Incidence of urinary tract infection following initiation of intermittent catheterization among patients with recent spinal cord injury in Germany and the Netherlands.

Objective: To assess incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI) among patients with recent spinal cord injury (SCI) who initiated intermittent catheterization (IC).Design: Retrospective chart review.Setting: Two European SCI rehabilitation centers.Participants: Seventy-three consecutive patients with recent SCI who initiated IC.Outcome measures: Incidence of UTI, using six different definitions, each based on microbiology ± symptomatology ± mention of UTI . Rates were expressed in terms of numbers of UTIs per 100 patient-months (PMs). Attention was focused on first-noted UTI during the three-month follow-up, as assessed with each of the six definitions.Results: Fifty-eight percent of patients (n = 33) met ≥1 definitions for UTI during follow-up (rate: 31.5 UTIs per 100 PMs), ranging from 14% (5.3 per 100 PMs; definition requiring bacteriuria, pyuria, and presence of symptoms) to 45% (22.7 per 100 PMs; definition requiring "mention of UTI"). Ten cases were identified using the definition that required bacteriuria, pyuria, and symptoms, whereas definitions that required bacteriuria and either pyuria or symptoms resulted in the identification of 20-25 cases. Median time to UTI ranged from 42 days ("mention of UTI") to 81 days (definition requiring bacteriuria and ≥100 leukocytes/mm3).Conclusion: Depending on definition, 14% to 45% of patients with recent SCI experience UTI within three months of initiating IC. Definitions requiring bacteriuria and either pyuria or symptoms consistently identified about twice as many cases as those that required all three conditions. Standardizing definitions may help improve detection, treatment, and prevention of UTI within this vulnerable population.

The Burden of Peristomal Skin Complications on an Ostomy Population as Assessed by Health Utility and the Physical Component Summary of the SF-36v2®.

BACKGROUND: Body-altering surgery may affect perceptions of one's self. For those with abdominal stoma surgeries, altered perceptions amplified by peristomal skin condition can increase health burdens. OBJECTIVES: To assess health utility and health-related quality of life in an adult US ostomy sample in the presence of three levels of peristomal skin condition: intact, moderately compromised, and severely compromised. METHODS: The short form 36 health survey version 2, a generic health survey incorporating the six-dimensional health state short form preference-based utility index, was chosen to assess the sample. Analysis of covariance adjusted for age and time from surgery was used. RESULTS: The six-dimensional health state short form utilities for those with intact skin and physical component summary (PCS) levels indicating no physical limitations varied significantly from those with severely compromised skin and indicating the greatest degree of physical limitation (0.833 vs. 0.527). Peristomal skin condition decreases were associated with health utility decreases across all levels of the PCS. Because peristomal skin conditions are intermittent, the analysis presents quality-adjusted life-days (QALDs) per month. Ostomates with intact skin and PCS levels indicating no physical limitations demonstrated significant differences from those with severe skin condition and indicating the greatest degree of physical limitations (26.5 d/mo vs. 15.8 d/mo). As peristomal skin condition worsened, QALDs decreased across all levels of the PCS. A minimally important expected value of health was estimated to be an increase of 2.18 QALDs/mo. CONCLUSIONS: Successful treatment from a clinical perspective is more than the elimination of conditions-it is also a return of quality time to an individual.

Can dialysis patients be accurately identified using healthcare claims data?

BACKGROUND: While health insurance claims data are often used to estimate the costs of renal replacement therapy in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), the accuracy of methods used to identify patients receiving dialysis - especially peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) - in these data is unknown. METHODS: The study population consisted of all persons aged 18 - 63 years in a large US integrated health plan with ESRD and dialysis-related billing codes (i.e., diagnosis, procedures) on healthcare encounters between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2008. Using billing codes for all healthcare encounters within 30 days of each patient's first dialysis-related claim ("index encounter"), we attempted to designate each study subject as either a "PD patient" or "HD patient." Using alternative windows of ± 30 days, ± 90 days, and ± 180 days around the index encounter, we reviewed patients' medical records to determine the dialysis modality actually received. We calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) for each dialysis-related billing code, using information in patients' medical records as the "gold standard." RESULTS: We identified a total of 233 patients with evidence of ESRD and receipt of dialysis in healthcare claims data. Based on examination of billing codes, 43 and 173 study subjects were designated PD patients and HD patients, respectively (14 patients had evidence of PD and HD, and modality could not be ascertained for 31 patients). The PPV of codes used to identify PD patients was low based on a ± 30-day medical record review window (34.9%), and increased with use of ± 90-day and ± 180-day windows (both 67.4%). The PPV for codes used to identify HD patients was uniformly high - 86.7% based on ± 30-day review, 90.8% based on ± 90-day review, and 93.1% based on ± 180-day review. CONCLUSIONS: While HD patients could be accurately identified using billing codes in healthcare claims data, case identification was much more problematic for patients receiving PD.

Dialysis facility and patient characteristics associated with utilization of home dialysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Nonmedical factors influencing utilization of home dialysis at the facility level are poorly quantified. Home dialysis is comparably effective and safe but less expensive to society and Medicare than in-center hemodialysis. Elimination of modifiable practice variation unrelated to medical factors could contribute to improvements in patient outcomes and use of scarce resources. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Prevalent dialysis patient data by facility were collected from the 2007 ESRD Network's annual reports. Facility characteristic data were collected from Medicare's Dialysis Facility Compare file. A multivariate regression model was used to evaluate associations between the use of home dialysis and facility characteristics. RESULTS: The utilization of home dialysis was positively associated with facility size, percent patients employed full- or part-time, younger population, and years a facility was Medicare certified. Variables negatively associated include an increased number of hemodialysis patients per hemodialysis station, chain association, rural location, more densely populated zip code, a late dialysis work shift, and greater percent of black patients within a zip code. CONCLUSIONS: Improved understanding of factors affecting the frequency of use of home dialysis may help explain practice variations across the United States that result in an imbalanced use of medical resources within the ESRD population. In turn, this may improve the delivery of healthcare and extend the ability of an increasingly overburdened medical financing system to survive.

Cost comparison of peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis in end-stage renal disease.

OBJECTIVE: To compare healthcare utilization and costs in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) beginning peritoneal dialysis (PD) or hemodialysis (HD). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Using a US health insurance database, we identified all patients with ESRD who began dialysis between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2006. Patients were designated as PD patients or as HD patients based on first-noted treatment. Patients with less than 6 months of pretreatment data and those with less than 12 months of data following initiation of dialysis ("pretreatment" and "follow-up," respectively) were dropped from the study sample. The PD patients were matched to HD patients using propensity scoring to control for differences in pretreatment characteristics. Healthcare utilization and costs were then compared over 12 months between propensity-matched PD patients and HD patients using paired t tests and Wilcoxon signed rank tests for continuous variables and using Bowker and McNemar tests for categorical variables, as appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 463 patients met all study entrance criteria; 56 (12%) began treatment with PD, and 407 (88%) began treatment with HD. Fifty PD patients could be propensity matched to an equal number of HD patients. The HD patients were more than twice as likely as matched PD patients to be hospitalized over the subsequent 12 months (hazard ratio, 2.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-3.51; P <.01). Their median healthcare costs over the 12-month follow-up period were $43,510 higher ($173,507 vs $129,997 for PD patients, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with ESRD, PD patients are less likely than HD patients to be hospitalized in the year following initiation of dialysis. They also have significantly lower total healthcare costs.