Employment in Office-Based and Intensive Behavioral Health Settings in the US, 2016-2021.

This study uses employment census data to show trends in behavioral health employment during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Prevenção quaternária e Homeopatia: prevenindo o quê?

Live com o Dr. Angelmar Constantino Roman.

COVID-19 Testing Among US Children, Parental Preferences for Testing Venues, and Acceptability of School-Based Testing.

OBJECTIVES: Testing remains critical for identifying pediatric cases of COVID-19 and as a public health intervention to contain infections. We surveyed US parents to measure the proportion of children tested for COVID-19 since the start of the pandemic, preferred testing venues for children, and acceptability of school-based COVID-19 testing. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 2074 US parents of children aged ≤12 years in March 2021. We applied survey weights to generate national estimates, and we used Rao-Scott adjusted Pearson χ2 tests to compare incidence by selected sociodemographic characteristics. We used Poisson regression models with robust SEs to estimate adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) of pediatric testing. RESULTS: Among US parents, 35.9% reported their youngest child had ever been tested for COVID-19. Parents who were female versus male (aRR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60-0.79), Asian versus non-Hispanic White (aRR = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39-0.87), and from the Midwest versus the Northeast (aRR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63-0.91) were less likely to report testing of a child. Children who had health insurance versus no health insurance (aRR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.05-1.81), were attending in-person school/daycare versus not attending (aRR = 1.67; 95% CI, 1.43-1.95), and were from households with annual household income ≥$100 000 versus income <$50 000-$99 999 (aRR = 1.19; 95% CI, 1.02-1.40) were more likely to have tested for COVID-19. Half of parents (52.7%) reported the pediatrician's office as the most preferred testing venue, and 50.6% said they would allow their youngest child to be tested for COVID-19 at school/daycare if required. CONCLUSIONS: Greater efforts are needed to ensure access to COVID-19 testing for US children, including those without health insurance.

Association between nutritional guidance or ophthalmological examination and discontinuation of physician visits in patients with newly diagnosed diabetes: A retrospective cohort study using a nationwide database.

AIMS/INTRODUCTION: Discontinuation of diabetes care has been studied mostly in patients with prevalent diabetes and not in patients with newly diagnosed diabetes, whose dropout risk is highest. Because enrolling patients in a prospective study will influence adherence, we retrospectively examined whether guideline-recommended practices, defined as nutritional guidance or ophthalmological examination, can prevent patient discontinuation of diabetes care after its initiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified adults with newly screened diabetes during checkups using a large Japanese administrative claims database (JMDC, Tokyo, Japan) that contains laboratory data and lifestyle questionnaires. We defined discontinuation of physician visits as a follow-up interval exceeding 6 months. We divided the patients into those who received guideline-recommended practices (nutritional guidance or ophthalmology consultation) within the same month as the first visit and those who did not. We calculated propensity scores and carried out inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses to compare discontinuation between the two groups. RESULTS: We identified 6,508 patients with at least one physician consultation for diabetes care within 3 months after their checkup, including 4,574 patients without and 1,934 with guideline-recommended practices. After inverse probability of treatment weighting, patients with guideline-recommended practices had a significantly lower proportion of discontinuation than those without (17.2% vs 21.8%; relative risk 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.91). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to show that after adjustment for both patient and healthcare provider factors, guideline-recommended practices within the first month of physician consultation for diabetes care can decrease subsequent discontinuation of physician visits in patients with newly diagnosed diabetes.

Computerized Capability of Office-Based Physicians to Identify Patients Who Need Preventive or Follow-up Care - United States, 2017.

Preventive care or follow-up care have the potential to improve health outcomes, reduce disease in the population, and decrease health care costs in the long-term (1). Approximately one half of persons in the United States receive general recommended preventive services (2,3). Missed physician appointments can hinder the receipt of needed health care (4). With electronic health record (EHR) systems able to improve interaction and communication between patients and providers (5), electronic reminders are used to decrease missed care. These reminders can improve various types of preventive and follow-up care, such as immunizations (6) and cancer screening (7); however, computerized capability must exist to make use of these reminders. To examine this capability among U.S. office-based physicians, data from the National Electronic Health Records Survey (NEHRS) for 2017, the most recent data available, were analyzed. An estimated 64.7% of office-based physicians had computerized capability to identify patients who were due for preventive or follow-up care, with 72.9% of primary care physicians and 71.4% of physicians with an EHR system having this capability compared with surgeons (54.8%), nonprimary care physicians (58.5%), and physicians without an EHR system (23.4%). Having an EHR system is associated with the ability to send electronic reminders to increase receipt of preventive or follow-up care, which has been shown to improve patient health outcomes (8).

HIV Testing Trends at Visits to Physician Offices, Community Health Centers, and Emergency Departments - United States, 2009-2017.

In 2019, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services launched the Ending the HIV Epidemic: A Plan for America (EHE) initiative to end the U.S. human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic by 2030. A critical component of the EHE initiative involves early diagnosis of HIV infection, along with prevention of new transmissions, treatment of infections, and response to HIV outbreaks (1). HIV testing is the first step in identifying persons with HIV infection who need to be engaged in treatment and care as well as persons with a negative HIV test result and who are at high risk for infection and can benefit from HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and other prevention services. These opportunities are often missed for persons receiving clinical services in ambulatory care settings (2). Data from the 2009-2016 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) and 2009-2017 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) were analyzed to estimate trends in HIV testing at visits by males and nonpregnant females to physician offices, community health centers (CHCs), and emergency departments (EDs) in the United States. HIV tests were performed at 0.63% of 516 million visits to physician offices, 2.65% of 37 million visits to CHCs, and 0.55% of 87 million visits to EDs. The percentage of visits with an HIV test did not increase at visits to physician offices during 2009-2016, increased at visits to CHC physicians during 2009-2014, and increased slightly at visits to EDs during 2009-2017. All adolescents and adults should have at least one HIV test in their lifetime (3). Strategies that reduce clinical barriers to HIV testing (e.g., clinical decision supports that use information in electronic health records [EHRs] to order an HIV test for persons who require one or standing orders for routine opt-out testing) are needed to increase HIV testing at ambulatory care visits.

Towards ending the human immunodeficiency virus epidemic in the US: State of human immunodeficiency virus screening during physician and emergency department visits, 2009 to 2014.

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing is important for prevention and treatment. Ending the HIV epidemic is unattainable if significant proportions of people living with HIV remain undiagnosed, making HIV testing critical for prevention and treatment. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends routine HIV testing for persons aged 13 to 64 years in all health care settings. This study builds on prior research by estimating the extent to which HIV testing occurs during physician office and emergency department (ED) post 2006 CDC recommendations.We performed an unweighted and weighted cross-sectional analysis using pooled data from 2 nationally representative surveys namely National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2009 to 2014. We assessed routine HIV testing trends and predictive factors in physician offices and ED using multi-stage statistical survey procedures in SAS 9.4.HIV testing rates in physician offices increased by 105% (5.6-11.5 per 1000) over the study period. A steeper increase was observed in ED with a 191% (2.3-6.7 per 1000) increase. Odds ratio (OR) for HIV testing in physician offices were highest among ages 20 to 29 ([OR] 7.20, 99% confidence interval [CI: 4.37-11.85]), males (OR 1.34, [CI: 0.91-0.93]), African-Americans (OR 2.97, [CI: 2.05-4.31]), Hispanics (OR 1.80, [CI: 1.17-2.78]), and among visits occurring in the South (OR 2.06, [CI: 1.23-3.44]). In the ED, similar trends of higher testing odds persisted for African Americans (OR 3.44, 99% CI 2.50-4.73), Hispanics (OR 2.23, 99% CI 1.65-3.01), and Northeast (OR 2.24, 99% CI 1.10-4.54).While progress has been made in screening, HIV testing rates remains sub-optimal for ED visits. Populations visiting the ED for routine care may suffer missed opportunities for HIV testing, which delays their entry into HIV medical care. To end the epidemic, new approaches for increasing targeted routine HIV testing for populations attending health care settings is recommended.

Healthcare costs for abortions performed in ambulatory surgery centers vs office-based settings.

BACKGROUND: Several states require that abortions be provided in ambulatory surgery centers. Supporters of such laws argue that they make abortions safer, yet previous studies have found no differences in abortion-related morbidities or adverse events for abortions performed in ambulatory surgery centers versus office-based settings. However, little is known about how costs of abortions provided in ambulatory surgery centers differ from those provided in office-based settings. OBJECTIVE: To compare healthcare expenditures for abortions performed in ambulatory surgery centers versus office-based settings using a large national private insurance claims database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study compared expenditures for abortions performed in ambulatory surgery centers versus office-based settings. Data on women who had abortions in an ambulatory surgery center or office-based setting between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2014 were obtained from the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database. The sample was limited to women who were continuously enrolled in their insurance plans for at least 1 year before and at least 6 weeks after the abortion. Healthcare expenditures were assessed separately for the index abortion and the 6-week period after the abortion. Costs were measured from the perspective of the healthcare system and included all payments to the provider, including insurance company payments and any patient out-of-pocket payments. RESULTS: Overall, 49,287 beneficiaries who had 50,311 abortions met inclusion criteria. Of the included abortions, 47% were first-trimester aspiration, 27% first-trimester medication, and 26% second-trimester or later abortions. Most abortions (89%) were provided in office-based settings, with 11% provided in ambulatory surgery centers. Unadjusted mean index abortion costs were higher in ambulatory surgery centers than in office-based settings ($1704 versus $810; P < .001). After adjusting for patient clinical and demographic characteristics, costs of index abortions were $772 higher (95% confidence interval, $746-$797), total follow-up costs for abortions that had any follow-up care were $1099 higher (95% confidence interval, $1004-$1,195), and total follow-up costs for abortions that had an abortion-related morbidity or adverse event were not significantly different in ambulatory surgery centers compared to office-based settings. There were also no significant differences in the likelihood of having any follow-up care or abortion-related event follow-up care. CONCLUSION: Abortions performed at ambulatory surgery centers are significantly more costly than those performed in office-based settings, with no difference in the likelihood of receiving follow-up care. Laws requiring that abortions be provided in ambulatory surgery centers may only result in increased costs for abortions, with no effect on abortion safety.

XW-100: First FDA CLIA-Waived CBC Analyzer Designed for Physician Office Use.

BACKGROUND: The XW-100 hematology analyzer (Sysmex America) is the first complete blood count (CBC) instrument waived by the US Food and Drug Administration. This analyzer also tests for a 3-part white blood cell count differential. METHODS: The XW-100 analyzer was evaluated for preanalytical specimen variables including the need for mixing, specimen storage conditions, freeze-thaw cycles, the effect of under filling of tubes, precision, linearity, carryover, limits of the blank, detection, and quantification and interferences from common and CBC-specific substances. The clinical study examined 586 blood samples from 6 CLIA-waived clinical sites and 6 paired moderately complex sites. The point-of-care sites had different medical specialties and were using inexperienced operators. The results of 8 measurements and 4 calculated parameters were compared to a moderately complex point-of-care hematology analyzer (pocH-100i, Sysmex). RESULTS: The precision was <6% for all analytics, and there was no carryover noted. Samples containing interfering substances were appropriately flagged or suppressed by the instrument. The correlation to the predicate analyzer was highly concordant, producing near unity slope and intercept and minimal bias. Delays from sample collection to testing resulted in decreased performance. The percentage of samples inside the allowable error was >98.8% for all parameters studied. CONCLUSION: This CLIA-waived hematology analyzer produces acceptable results and can be used in offices and clinics.

