1155781

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The current study was performed to evaluate risk factors for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries during the pandemic's early phase. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study covering Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, we separated out elderly residents in nursing homes (NHs) and those with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) from the primary study population of individuals age ≥65 years. Outcomes included COVID-19 hospital encounters and COVID-19-associated deaths. We estimated adjusted odds ratios (ORs) using logistic regression. RESULTS: We analyzed 25 333 329 elderly non-NH beneficiaries without ESRD, 653 966 elderly NH residents, and 292 302 patients with ESRD. COVID-related death rates (per 10 000) were much higher among elderly NH residents (275.7) and patients with ESRD (60.8) than in the primary study population (5.0). Regression-adjusted clinical predictors of death among the primary population included immunocompromised status (OR, 1.43), frailty index conditions such as cognitive impairment (3.16), and other comorbid conditions, including congestive heart failure (1.30). Demographic-related risk factors included male sex (OR, 1.77), older age (3.09 for 80- vs 65-year-olds), Medicaid dual-eligibility status (2.17), and racial/ethnic minority. Compared with whites, ORs were higher for blacks (2.47), Hispanics (3.11), and Native Americans (5.82). Results for COVID-19 hospital encounters were consistent. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty, comorbid conditions, and race/ethnicity were strong risk factors for COVID-19 hospitalization and death among the US elderly.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Minority Groups , Nursing Homes , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Severity of Illness Index , United States/epidemiology
15.
West J Emerg Med ; 22(2): 234-243, 2021 Feb 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1143753

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: To describe the impact of COVID-19 on a large, urban emergency department (ED) in Los Angeles, California, we sought to estimate the effect of the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) and "safer-at-home" declaration on ED visits, patient demographics, and diagnosis-mix compared to prior years. METHODS: We used descriptive statistics to compare ED volume and rates of admission for patients presenting to the ED between January and early May of 2018, 2019, and 2020. RESULTS: Immediately after California's "safer-at-home" declaration, ED utilization dropped by 11,000 visits (37%) compared to the same nine weeks in prior years. The drop affected patients regardless of acuity, demographics, or diagnosis. Reductions were observed in the number of patients reporting symptoms often associated with COVID-19 and all other complaints. After the declaration, higher acuity, older, male, Black, uninsured or non-Medicaid, publicly insured, accounted for a disproportionate share of utilization. CONCLUSION: We show an abrupt, discontinuous impact of COVID-19 on ED utilization with a slow return as safer-at-home orders have lifted. It is imperative to determine how this reduction will impact patient outcomes, disease control, and the health of the community in the medium and long terms.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Age Distribution , Communicable Disease Control , Female , Humans , Los Angeles/epidemiology , Male , Medicaid/statistics & numerical data , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Patient Acuity , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Sex Distribution , United States/epidemiology , Urban Population
17.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(7): 245-249, 2021 Feb 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1089243

ABSTRACT

On March 13, 2020, the United States declared a national emergency concerning the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak (1). In response, many state and local governments issued shelter-in-place or stay-at-home orders, restricting nonessential activities outside residents' homes (2). CDC initially issued guidance recommending postponing routine adult vaccinations, which was later revised to recommend continuing to administer routine adult vaccines (3). In addition, factors such as disrupted operations of health care facilities and safety concerns regarding exposure to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, resulted in delay or avoidance of routine medical care (4), likely further affecting delivery of routine adult vaccinations. Medicare enrollment and claims data of Parts A (hospital insurance), B (medical insurance), and D (prescription drug insurance) were examined to assess the change in receipt of routine adult vaccines during the pandemic. Weekly receipt of four vaccines (13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine [PCV13], 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine [PPSV23], tetanus-diphtheria or tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccine [Td/Tdap], and recombinant zoster vaccine [RZV]) by Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years during January 5-July 18, 2020, was compared with that during January 6-July 20, 2019, for the total study sample and by race and ethnicity. Overall, weekly administration rates of the four examined vaccines declined by up to 89% after the national emergency declaration in mid-March (1) compared with those during the corresponding period in 2019. During the first week following the national emergency declaration, the weekly vaccination rates were 25%-62% lower than those during the corresponding week in 2019. After reaching their nadirs of 70%-89% below 2019 rates in the second to third week of April 2020, weekly vaccination rates gradually began to recover through mid-July, but by the last study week were still lower than were those during the corresponding period in 2019, with the exception of PPSV23. Vaccination declined sharply for all vaccines studied, overall and across all racial and ethnic groups. While the pandemic continues, vaccination providers should emphasize to patients the importance of continuing to receive routine vaccinations and provide reassurance by explaining the procedures in place to ensure patient safety (3).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccines/administration & dosage , Aged , Humans , United States/epidemiology
18.
J Intensive Care Med ; 36(3): 271-276, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1067075

