Cancer Incidence After Diagnosis of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm-Brief Report.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological and mechanistic data support a potential causal link between cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer. Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) represent a common form of CVD with at least partially distinct genetic and biologic pathogenesis from other forms of CVD. The risk of cancer and how this risk differs compared with other forms of CVD, is unknown among AAA patients. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the IBM MarketScan Research Database to test whether individuals with AAA have a higher cancer risk independent of traditional shared risk factors. METHODS: All individuals ≥18 years of age with ≥36 months of continuous coverage between 2008 and 2020 were enrolled. Those with potential Mendelian etiologies of AAA, aortic aneurysm with nonspecific anatomic location, or a cancer diagnosis before the start of follow-up were excluded. A subgroup analysis was performed of individuals having the Health Risk Assessment records including tobacco use and body mass index. The following groups of individuals were compared: (1) with AAA, (2) with non-AAA CVD, and (3) without any CVD. RESULTS: The propensity score-matched cohort included 58 993 individuals with AAA, 117 986 with non-AAA CVD, and 58 993 without CVD. The 5-year cumulative incidence of cancer was 13.1% (12.8%-13.5%) in participants with AAA, 10.1% (9.9%-10.3%) in participants with non-AAA CVD, and 9.6% (9.3%-9.9%) in participants without CVD. Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models found that patients with AAA exhibited a higher cancer risk than either those with non-AAA CVD (hazard ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.23-1.32]; P<0.001) or those without CVD (hazard ratio, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.26-1.38]; P<0.001). Results remained consistent after excluding common smoking-related cancers and when adjusting for tobacco use and body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with AAA may have a unique risk of cancer requiring further mechanistic study and investigation of the role of enhanced cancer screening.

Development and Evaluation of Rehabilitation Service Areas for the United States.

BACKGROUND: Geographic areas have been developed for many healthcare sectors including acute and primary care. These areas aid in understanding health care supply, use, and outcomes. However, little attention has been given to developing similar geographic tools for understanding rehabilitation in post-acute care. The purpose of this study was to develop and characterize post-acute care Rehabilitation Service Areas (RSAs) in the United States (US) that reflect rehabilitation use by Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: A patient origin study was conducted to cluster beneficiary ZIP (Zone Improvement Plan) code tabulation areas (ZCTAs) with providers who service those areas using Ward's clustering method. We used US national Medicare claims data for 2013 to 2015 for beneficiaries discharged from an acute care hospital to an inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF), skilled nursing facility (SNF), long-term care hospital (LTCH), or home health agency (HHA). Medicare is a US health insurance program primarily for older adults. The study population included patient records across all diagnostic groups. We used IRF, SNF, LTCH and HHA services to create the RSAs. We used 2013 and 2014 data (n = 2,730,366) to develop the RSAs and 2015 data (n = 1,118,936) to evaluate stability. We described the RSAs by provider type availability, population, and traveling patterns among beneficiaries. RESULTS: The method resulted in 1,711 discrete RSAs. 38.7% of these RSAs had IRFs, 16.1% had LTCHs, and 99.7% had SNFs. The number of RSAs varied across states; some had fewer than 10 while others had greater than 70. Overall, 21.9% of beneficiaries traveled from the RSA where they resided to another RSA for care. CONCLUSIONS: Rehabilitation Service Areas are a new tool for the measurement and understanding of post-acute care utilization, resources, quality, and outcomes. These areas provide policy makers, researchers, and administrators with small-area boundaries to assess access, supply, demand, and understanding of financing to improve practice and policy for post-acute care in the US.

Understanding Variation in Postacute Care: Developing Rehabilitation Service Areas Through Geographic Mapping.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of the study were to demonstrate a method for developing rehabilitation service areas and to compare service areas based on postacute care rehabilitation admissions to service areas based on acute care hospital admissions. DESIGN: We conducted a secondary analysis of 2013-2014 Medicare records for older patients in Texas (N = 469,172). Our analysis included admission records for inpatient rehabilitation facilities, skilled nursing facilities, long-term care hospitals, and home health agencies. We used Ward's algorithm to cluster patient ZIP Code Tabulation Areas based on which facilities patients were admitted to for rehabilitation. For comparison, we set the number of rehabilitation clusters to 22 to allow for comparison to the 22 hospital referral regions in Texas. Two methods were used to evaluate rehabilitation service areas: intraclass correlation coefficient and variance in the number of rehabilitation beds across areas. RESULTS: Rehabilitation service areas had a higher intraclass correlation coefficient (0.081 vs. 0.076) and variance in beds (27.8 vs. 21.4). Our findings suggest that service areas based on rehabilitation admissions capture has more variation than those based on acute hospital admissions. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the use of rehabilitation service areas would lead to more accurate assessments of rehabilitation geographic variations and their use in understanding rehabilitation outcomes.

What Types of Treatment Are Provided for Patients With Carpal Tunnel Syndrome? A Retrospective Analysis of Commercial Insurance.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) in commercially insured patients across the spectrum of provider types rarely has been described. OBJECTIVE: To describe patterns of types of treatment for patients with CTS using a large commercial insurance database. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort descriptive study. SETTING: Administrative health data from the Clinformatics Data Mart (OptumInsight, Eden Prairie, MN). PATIENTS: Adults with a primary diagnosis of CTS seen from between January 2010 to December 2012 who had a total of 48 months of continuous data (12 months before diagnosis and 36 months after diagnosis) (n = 24,931). OUTCOMES: Frequency of types of treatment (heat, manual therapy, positioning, steroids, stretching, surgery) by number of treatments, number of visits, provider type, and characteristics. RESULTS: Fifty-four percent of patients received no reported treatment, and 50.4% had no additional visits. Surgery (42.5%) and positioning (39.8%) were the most frequent single treatments. Patients who were seen by orthopedist for their first visit more frequently received some treatment (75.1%) and at least 1 additional visit (74.1%) compared with those seen by general practitioners (59.5%, 57.5%, respectively) or other providers (65.4%, 68.4, respectively). Orthopedists more frequently prescribed positioning devices (26.8%) and surgery (36.8%) than general practitioners (18.8%, 14.1%, respectively) or other providers (15.7%, 19.7%, respectively). Older adults more frequently had CTS surgery, as did people who lived in the Midwest. Overall, only 24% of patients with CTS had surgery. CONCLUSIONS: For more than one-half of patients with CTS no treatment was provided after an initial visit. Surgery rates were much lower than what has previously been reported in the literature. Generally, patients with CTS receive treatments that are supported by current treatment guidelines. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA.