Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 35
Filter
1.
Surg Open Sci ; 18: 53-60, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38322023

ABSTRACT

Background: Children from racial and ethnic minority groups have higher prevalence of perforated appendicitis, and the COVID-19 pandemic worsened racial and ethnic health-related disparities. We hypothesized that the incidence of perforated appendicitis worsened for children from racial and ethnic minorities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of the Pediatric Health Information System for children ages 2-18y undergoing appendectomy pre-pandemic (3/19/2019-3/18/2020) and intra-pandemic (3/19/2020-3/30/2021). The primary outcome was presentation with perforated appendicitis. Multivariable logistic regression with mixed effects estimated the likelihood of presentation with perforated appendicitis. Covariates included race, ethnicity, pandemic status, Child Opportunity Index, gender, insurance, age, and hospital region. Results: Overall, 33,727 children underwent appendectomy: 16,048 (47.6 %) were Non-Hispanic White, 12,709 (37.7 %) were Hispanic, 2261 (6.7 %) were Non-Hispanic Black, 960 (2.8 %) were Asian, and 1749 (5.2 %) Other. Overall perforated appendicitis rates were unchanged during the pandemic (37.4 % intra-pandemic, 36.4 % pre-pandemic, p = 0.06). Hispanic children were more likely to present with perforated appendicitis intra-pandemic versus pre-pandemic (OR 1.18, 95%CI: 1.07, 1.13). Hispanic children had higher odds of perforated appendicitis versus Non-Hispanic White children pre-pandemic (OR 1.10, 95%CI: 1.00, 1.20) which increased intra-pandemic (OR 1.19, 95%CI: 1.09, 1.30). Publicly-insured children had increased odds of perforated appendicitis intra-pandemic versus pre-pandemic (OR 1.14, 95%CI: 1.03, 1.25), and had increased odds of perforated appendicitis versus privately-insured children (intra-pandemic OR 1.26, 95%CI: 1.16, 1.36; pre-pandemic OR 1.12, 95%CI: 1.04, 1.22). Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic, Hispanic and publicly-insured children were more likely to present with perforated appendicitis, suggesting that the pandemic exacerbated existing disparities in healthcare for children with appendicitis. Key message: We found that Hispanic children and children with public insurance were more likely to present with perforated appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic. Public health efforts aimed at ameliorating racial and ethnic disparities created during the COVID-19 pandemic should consider increasing healthcare access for Hispanic children to address bias, racism, and systemic barriers that may prevent families from seeking care.

2.
Med Care Res Rev ; 81(2): 87-95, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38174355

ABSTRACT

Prescription drug cost-sharing is a barrier to medication adherence, particularly for low-income and minority populations. In this systematic review, we examined the impact of prescription drug cost-sharing and policies to reduce cost-sharing on racial/ethnic and income disparities in medication utilization. We screened 2,145 titles and abstracts and identified 19 peer-reviewed papers that examined the interaction between cost-sharing and racial/ethnic and income disparities in medication adherence or utilization. We found weak but inconsistent evidence that lower cost-sharing is associated with reduced disparities in adherence and utilization, but studies consistently found that significant disparities remained even after adjusting for differences in cost-sharing across individuals. Study designs varied in their ability to measure the causal effect of policy or cost-sharing changes on disparities, and a wide range of policies were examined across studies. Further research is needed to identify the types of policies that are best suited to reduce disparities in medication adherence.


Subject(s)
Prescription Drugs , Humans , United States , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Cost Sharing , Income , Racial Groups
3.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 11(7): 2054-2066, 2023 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36990429

ABSTRACT

Food allergy (FA) is a growing issue worldwide. The United Kingdom and United States are high-income, industrialized countries with reported increases in FA prevalence over the past few decades. This review compares delivery of FA care in the United Kingdom and United States and each country's response to the heightened demand and disparities for FA services. In the United Kingdom, allergy specialists are scarce and general practitioners (GPs) provide most allergy care. Whereas the United States has more allergists per capita than the United Kingdom, there is still a shortage of allergy services owing to the greater reliance on specialist care for FA in America and wide geographic variation in access to allergist services. Currently, generalists in these countries lack the specialty training and equipment to diagnose and manage FA optimally. Moving forward, the United Kingdom aims to enhance training for GPs so they may provide better quality frontline allergy care. In addition, the United Kingdom is implementing a new tier of semi-specialized GPs and increasing cross-center collaboration through clinical networks. The United Kingdom and United States aim to increase the number of FA specialists, which is critical at a time of rapidly expanding management options for allergic and immunologic diseases requiring clinical expertise and shared decision-making to select appropriate therapies. While these countries aim to grow their supply of quality FA services actively, further efforts to build clinical networks and perhaps recruit international medical graduates and expand telehealth services are necessary to reduce disparities in access to care. For the United Kingdom in particular, increasing quality services will require additional support from the leadership of the centralized National Health Service, which remains challenging.


Subject(s)
Food Hypersensitivity , State Medicine , Humans , United States/epidemiology , Food Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Food Hypersensitivity/therapy , Income , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Forecasting
4.
J Gen Intern Med ; 38(7): 1593-1598, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36600078

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) are becoming increasingly common, but their financial implications for enrollees with and without chronic conditions and the mitigating effects of health savings accounts (HSAs) are relatively unknown. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to compare financial hardship between non-HDHPs and HDHPs with and without HSAs, stratified by enrollees' number of chronic conditions. DESIGN: We used data from 2015 to 2018 Medical Expenditure Panels Surveys (MEPS) to compare rates of financial hardship across individuals with HDHPs and non-HDHPs using linear and logistic regression models. PARTICIPANTS: A nationally representative sample of 30,981 adults aged 18-64 enrolled in HDHPs and non-HDHPs. MAIN MEASURES: We examined several measures of financial hardship, including total yearly out-of-pocket medical spending as well as rates of delaying medical care or prescriptions in the past year due to cost, forgoing medical care or prescriptions in the past year due to cost, paying medical bills over time, or having problems paying medical bills. We compared rates using the non-HDHP as the control. KEY RESULTS: On most measures, HDHPs are associated with greater financial hardship compared to non-HDHPs, including average annual out-of-pocket spending of $637 for non-HDHPs, $939 for HDHPs with HSAs, and $825 for HDHPs without HSAs (p < 0.01). However, for HDHP enrollees with multiple chronic conditions, having an HSA was associated with less financial hardship (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that HSAs may be most beneficial for those with chronic conditions, in part due to the tax benefits they offer as well as the fact that those with chronic conditions are more likely to take advantage of their HSAs than their younger, healthier counterparts. However, as HDHPs are more likely to be correlated with worse financial outcomes regardless of health status, recent trends of increasing participation may be a reason for concern.


Subject(s)
Deductibles and Coinsurance , Medical Savings Accounts , Adult , Humans , United States/epidemiology , Financial Stress , Health Expenditures , Chronic Disease
5.
Health Econ ; 32(3): 639-653, 2023 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36399360

ABSTRACT

The Affordable Care Act included a provision to gradually eliminate the Medicare prescription drug coverage gap between 2011 and 2020, which substantially lower medication costs in the gap. Using 2007-2016 Medicare claims data, we estimate how filling the gap affects individuals' out-of-pocket spending and medication use, separately for branded and generic drugs. One important difficulty in estimating the policy impact is that around the same time, many blockbuster drugs commonly used by the Medicare population experienced patent expiration and began to see generic entry. Because generic entries affected different therapeutic classes at different times, we run difference-in-differences models by therapeutic category at the beneficiary-month level to isolate the effect of the gap closure from that of generic entry. Overall, we find that filling the gap substantially reduced out-of-pocket spending and increased the use of branded drugs, which had larger discount rates during the analysis period. Beneficiaries reaching the gap, at older ages, or with comorbidities experienced larger reduction in out-of-pocket spending. We show that without accounting for generic entry, the effect of filling the coverage gap on medication use is underestimated for branded drugs and overestimated for generic drugs.


