Measuring Racial Inequities In The Quality Of Care Across Oncology Practices In The US.

Racial inequities in clinical performance diminish overall health care system performance; however, quality assessments have rarely incorporated reliable measures of racial inequities. We studied care for more than one million Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with cancer to assess the feasibility of calculating reliable practice-level measures of racial inequities in chemotherapy-associated emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations. Specifically, we used hierarchical models to estimate adjusted practice-level Black-White differences in these events and described differences across practices. We calculated reliable inequity measures for 426 and 322 practices, depending on the measure. These practices reflected fewer than 10 percent of practices treating Medicare beneficiaries with chemotherapy, but they treated approximately half of all White and Black Medicare beneficiaries receiving chemotherapy and two-thirds of Black Medicare beneficiaries receiving chemotherapy. Black patients experienced chemotherapy-associated ED visits and hospitalizations at higher rates (54.2 percent and 35.8 percent, respectively) than White patients (45.7 percent and 31.9 percent, respectively). The median within-practice Black-White difference was 8.1 percentage points for chemotherapy-associated ED visits and 2.7 percentage points for chemotherapy-associated hospitalizations. Additional research is needed to identify other reliable measures of racial inequities in health care quality, measure care inequities in smaller practices, and assess whether providing practice-level feedback could improve equity.

Association Between Clinical Practice Group Adherence to Quality Measures and Adverse Outcomes Among Adult Patients With Diabetes.

Importance: Clinical practice group performance on quality measures associated with chronic disease management has become central to reimbursement. Therefore, it is important to determine whether commonly used process and disease control measures for chronic conditions correlate with utilization-based outcomes, as they do in acute disease. Objective: To examine the associations among clinical practice group performance on diabetes quality measures, including process measures, disease control measures, and utilization-based outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, cross-sectional analysis examined commercial claims data from a national health insurance plan. A cohort of eligible beneficiaries with diabetes aged 18 to 65 years who were enrolled for at least 12 months from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2014, was defined. Eligible beneficiaries were attributed to a clinical practice group based on the plurality of their primary care or endocrinology office visits. Data were analyzed from October 1, 2018, through April 30, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: For each clinical practice group, performance on current diabetes quality measures included 3 process measures (2 testing measures [hemoglobin A1c {HbA1c} and low-density lipoprotein {LDL} testing] and 1 drug use measure [statin use]) and 2 disease control measures (HbA1c <8% and LDL level <100 mg/dL). The rates of utilization-based outcomes, including hospitalization for diabetes and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), were also measured. Results: In this cohort of 652 258 beneficiaries with diabetes from 886 clinical practice groups, 42.9% were aged 51 to 60 years, and 52.6% were men. Beneficiaries lived in areas that were predominantly white (68.1%). At the clinical practice group level, except for high correlation between the 2 testing measures, correlations among different quality measures were weak (r range, 0.010-0.244). Rate of HbA1c of less than 8% had the strongest correlation with hospitalization for MACE (r = -0.046; P = .03) and diabetes (r = -0.109; P < .001). Rates of HbA1c control at the clinical practice group level were not significantly associated with likelihood of hospitalization at the individual level. Performance on the process and disease control measures together explained 3.9% of the variation in the likelihood of hospitalization for a MACE or diabetes at the individual level. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, performance on utilization-based measures-intended to reflect the quality of chronic disease management-was only weakly associated with direct measures of chronic disease management, namely, disease control measures. This correlation should be considered when determining the degree of financial emphasis to place on hospitalization rates as a measure of quality in treatment of chronic diseases.

National Rates of Initiation and Intensification of Antidiabetic Therapy Among Patients With Commercial Insurance.

OBJECTIVE: Prompt initiation and intensification of antidiabetic therapy can delay or prevent complications from diabetes. We sought to understand the rates of and factors associated with the initiation and intensification of antidiabetic therapy among commercially insured patients in the U.S. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Using 2008-2015 commercial claims linked with laboratory and pharmacy data, we created an initiation cohort with no prior antidiabetic drug use and an HbA1c ≥8% (64 mmol/mol) and an intensification cohort of patients with an HbA1c ≥8% (64 mmol/mol) who were on a stable dose of one noninsulin diabetes drug. Using multivariable logistic regression, we determined the rates of and factors associated with initiation and intensification. In addition, we determined the percent of variation in treatment patterns explained by measurable patient factors. RESULTS: In the initiation cohort (n = 9,799), 63% of patients received an antidiabetic drug within 6 months of the elevated HbA1c test. In the intensification cohort (n = 10,941), 82% had their existing antidiabetic therapy intensified within 6 months of the elevated HbA1c test. Higher HbA1c levels, lower generic drug copayments, and more frequent office visits were associated with higher rates of both initiation and intensification. Better patient adherence prior to the elevated HbA1c level, existing therapy with a second-generation antidiabetic drug, and lower doses of existing therapy were also associated with intensification. Patient factors explained 7.96% of the variation in initiation and 7.35% of the variation in intensification. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately two-thirds of patients were newly initiated on antidiabetic therapy, and four-fifths of those already receiving antidiabetic therapy had it intensified within 6 months of an elevated HbA1c in a commercially insured population. Patient factors explain 7-8% of the variation in diabetes treatment patterns.