Cancer care spending and use by site of provider-administered chemotherapy in Medicare.

OBJECTIVES: To compare cancer care spending and utilization by site of provider-administered chemotherapy in Medicare. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective analysis using 2010-2013 Medicare claims. METHODS: The study population was a random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with cancer who initiated provider-administered chemotherapy in a hospital outpatient department (HOPD) or physician office (PO). We assessed the following outcomes during the 6-month follow-up period: (1) spending on cancer-related outpatient services excluding chemotherapy, (2) spending on cancer-related inpatient services, (3) utilization of select cancer-related outpatient services (evaluation and management, commonly used expensive billing codes, and radiation therapy sessions), and (4) the number of cancer-related hospitalizations. We used regression analyses to adjust for patient health risk factors and market characteristics. RESULTS: During the 6-month follow-up period, risk-adjusted spending on nonchemotherapy outpatient services was slightly lower among patients receiving chemotherapy in HOPDs than in POs ($12,183 [95% CI, $12,008-$12,358] vs $12,444 [95% CI, $12,313-$12,575]; P <.05). Risk-adjusted cancer-related inpatient spending was higher in the HOPD group than in the PO group ($3996 [95% CI, $3837-$4156] vs $3168 [95% CI, $3067-$3268]; P <.01). The HOPD group had fewer visits in all select outpatient services but had a higher number of hospitalizations than the PO group. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in cancer care spending by site of chemotherapy (HOPDs vs POs) vary by service type. Those differences are partially driven by utilization differences. As the site of chemotherapy shifts from POs to HOPDs, spending and utilization patterns in both settings need to be monitored.

Same-Day vs Different-Day Elective Upper and Lower Endoscopic Procedures by Setting.

Importance: Performing elective upper and lower endoscopic procedures on the same day is a patient-centered and less costly approach than a 2-stage approach performed on different days, when clinically appropriate. Whether this practice pattern varies based on practice setting has not been studied. Objectives: To estimate the rate of different-day upper and lower endoscopic procedures in 3 types of outpatient settings and investigate the factors associated with the performance of these procedures on different days. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective analysis was conducted of Medicare claims between January 1, 2011, and June 30, 2018, for Medicare beneficiaries who underwent a pair of upper and lower endoscopic procedures performed within 90 days of each other at hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs), freestanding ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), and physician offices. Main Outcomes and Measures: Undergoing an upper and a lower endoscopic procedure on different days, adjusted for patient characteristics (age, sex, race/ethnicity, residence location and region, comorbidity, and procedure indication) and physician characteristics (sex, years in practice, procedure volume, and primary specialty). Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs were calculated. Results: A total of 4 028 587 procedure pairs were identified, of which 52.5% were performed in HOPDs, 43.3% in ASCs, and 4.2% in physician offices. The rate of different-day procedures was 13.6% in HOPDs, 22.2% in ASCs, and 47.7% in physician offices. For the 7564 physicians who practiced at both HOPDs and ASCs, their different-day procedure rate changed from 14.1% at HOPDs to 19.4% at ASCs. For the 993 physicians who practiced at both HOPDs and physician offices, their different-day procedure rate changed from 15.8% at HOPDs to 37.4% at physician offices. Patients were more likely to undergo different-day procedures at physician offices and ASCs compared with HOPDs, even after adjusting for patient and physician characteristics (physician office vs HOPD: aOR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.85-2.20; ASC vs HOPD: aOR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.23-1.32). Older age (85-94 years vs 65-74 years: aOR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.08-1.11; 95 years or older vs 65-74 years: aOR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.26), black and Hispanic race/ethnicity (black: aOR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.12-1.17; Hispanic: aOR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.10-1.14), and residing in the Northeast region (adjusted OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.28-1.36) were risk factors for undergoing different-day procedures. Micropolitan location (aOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.96) and rural location (aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.89-0.93), more comorbidities (≥5: aOR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.74-0.76), physician's fewer years in practice (aOR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.81-0.87), physician's higher procedure volume (aOR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.62-0.68), and physician's specialty of general surgery (aOR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.80-0.91) were protective factors. Conclusions and Relevance: Physician offices and ASCs had much higher different-day procedure rates compared with HOPDs. This disparity may represent an opportunity for quality improvement and financial savings for common endoscopic procedures.

