Patterns of Athlete Medication Use at the 2018 PyeongChang Paralympic Games: A Descriptive Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: Medication use among elite athletes has received growing attention over the past decades. However, only limited studies have focused on para athletes, and trends in medication use among this cohort remain unclear. The aims of this study were (1) to describe the pattern of medication use in elite Paralympic athletes, with a particular focus on analgesics, (2) to analyze whether medications declared by athletes were included in the 2018 World Anti-Doping Agency's prohibited list and monitoring program, (3) to report on a variety of novel supplements, and (4) to review whether athlete analgesic needs will be met by the new Olympic & Paralympic Model Formulary. DESIGN: This is a retrospective, descriptive cohort study. RESULTS: Of all athletes who underwent doping control, 21% declared the use of an analgesic medication. Athletes with limb deficiency and para snowboarders declared the most analgesic medications in their respective categories. It was determined that 84% of the athletes' analgesic medication needs were provided from the new Olympic & Paralympic Model Formulary. CONCLUSIONS: Analgesic use among athletes who participated at the 2018 PyeongChang Winter Paralympics was high. Para snowboarders and athletes with limb deficiency declared the most analgesics. The new Olympic & Paralympic Model Formulary adequately addressed the medication needs of the athletes attending the 2018 games.

Impact of mailing information about nonurgent care on emergency department visits by Medicaid beneficiaries enrolled in managed care.

CONTEXT: Emergency department services may be used more appropriately if laypeople's knowledge of managing minor medical problems could be enhanced, especially since Medicaid applies a "prudent layperson" standard for providing access to emergency care. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of mailing a booklet, First Look, that informed Medicaid beneficiaries about care of common nonurgent conditions and encouraged use of alternatives to emergency care including care by office-based physicians, telephonic nursing assistance, and self-care. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, parallel group study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Administrative data from 2 health plans serving urban Medicaid populations were used to identify households with a history of emergency department utilization (n = 3101 and n = 3822). Within each health plan, households were randomly assigned to receive First Look. The number of emergency department visits during 6.5 months of follow-up was the primary study endpoint. RESULTS: Compared with controls, 1% fewer members of households that were mailed First Look visited an emergency department in each health plan (23% versus 24% in Plan A; 27% versus 28% in Plan B). The 95% confidence intervals on the observed differences were -3% to 1% and -4% to 1% in Plans A and B, respectively. The proportion of emergency department visits for conditions discussed in First Look was not significantly reduced in households that were mailed the booklet (62% versus 60% in Plan A and 51% versus 48% in Plan B). CONCLUSION: Mailing First Look to Medicaid beneficiaries did not have a significant effect on use of emergency departments. Medicaid programs need to evaluate other, perhaps more multifaceted, interventions to promote appropriate use of emergency departments.