Subject(s)
Medicare Part D , Prescription Drugs , Aged , Humans , United States , Drugs, Generic/therapeutic use , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , Health Expenditures
6.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev ; 32(2): 167-174, 2023 02 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36166516

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Symptom burden differences may contribute to racial disparities in breast cancer survival. We compared symptom changes from before to during chemotherapy among women with breast cancer. METHODS: This observational study followed a cohort of Black and White women diagnosed with Stage I-III, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer from a large cancer center in 2007 to 2015, and reported symptoms before and during chemotherapy. We identified patients who experienced a one-standard deviation (SD) increase in symptom burden after starting chemotherapy using four validated composite scores (General Physical Symptoms, Treatment Side Effects, Acute Distress, and Despair). Kitagawa-Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition was used to quantify race differences in symptom changes explained by baseline characteristics (sociodemographic, baseline scores, cancer stage) and first-line chemotherapy regimens. RESULTS: Among 1,273 patients, Black women (n = 405, 31.8%) were more likely to report one-SD increase in General Physical Symptoms (55.6% vs. 48.2%, P = 0.015), Treatment Side Effects (74.0% vs. 63.4%, P < 0.001), and Acute Distress (27.4% vs. 20.0%, P = 0.010) than White women. Baseline characteristics and first-line chemotherapy regimens explained a large and significant proportion of the difference in Acute Distress changes (93.7%, P = 0.001), but not General Physical Symptoms (25.7%, P = 0.25) or Treatment Side Effects (16.4%, P = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: Black women with early-stage breast cancer were more likely to experience significant increases in physical and psychological symptom burden during chemotherapy. Most of the difference in physical symptom changes remained unexplained by baseline characteristics, which suggests inadequate symptom management among Black women. IMPACT: Future studies should identify strategies to improve symptom management among Black women and reduce differences in symptom burden. See related commentary by Rosenzweig and Mazanec, p. 157.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Race Factors , Black People , Neoplasm Staging , Patient Reported Outcome Measures
7.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(8): e2225485, 2022 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35947386

ABSTRACT

Importance: Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) reduces breast cancer recurrence, but symptom burden is a key barrier to adherence. Black women have lower AET adherence and worse health outcomes than White women. Objective: To investigate the association between symptom burden and AET adherence differences by race. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study using electronic health records with patient-reported data from a large cancer center in the US. Patients included Black and White women initiating AET therapy for early-stage breast cancer from August 2007 to December 2015 who were followed for 1 year from AET initiation. Sixty symptoms classified into 7 physical and 2 psychological symptom clusters were evaluated. For each cluster, the number of symptoms with moderate severity at baseline, and symptoms with 3-point or greater increases during AET were counted. Adherence was measured as the proportion of days covered by AET during the first-year follow-up. Multivariable regressions for patients' adherence adjusting for race, symptom measures, sociodemographic characteristics, and clinical characteristics were conducted. Kitagawa-Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition was used to quantify racial differences in adherence explained by symptoms and patient characteristics. Analyses were conducted from July 2021 to January 2022. Exposures: Physical and psychological symptoms at baseline and changes during AET. Results: Among 559 patients (168 [30.1%] Black and 391 [69.9%] White; mean [SD] age 65.5 [12.1] years), Black women received diagnoses younger (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 58.7 [13.7] vs 68.5 [10.0] years old) than White women, with more advanced stages (30 Black participants [17.9%] vs 31 White participants [7.9%] had stage III disease at diagnosis), and lived in areas with fewer adults attaining high school education (mean [SD], 78.8% [7.8%] vs 84.0% [9.3%]). AET adherence in the first year was 78.8% for Black and 82.3% for White women. Black women reported higher severity in most symptom clusters than White women. Neuropsychological, vasomotor, musculoskeletal, cardiorespiratory, distress, and despair symptoms at baseline and increases during the follow-up were associated with 1.2 to 2.6 percentage points decreases in adherence, which corresponds to 4 to 9 missed days receiving AET in the first year. After adjusting for psychological symptoms, being Black was associated with 6.5 percentage points higher adherence than being White. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, severe symptoms were associated with lower AET adherence. Black women had lower adherence rates that were explained by their higher symptom burden and baseline characteristics. These findings suggest that better symptom management with a focus on psychological symptoms could improve AET adherence and reduce racial disparities in cancer outcomes.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Adult , Aged , Child , Female , Humans , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Cohort Studies , Medication Adherence/psychology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/drug therapy , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Race Factors , Retrospective Studies , Syndrome
8.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 22(1): 958, 2022 Jul 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35902910

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Three major hospital pay for performance (P4P) programs were introduced by the Affordable Care Act and intended to improve the quality, safety and efficiency of care provided to Medicare beneficiaries. The financial risk to hospitals associated with Medicare's P4P programs is substantial. Evidence on the positive impact of these programs, however, has been mixed, and no study has assessed their combined impact. In this study, we examined the combined impact of Medicare's P4P programs on clinical areas and populations targeted by the programs, as well as those outside their focus. METHODS: We used 2007-2016 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases for 14 states to identify hospital-level inpatient quality indicators (IQIs) and patient safety indicators (PSIs), by quarter and payer (Medicare vs. non-Medicare). IQIs and PSIs are standardized, evidence-based measures that can be used to track hospital quality of care and patient safety over time using hospital administrative data. The study period of 2007-2016 was selected to capture multiple years before and after introduction of program metrics. Interrupted time series was used to analyze the impact of the P4P programs on study outcomes targeted and not targeted by the programs. In sensitivity analyses, we examined the impact of these programs on care for non-Medicare patients. RESULTS: Medicare P4P programs were not associated with consistent improvements in targeted or non-targeted quality and safety measures. Moreover, mortality rates across targeted and untargeted conditions were generally getting worse after the introduction of Medicare's P4P programs. Trends in PSIs were extremely mixed, with five outcomes trending in an expected (improving) direction, five trending in an unexpected (deteriorating) direction, and three with insignificant changes over time. Sensitivity analyses did not substantially alter these results. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous studies for individual programs, we detect minimal, if any, effect of Medicare's hospital P4P programs on quality and safety. Given the growing evidence of limited impact, the administrative cost of monitoring and enforcing penalties, and potential increase in mortality, CMS should consider redesigning their P4P programs before continuing to expand them.


Subject(s)
Medicare , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , Quality of Health Care , Reimbursement, Incentive , Hospitals , Humans , Inpatients , Medicare/economics , United States
9.
Med Care ; 60(2): 133-139, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35030562

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to study how changes in insurance benefit design affect medication use of older adults with mental disorders. DATA SOURCES: US Medicare claims data from 2007 to 2018. STUDY DESIGN: Exploiting the gradual elimination of the Medicare prescription drug coverage gap beginning in 2011, we examine the effects on medication use and out-of-pocket spending by drug type with a difference-in-differences approach. We identify subpopulations by mental disorder and compare the estimates across mental health groups and to the general Medicare population. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Closing the gap substantially reduced individuals' out-of-pocket spending, and the reduction was larger for those with more severe mental disorders. The policy led to a statistically significant increase in branded drugs used for the Medicare population (0.91; P<0.01; 12.12% increase), beneficiaries with severe mental disorders (2.71; P<0.01; 11.13% increase), and common mental disorders (2.63; P<0.01; 11.62% increase), whereas such effect for beneficiaries with Alzheimer disease and dementia (AD) is substantially smaller (0.44; P<0.01; 1.83% increase). In contrast, the policy decreased generic drugs used by about 3%-5% for all groups. Overall, beneficiaries without mental health illness have a statistically significant increase in total medication use (2.05%) following the coverage gap closure, while all 3 mental health groups have either no statistically significant changes or a small reduction in total mediation use (AD, -1.26%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients' responses to price changes vary across mental disorders and by drug type. The impact on branded drug utilization among those with AD is particularly small. Our findings suggest that lowering medication costs has differential impacts across diseases and may not be sufficient to improve adherence for all conditions, in particular those with severe mental health disorders such as AD.


Subject(s)
Medicare Part D/statistics & numerical data , Medication Adherence/statistics & numerical data , Mental Disorders/drug therapy , Prescription Drugs/economics , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Drugs, Generic/economics , Female , Financing, Personal , Humans , Insurance Claim Review , Male , Patient Acuity , United States
10.
Prev Med Rep ; 24: 101544, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34493966

ABSTRACT

An equitable COVID-19 vaccine rollout is a necessary piece of the public health strategy to end the current pandemic; however, vaccine hesitancy may present a major hurdle. This study examines racial/ethnic and income-based disparities in vaccine hesitancy in Los Angeles County, a recent epicenter of the pandemic in the US, immediately after the Food and Drug Administration issued its emergency use authorization of a COVID-19 vaccine. We conducted online, stratified cross-sectional surveys of 1,984 adults living in Los Angeles County between December 2020 and January 2021 to assess hesitancy towards getting a COVID-19 vaccine. We used multivariable logistic regression to predict vaccine hesitancy after adjusting for covariates and calculated weighted population level estimates of hesitancy and reasons for hesitancy. Blacks and Hispanics were significantly more likely to be hesitant than Whites (AOR = 3.3, P < 0.001; AOR = 2.1, P = 0.008) as were those in the lowest income group (annual income <$20,000 compared to >$100,000) (AOR = 1.8, P = 0.009). Additionally, those having no confidence in doing things online (AOR = 3.3, P < 0.001) were less likely to accept the vaccine than those who were confident. Compared to hesitant White respondents, Black respondents had higher mistrust of the government (36.1% vs 22.1%, P = 0.03) and Black and Hispanic respondents were more likely to want to wait to see how the vaccine works (41.2% and 42.0% vs 27.3%, P = 0.02 and P = 0.006). Our study suggests that culturally appropriate messaging that addresses concerns for lower income and racial/ethnic minority communities, as well as alternatives to online vaccine appointments, are necessary for improving vaccine rollout.

11.
Health Serv Res ; 55(6): 983-992, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33107609

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The Affordable Care Act allows insurers to charge up to 50% higher premiums to tobacco users, making tobacco use the only behavioral factor that can be used to rate premiums in the nongroup insurance market. Some states have set more restrictive limits on rating for tobacco use, and several states have outlawed tobacco premium surcharges altogether. We examined the impact of state level tobacco surcharge policy on health insurance enrollment decisions among smokers. STUDY DESIGN: We compared insurance enrollment in states that did and did not allow tobacco surcharges, using a difference-in-difference approach to compare the policy effects among smokers and nonsmokers. We also used geographic variation in tobacco surcharges to examine how the size of the surcharge affects insurance coverage, again comparing smokers to nonsmokers. DATA COLLECTION: We linked data from two components of the Current Population Survey-the 2015 and 2019 Annual Social and Economic Supplement and the Tobacco Use Supplement, which we combined with data on marketplace plan premiums. We also collected qualitative data from a survey of smokers who did not have insurance through an employer or public program. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Allowing a tobacco surcharge reduced insurance enrollment among smokers by 4.0 percentage points (P = .01). Further, smokers without insurance through an employer or public program were 9.0 percentage points less likely (P < .01) to enroll in a nongroup plan if they were subject to a tobacco surcharge. In states with surcharges, enrollment among smokers was 3.4 percentage points lower (P < .01) for every 10 percentage point increase in the tobacco surcharge. CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco use is the largest cause of preventable illness in the United States. State tobacco surcharge policy may have a substantial impact on whether tobacco users choose to remain insured and consequently their ability to receive care critical for preventing and treating tobacco-related disease.


Subject(s)
Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Insurance, Health/statistics & numerical data , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislation & jurisprudence , Taxes/legislation & jurisprudence , Tobacco Products/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , State Government , Tobacco Products/economics , United States
12.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 39(9): 1540-1545, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32897786

ABSTRACT

Tobacco users can be charged health insurance Marketplace premiums up to 1.5 times higher than premiums for nonusers of tobacco. Despite being charged higher premiums, low- and middle-income tobacco users receive premium subsidies identical to those received by nonusers and cannot apply the subsidy to pay for any portion of their tobacco surcharge. Premium increases over time have exacerbated the discrepancy in premium prices based on tobacco use.


Subject(s)
Health Insurance Exchanges , Nicotiana , Humans , Income , Insurance Coverage , Insurance, Health , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , United States
13.
Prev Med Rep ; 18: 101084, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32309114

ABSTRACT

Black adults bear a disproportionate burden of the obesity epidemic but are underrepresented in weight loss research and lose less weight than their white counterparts in weight loss interventions. Comprehensive behavioral weight loss interventions cause weight loss, but their high cost have stymied their implementation in black and other underserved communities. Recent translations of evidence-based weight loss interventions for black communities have been designed to increase intervention reach. However, the costs of implementing such interventions have seldom been reported in the context of a randomized controlled trial. Thus, the costs of implementing a community-health worker delivered Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) adaptated for rural black adults of faith (The WORD) are reported. Data from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial conducted in 31 churches (n = 440) were used to calculate implementation costs. All participants received the 16-session core weight loss intervention and weight loss data was collected at baseline and 6 months. Participants lost an average of 2.53 kg at 6 months. Total implementation costs were $340.95 per participant. Thus, the implementation cost was $138 per kg. This is one of the few comprehensive examinations of costs for a DPP translation for black adults of faith and provide initial data from which practitioners and policy makers can use to determine the engagement of churches to disseminate the DPP through churches. Future studies are needed to confirm the extent churches are a cost-effective strategy to cause weight loss in black communities.

14.
Rheumatol Ther ; 7(1): 133-147, 2020 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31741182

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Treatment guidelines recommend low-dose corticosteroids as short-term therapy among rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. However, it may be difficult to wean/eliminate steroids once initiated. Initiation of more effective therapies such as biologics may help to taper corticosteroid use. The objective was to examine the impact of adalimumab (ADA) initiation on steroid utilization and non-drug medical costs among patients with RA. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted among adult RA patients initiating ADA as the initial biologic in the MarketScan Database (2012-2016). Study outcomes included whether oral/injectable steroids were used, daily dose, dosage categories (< 5 and ≥ 5 mg/day), number of steroid injections, and non-drug medical costs. Outcomes were compared 6 months pre- and post-ADA initiation. Mixed effects logistic, classical linear, multinomial logistic models, and linear model with a log link and gamma distribution were used to adjust for patient demographic and health characteristics. RESULTS: The sample included 7404 ADA initiators. Compared to pre-ADA initiation, in the post-initiation period there was a reduction in proportions of patients using oral steroids (from 71.80 to 62.56%) and injectable steroids (from 34.91 to 29.88%), average daily dose of oral steroids (from 3.30 to 2.62 mg/day), patients with dose ≥ 5 mg/day (from 21.76 to 16.34%), number of injections (from 0.64 to 0.53), and non-drug medical costs (from $5356.30 to $5146.84) (P < 0.01). The multivariate analysis produced similar patterns. For example, post-ADA initiation, patients were less likely to use oral steroids [odds ratio (OR) 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.56]; coefficient estimate for daily dose reduction was - 0.68 (95% CI - 0.81 to - 0.56); ratio estimate for medical costs was 0.91 (95% CI 0.86-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with RA, following ADA initiation, there is a reduction in steroid utilization and dosage, and non-drug medical costs. Prospective studies should be conducted to confirm this relationship in the future.

15.
J Gen Intern Med ; 34(6): 878-883, 2019 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30737680

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Thirty-day readmission penalties implemented with the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) place a larger burden on safety-net hospitals which treat a disproportionate share of racial minorities, leading to concerns that already large racial disparities in readmissions could widen. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether there were changes in Black-White disparities in 30-day readmissions for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), congestive heart failure (CHF), or pneumonia following the passage and implementation of HRRP, and to compare disparities across safety-net and non-safety-net hospitals. DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional analysis, stratified by safety-net status. SUBJECTS: 1,745,686 Medicare patients over 65 discharged alive from hospitals in 5 US states: NY, FL, NE, WA, and AR. MAIN MEASURES: Odds ratios comparing 30-day readmission rates following an index admission for AMI, CHF, or pneumonia for Black and White patients between 2007 and 2014. KEY RESULTS: Prior to the passage of HRRP in 2010, Black and White readmission rates and disparities in readmissions were decreasing. These reductions were largest at safety-net hospitals. In 2007, Blacks had 13% higher odds of readmission if treated in safety-net hospitals, compared with 5% higher odds in 2010 (P < 0.05). These trends continued following the passage of HRRP. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to HRRP, there were large reductions in Black-White disparities in readmissions at safety-net hospitals. Although HRRP tends to assess higher penalties for safety-net hospitals, improvements in readmissions have not reversed following the implementation of HRRP. In contrast, disparities continue to persist at non-safety-net hospitals which face much lower penalties.


Subject(s)
Black People , Healthcare Disparities/trends , Medicare/trends , Patient Readmission/trends , Safety-net Providers/trends , White People , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Arkansas/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Florida/epidemiology , Healthcare Disparities/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Medicare/legislation & jurisprudence , Nebraska/epidemiology , New York/epidemiology , Patient Readmission/legislation & jurisprudence , Safety-net Providers/legislation & jurisprudence , Time Factors , United States/epidemiology , Washington/epidemiology
16.
J Oncol Pract ; 15(1): e56-e64, 2019 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30523764

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: We examined whether the Community Oncology Medical Home (COME HOME) program, a medical home program implemented in seven community oncology practices, was associated with changes in spending and care quality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compared outcomes from elderly fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed between 2011 and 2015 with breast, lung, colorectal, thyroid, or pancreatic cancer, lymphoma, or melanoma and served by COME HOME practices before and after program implementation versus similar beneficiaries served by other geographically proximate oncologists. Difference-in-differences analysis compared changes in outcomes for COME HOME patients versus concurrent controls. Propensity score matching and regression methods were adjusted for clinical and sociodemographic differences. Our primary outcome was 6-month medical spending per beneficiary. Secondary outcomes included 6-month out-of-pocket spending, inpatient and ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations, readmissions, length of stay, and emergency department and evaluation and management visits. RESULTS: Before COME HOME, 6-month medical spending was $2,975 higher for the study group compared with controls (95% CI, $1,635 to $4,315; P < .001) and increasing at a similar rate. After intervention, this difference was reduced to $318 (95% CI, -$1,105 to $1,741; P = .661), a significant change of -$2,657 (95% CI, -$4,631 to -$683; P = .008) or 8.1% savings relative to 6-month average spending ($32,866). COME HOME was also associated with significantly reduced (10.2 %) emergency department visits per 1,000 patients per 6-month period ( P = .024). There were no statistically significant differences in other outcomes. CONCLUSION: COME HOME was associated with reduced Medicare spending and improved emergency department use. The patient-centered medical home model holds promise for oncology practices, but improvements were not uniform.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms/therapy , Patient-Centered Care , Quality of Health Care , Aged , Community Health Services , Female , Health Expenditures , Humans , Male , Medicare , Patient-Centered Care/economics , Patient-Centered Care/standards , Propensity Score , United States
17.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 18(1): 450, 2018 06 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29902996

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A central objective of recent U.S. healthcare policy reform, most notably the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) Health Insurance Marketplace, has been to increase access to stable, affordable health insurance. However, changing market dynamics (rising premiums, changes in issuer participation and plan availability) raise significant concerns about the marketplaces' ability to provide a stable source of healthcare for Americans that rely on them. By looking at the effect of instability on changes in the consumer choice set, we can analyze potential incentives to switch plans among price-sensitive enrollees, which can then be used to inform policy going forward. METHODS: Data on health plan features for non-tobacco users in 2512 counties in 34 states participating in federally-facilitated exchanges from 2014 to 2016 was obtained from the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services. We examined how changes in individual plan features, including premiums, deductibles, issuers, and plan types, impact consumers who had purchased the lowest-cost silver or bronze plan in their county the previous year. We calculated the cost of staying in the same plan versus switching to another plan the following year, and analyzed how costs vary across geographic regions. RESULTS: In most counties in 2015 and 2016 (53.7 and 68.2%, respectively), the lowest-cost silver plan from the previous year was still available, but was no longer the cheapest plan. In these counties, consumers who switched to the new lowest-cost plan would pay less in monthly premiums on average, by $51.48 and $55.01, respectively, compared to staying in the same plan. Despite potential premium savings from switching, however, the majority would still pay higher average premiums compared to the previous year, and most would face higher deductibles and an increased probability of having to change provider networks. CONCLUSION: While the ACA has shown promise in expanding healthcare access, continued changes in the availability and affordability of health plans are likely to result in churning and switching among enrollees, which may have negative ramifications for their health going forward. Future healthcare policy reform should aim to stabilize marketplace dynamics in order to encourage greater care continuity and limit churning.


Subject(s)
Health Care Reform/economics , Health Insurance Exchanges , Insurance, Health/trends , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , Costs and Cost Analysis , Health Care Reform/trends , Health Insurance Exchanges/economics , Health Services Accessibility/economics , Humans , Insurance Coverage/economics , Insurance, Health/economics , United States
18.
Am J Prev Med ; 55(2): 253-262, 2018 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29903568

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT: To provide a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis on smoking interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit, a population that makes up approximately 32% of current smokers. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Twenty-two studies on pharmacological, behavioral, and combination smoking-cessation interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit (defined as those who reported they were not ready to quit at the time of the study) published between 2000 and 2017 were analyzed. The effectiveness (measured by the number needed to treat) and cost effectiveness (measured by costs per quit) of interventions were calculated. All data collection and analyses were performed in 2017. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Smoking interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit can be as effective as similar interventions for smokers ready to quit; however, costs of intervening on this group may be higher for some intervention types. The most cost-effective interventions identified for this group were those using varenicline and those using behavioral interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Updating clinical recommendations to provide cessation interventions for this group is recommended. Further research on development of cost-effective treatments and effective strategies for recruitment and outreach for this group are needed. Additional studies may allow for more nuanced comparisons of treatment types among this group.


Subject(s)
Cost-Benefit Analysis , Smoking/economics , Health Behavior , Smokers , Smoking Cessation/methods , Smoking Cessation Agents/administration & dosage , United States , Varenicline/administration & dosage
19.
Tob Induc Dis ; 16: 26, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31516426

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Brief health prevention programs have been shown efficacious in prevention of tobacco use initiation and re-initiation in the US Air Force. In this manuscript we apply a comparative effectiveness assessment of two published studies, based on testing the equality of effect sizes for perceived harm and intentions-to-use for five tobacco products. METHODS: We calculate and compare the effect sizes from the brief tobacco intervention (BTI) study (N=1055) with those of the anti-tobacco media campaign (MEDIA) study (N=665), for perceived harm and intentions-to-use of cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, cigarillos, e-cigarettes and hookah, among Airmen in the US Air Force Technical Training. Univariate and multivariate parametric and non-parametric methods and models were applied to compare the outcomes between the interventions. In addition, we calculate and report the cost of each intervention per Airman. RESULTS: Effect sizes for perceived harm were 0.24-0.99 for BTI and 0.17-0.33 for MEDIA, while intentions-to-use effect sizes were 0.14-0.34 for BTI and 0.01- 0.07 for MEDIA, depending on the product. BTI intervention effects sizes were significantly greater than MEDIA intervention for all products, mainly among past users, and for both perceived harm (all p<0.0001) and intentions-to-use (all p<0.01). Cost per Airmen was comparable between the two interventions, $14.90 for BTI and $16.52 for MEDIA. CONCLUSIONS: Direct comparison suggests that BTI produced effect sizes of significantly higher magnitude in the desired direction for perceived harm and intentions-to-use, for five tobacco products most commonly used by the Airmen, and mainly among past users.

20.
Med Care Res Rev ; 75(6): 762-772, 2018 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29148343

ABSTRACT

Since 2014, average premiums for health plans available in the Affordable Care Act marketplaces have increased. We examine how premium price changes affected the amount consumers pay after subsidies for the lowest-cost bronze and silver plans available by age in the federally facilitated exchanges. Between 2015 and 2016, benchmark plan premiums increased in 83.3% of counties. Overall, rising benchmark premiums were associated with lower average after-subsidy premiums for the lowest-cost bronze and silver plans for older subsidy-eligible adults, but with higher after-subsidy premiums for younger adults purchasing the same plans, regardless of income. With recent discussions to replace or overhaul the Affordable Care Act, it is critical that we learn from the successes and failures of the current policy. Our findings suggest that the subsidy design, which makes rising premiums costlier for younger adults looking to purchase an entry-level plan, may be contributing to adverse selection and instability in the marketplace.


Subject(s)
Health Insurance Exchanges/economics , Insurance Coverage/economics , Insurance, Health/economics , Insurance/economics , Insurance/statistics & numerical data , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Child , Child, Preschool , Decision Making , Female , Health Insurance Exchanges/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Insurance, Health/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , United States , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...