Association between income levels and irregular physician visits after a health checkup, and its consequent effect on glycemic control among employees: A retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study.

AIMS/INTRODUCTION: The present study aimed to evaluate the effects of income levels on physician visit patterns and to quantify the consequent impact of irregular physician visits on glycemic control among employees' health insurance beneficiaries in Japan. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We obtained specific health checkup data of untreated diabetes patients from the Fukuoka branch of the Japanese Health Insurance Association. We selected 2,981 insurance beneficiaries and classified 650 and 2,331 patients into, respectively, the regular visit and irregular visit group. We implemented propensity score matching to select an adequate control group. RESULTS: Compared with those with a standard monthly income <$2,000 (US$1 = ¥100), those with a higher monthly income were less likely to have irregular visits; $2,000-2,999: odds ratio 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.56-0.98), $3,000-3,999: odds ratio 0.63 (95% confidence interval 0.46-0.87) and ≥$5,000: odds ratio 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.39-0.86). After propensity score matching and adjusting for covariates, the irregular visit group tended to have poor glycemic control; increased glycated hemoglobin ≥0.5: odds ratio 1.90 (95% confidence interval 1.30-2.77), ≥1.0: odds ratio 2.75 (95% confidence interval 1.56-4.82) and ≥20% relatively: odds ratio 3.18 (95% confidence interval 1.46-6.92). CONCLUSIONS: We clarified that there was a significant relationship between income and irregular visits, and this consequently resulted in poor glycemic control. These findings would be useful for more effective disease management.

Characteristics of Office-based Physician Visits, 2016.

In 2016, most Americans had a usual place to receive health care (86% of adults and 96% of children) (1,2). The majority of children and adults listed a doctor's office as the usual place they received care (1,2). In 2016, there were an estimated 883.7 million office-based physician visits in the United States (3,4). This report examines visit rates by age and sex. It also examines visit characteristics-including insurance status, reason for visit, and services-by age. Estimates use data from the 2016 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS).

Estimated Annual Deaths, Hospitalizations, and Emergency Department and Physician Office Visits from Foodborne Illness in Ontario.

Public Health Ontario is working to estimate the burden of disease from environmental hazards in Ontario, Canada. As part of this effort, we estimated deaths and health care utilization resulting from exposure to pathogens and toxic substances in food. We applied fractions for the proportion of illness attributable to foodborne transmission to the annual (2008-2012) counts of deaths, hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and physician office visits for 15 diseases (13 pathogen-specific diseases and 2 nonspecific syndromes) captured by administrative health data. Nonspecific gastroenteritis (causative agent unknown) was the dominant disease, accounting for 98% of ED visits, 94% of hospitalizations, and 88% of deaths annually attributed to the 15 diseases. We estimated that foodborne nonspecific gastroenteritis results in ∼137,000 physician office visits (1000/100,000 population), 40,000 ED visits (310/100,000), 6200 hospitalizations (47/100,000), and 59 deaths (0.45/100,000) in Ontario per year (mean estimates). Our results indicate that pathogen-specific approaches to foodborne disease surveillance can substantially underestimate the deaths and illness resulting from exposure to foodborne pathogens and other causes of foodborne illness.

Mental Health-related Physician Office Visits by Adults Aged 18 and Over: United States, 2012-2014.

In 2016, mental illness affected about 45 million U.S. adults (1). Although mental health-related office visits are often made to psychiatrists (2), primary care physicians can serve as the main source of treatment for patients with mental health issues (3); however, availability of provider type may vary by geographic region (3,4). This report uses data from the 2012-2014 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) to examine adult mental healthrelated physician office visits by specialty and selected patient characteristics.

Characteristics of Office-based Physician Visits, 2015.

In 2015, most Americans had a usual place to receive health care (85% of adults and 96% of children) (1,2). The majority of children and adults listed a doctor's office as the usual place they received care (1,2). In 2015, there were an estimated 990.8 million office-based physician visits in the United States (3,4). This report examines visit rates by age and sex. It also examines visit characteristics-including insurance status, reason for visit, and services-by age. Estimates use data from the 2015 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS).

Physician visits and the timing of skeletal-related events among men newly diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer: A cohort analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Men diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) are at increased risk for skeletal complications which are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Although both the urologist and the medical oncologist play important roles in the management of patients with advanced PCa, there is limited information regarding their role in the context of skeletal complications. The current study investigated these relationships among newly diagnosed metastatic patients with PCa. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This retrospective cohort study used Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results cancer registry data for incident stage IV metastatic (M1) cases diagnosed from 2000 to 2007 with linked Medicare claims. Postdiagnosis urologist and medical oncologist visits were identified using billing codes. We considered skeletal-related events (SREs) that occurred after the urologist or medical oncologist visit. We used Cox proportional hazards models to examine the relationship between a physician visit and the timing of the first SRE with and without propensity-score matching to account for observable selection. RESULTS: The sample included 5,572 patients with stage IV M1 prostate cancer. Seventy-six percent of the patients were non-Hispanic White, 16% were non-Hispanic African American, and 8% were of other races; 75% of patients saw a urologist (median time to first visit = 19 days) and 44% saw an oncologist (median = 80 days), whereas 41% experienced at least one SRE (median = 309 days). Covariate-adjusted Cox models showed a longer time to an SRE for patients with only a medical oncologist visit (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.45-0.61), only a urologist visit (HR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.31-0.39) or both a urologist and medical oncologist visit (HR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.31-0.38), compared to individuals without these visits. Among men with a urologist visit, a medical oncologist visit was not associated with the time to the first SRE (HR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.90-1.05). Among those without a urologist visit a medical oncologist visit was associated with a longer time to an SRE (HR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.46-0.64). Results were comparable using propensity-score matched samples. CONCLUSION: Among men newly diagnosed with metastatic PCa, 4 of 10 patients experienced an SRE. Patients experienced a delay in skeletal complications when managed by a urologist or a medical oncologist compared to patients who did not see either specialist.

Association between supplementary private health insurance and visits to physician offices versus hospital outpatient departments among adults with diabetes in the universal public insurance system.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease with a high prevalence across the world as well as in South Korea. Most cases of diabetes can be adequately managed at physician offices, but many diabetes patients receive outpatient care at hospitals. This study examines the relationship between supplementary private health insurance (SPHI) ownership and the use of hospitals among diabetes outpatients within the universal public health insurance scheme. METHODS: Data from the 2011 Korea Health Panel, a nationally representative sample of Korean individuals, was used. For the study, 6,379 visits for diabetes care were selected while controlling for clustered errors. Multiple logistic regression models were used to examine determinants of hospital outpatient services. RESULTS: This study demonstrated that the variables of self-rated health status, comorbidity, unmet need, and alcohol consumption significantly correlated with the choice to use a hospital services. Patients with SPHI were more likely to use medical services at hospitals by 1.71 times (95% CI 1.068-2.740, P = 0.026) compared to patients without SPHI. CONCLUSIONS: It was confirmed that diabetic patients insured by SPHI had more use of hospital services than those who were not insured. People insured by SPHI seem to be more likely to use hospital services because SPHI lightens the economic burden of care.