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The United States currently has more confirmed cases of COVID-19 than any other country in the world. Given the variability in COVID-19 testing and prevention capability, identifying factors associated with mortality in patients requiring mechanical ventilation is critical. This study aimed to identify which demographics, comorbidities, markers of disease progression, and interventions are associated with 30-day mortality in COVID-19 patients requiring mechanical ventilation. METHODS: Adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 admitted to one of the health system's intensive care units and requiring mechanical ventilation between March 9, 2020 and April 1, 2020, were included in this observational cohort study. We used Chi-Square and Mann-Whitney U tests to compare patient characteristics between deceased and living patients and multiple logistic regression to assess the association between independent variables and the likelihood of 30-day mortality. RESULTS: We included 85 patients, of which 20 died (23.5%) within 30 days of the first hospital admission. In the univariate analysis, deceased patients were more likely ≥60 years of age (p < 0.001), non-Hispanic (p = 0.026), and diagnosed with a solid malignant tumor (p = 0.003). Insurance status also differed between survivors and non-survivors (p = 0.019). Age ≥60 and malignancy had a 9.5-fold (95% confidence interval 1.4-62.3, p = 0.020) and 5.8-fold higher odds ratio (95% confidence interval 1.2-28.4, p = 0.032) for 30-day mortality after adjusted analysis using multivariable logistic regression, while other independent variables were no longer significant. CONCLUSIONS: In our observational cohort study of 85 mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients, age, and a diagnosis of a solid malignant tumor were associated with 30-day mortality. Our findings validate concerns for the survival of elderly and cancer patients in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, where testing capabilities and preventative measures have been inconsistent. Preventative efforts geared to patients at risk for intensive care unit mortality from COVID-19 should be explored.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Insurance, Health/statistics & numerical data , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Respiration, Artificial , African Americans/statistics & numerical data , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Managed Care Programs/statistics & numerical data , Medicaid/statistics & numerical data , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Mortality , Multivariate Analysis , Odds Ratio , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology , /statistics & numerical data
20.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 40(1): 146-155, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1007110

ABSTRACT

Medicare's Skilled Nursing Facility Value-Based Purchasing Program, which awards value-based incentive payments based on hospital readmissions, distributed its first two rounds of incentives during fiscal years 2019 and 2020. Incentive payments were based on achievement or improvement scores-whichever was better. Incentive payments were as low as -2.0 percent in both program years and as high as +1.6 percent in FY 2019 and +3.1 percent in FY 2020. In FY 2019, 26 percent of facilities earned positive incentives and 72 percent earned negative incentives, compared with 19 percent positive and 65 percent negative incentives in FY 2020. Larger, rural, and not-for-profit facilities were more likely to earn positive incentives, as were those with the highest registered nurse staffing levels. Although these findings indicate the potential to reward high-quality care at skilled nursing facilities, intended and unintended outcomes of this new value-based purchasing program should be monitored closely for possible program refinements, particularly in light of the disproportionate impacts of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on nursing facilities.


Subject(s)
Medicare , Motivation , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , Skilled Nursing Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Value-Based Purchasing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Humans , Medicare/economics , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Quality of Health Care/standards , Skilled Nursing Facilities/economics , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL