Search

Objective There is a high prevalence of obesity in people with asthma, and obesity is associated with poorly controlled asthma. Significant weight loss might improve asthma control: the purpose of this study was to investigate patient characteristics and factors that might affect implementation of a weight loss and/or roflumilast intervention, to target both obesity and asthma. Methods A cross‐sectional study of people with obesity and poorly controlled asthma performed at 13 sites across the United States. Results One hundred and two people participated in this study. Median BMI was 37 (IQR 35–42). The majority, 55%, were African American and 76% were female. Fifty two percent had very poorly controlled asthma. Most participants were quite sedentary (70% reported being inactive or participating only in light‐intensity activities according to the Stanford Brief Activity Survey). Participants reported significant impairments related to physical function on the Impact of Weight on Quality of Life‐Lite questionnaire (median score 67 [IQR 41–84]). Thirty‐five percent of participants reported mild, and 2 % moderate, depressive symptoms as assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire‐9. Conclusions Poorly controlled asthma and obesity often affect minority populations and are associated with significant impairments in health related to physical function and low levels of physical activity that might complicate efforts to lose weight. Interventions targeted at poorly controlled asthma associated with obesity in the United States need to address factors complicating health in underserved communities, such as increasing opportunities for physical activity, while also managing activity limitations related to the combination of asthma and obesity.

Rationale: Decreasing medication overuse represents an opportunity to avoid harm and costs in the era of value-based purchasing. Studies of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) overuse in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have examined prevalent use. Understanding initiation of low-value ICS among complex patients with COPD may help shape deadoption efforts. Objectives: Examine ICS initiation among a cohort with low exacerbation risk COPD and test for associations with markers of patient and health system complexity. Methods: Between 2012 and 2016, we identified veterans with COPD from 21 centers. Our primary outcome was first prescription of ICS. We used the care assessment needs (CAN) score to assess patient-level complexity as the primary exposure. We used a time-to-event model with time-varying exposures over 1-year follow-up. We tested for effect modification using selected measures of health system complexity. Results: We identified 8,497 patients with COPD without an indication for ICS and did not have baseline use (inception cohort). Follow-up time was four quarters. Patient complexity by a continuous CAN score was associated with new dispensing of ICS (hazard ratio = 1.17 per 10-unit change; 95% confidence interval = 1.13–1.21). This association demonstrated a dose–response when examining quartiles of CAN score. Markers of health system complexity did not modify the association between patient complexity and first use of low-value ICS. Conclusions: Patient complexity may represent a symptom burden that clinicians are attempting to mitigate by initiating ICS. Lack of effect modification by health system complexity may reflect the paucity of structural support and low prioritization for COPD care.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of hospital readmissions in the United States. The quality of care delivered to patients with COPD is known to be lacking across the care continuum, and may contribute to high rates of readmission. As part of the response to these issues, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid instituted a penalty for 30-day readmissions as part of their Hospital Readmission Reduction Program in October 2014. At the time the penalty was instated, there was little published evidence on effective hospital-based programs to reduce readmissions after acute exacerbations of COPD. Even now, several years later, few published programs exist, and we continue to lack consistent approaches that lead to improved readmission rates. In addition, there was concern that the penalty would widen health disparities. Despite the dearth of published evidence to reduce readmissions beyond available COPD guidelines, many hospitals across the United States began to develop and implement programs, based on little evidence, due to the financial penalty. We, therefore, assembled a diverse group of clinicians, researchers, payers, and program leaders from across the country to present and discuss approaches that had the greatest potential for success. We drew on expertise from ongoing readmission reduction programs, implementation methodologies, and stakeholder perspectives to develop this Workshop Report on current best practices and models for addressing COPD hospital readmissions.

Introduction Initiating treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) traditionally relies on in-person visits with trained therapists to provide hands-on instruction regarding CPAP usage and mask fit. To overcome geographic barriers and reduce COVID-19 transmission, health systems increasingly rely on remote set-ups of mailed equipment. Despite a strong rationale for the mailed approach, relative effectiveness is unclear. Methods Our VA medical center shifted from in-person to mailed CPAP dispensation during the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. Using VA administrative and wireless CPAP usage data, we assembled a cohort of patients with newly diagnosed obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) who initiated CPAP for the first time from July 2019 to August 2020. Our primary outcome was mean nightly usage over the first 90 days. We compared patients with in-person vs. mailed CPAP dispensation using generalized linear models adjusted for age, gender, race, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Among patients with >1 hour of overall usage, we compared secondary outcomes of leak, apnea hypopnea index (AHI), and obstructive/central apnea indices. Results We identified 693 patients with newly diagnosed OSA whose CPAP was provided in-person and 296 who had CPAP mailed. Nightly usage in the first 90 days was modest in both groups (in-person: 149.7, mailed: 152.9 min/night), and we did not detect a difference in adjusted models (+7.6 min/night, 95%CI -13.6–28.8). We also did not detect a difference in 95th percentile leak (-1.2 liter/minute, 95%CI -3.3-0.9). Device-detected AHI was relatively low overall (in-person: 3.2, mailed: 4.1 events/hour), but was greater in the mailout group (+1.0/hour, 95%CI 0.2–1.7). AHI differences appeared to be driven by obstructive (+0.5/hour, 95%CI 0.2–0.8) but not central events (-0.1, 95% CI -0.2–0.4). Risk of AHI>5 was comparable between groups (in-person: 17.3%, mailed: 19.0%, OR 1.2, 95%CI 0.8–1.7). Conclusion We were able to switch from an in-person to a mail-based system of CPAP initiation without a change in CPAP adherence or mask leak. While AHI was slightly greater in the mailed group, the clinical significance of this finding is unclear. Future work will need to evaluate the impact of remote CPAP dispensation on patient-centered outcomes. Support (if any) VA Health Services Research and Development, CDA 18–187

Rationale: Symptoms of insomnia and anxiety are common among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), especially among patients with comorbid mental health disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Benzodiazepines provide temporary relief of these symptoms, but guidelines discourage routine use of benzodiazepines because of the serious risks posed by these medications. A more thorough understanding of guideline-discordant benzodiazepine use will be critical to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing and its associated risks. Objectives: Examine the national prevalence, variability, and center correlates of long-term benzodiazepine prescriptions for patients with COPD and comorbid PTSD. Methods: We identified patients with COPD and PTSD between 2010 and 2012 who received care within the Department of Veterans Affairs. We used a mixed-effects logistic regression model to assess center predictors of long-term benzodiazepine prescriptions (≥90 d), while accounting for patient characteristics. Results: Of 43,979 patients diagnosed with COPD and PTSD at 129 centers, 24.4% were prescribed benzodiazepines long term, with use varying from 9.5% to 49.4% by medical center. Patients with long-term prescriptions were more likely to be white (90.1% vs. 80.7%) and have other mental health comorbidities, including generalized anxiety disorder (31.3% vs. 16.5%). Accounting for patient mix and characteristics, long-term benzodiazepine use was associated with lower patient-reported access to mental health care (odds ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.37–0.80). Conclusions: Long-term benzodiazepine prescribing is common among patients at high risk for complications, although this practice varies substantially from center to center. Poor access to mental health care is a potential driver of this guideline inconsistent use.

The Long-Term Oxygen Treatment Trial demonstrated that long-term supplemental oxygen did not reduce time to hospital admission or death for patients who have stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and resting and/or exercise-induced moderate oxyhemoglobin desaturation, nor did it provide benefit for any other outcome measured in the trial. Nine months after initiation of patient screening, after randomization of 34 patients to treatment, a trial design amendment broadened the eligible population, expanded the primary outcome, and reduced the goal sample size. Within a few years, the protocol underwent minor modifications, and a second trial design amendment lowered the required sample size because of lower than expected treatment group crossover rates. After 5.5 years of recruitment, the trial met its amended sample size goal, and 1 year later, it achieved its follow-up goal. The process of publishing the trial results brought renewed scrutiny of the study design and the amendments. This article expands on the previously published design and methods information, provides the rationale for the amendments, and gives insight into the investigators' decisions about trial conduct. The story of the Long-Term Oxygen Treatment Trial may assist investigators in future trials, especially those that seek to assess the efficacy and safety of long-term oxygen therapy. Clinical trial registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00692198).

Background Guidelines discourage routine administration of antibiotics during exacerbations of asthma, however little is known about treatment patterns in clinical practice. To determine the frequency of antibiotic use in the management of patients hospitalized for asthma and to identify factors associated with treatment.

From the Authors: We thank Dr. Edelman for his interest in our Pulmonary Perspectives piece discussing the addition of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to Medicare’s Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (1). For the reasons outlined within our article, we believe the current evidence is insufficient to justify the use of 30-day all-cause readmission after COPD exacerbation as an accountability measure to penalize hospitals. We agree with conceptual framework, as described by Chassin and colleagues, that for a measure to be used for accountability, in contrast to being a potential indicator of quality, the relationship between the measure and desired outcome need to be tightly linked (2). The hospital readmission accountability measure does not achieve that threshold. As Dr. Edelman points out, there remain a number of issues that are outside of a hospital’s control (such as air quality) that contribute to the likelihood that a patient will be readmitted after an exacerbation of COPD, yet are not accounted for within the risk-adjusted readmission rates calculated under the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program. Inclusion of COPD in the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program has brought significantly more national attention to this long-underrepresented condition, a possible benefit that may come from the new accountability measure. We continue to support having health care facilities and systems use data on variation in readmission to inform quality improvement initiatives targeting COPD. We also remain hopeful that this attention to COPD will result in the discovery of evidence-based interventions that decrease exacerbations and hospital admissions and improve the quality of life for the millions of Americans with this devastating disease.

Many health care performance measures are either not based on high-quality clinical evidence or not tightly linked to patient-centered outcomes, limiting their usefulness in quality improvement. In this report we summarize the proceedings of an American Thoracic Society workshop convened to address this problem by reviewing current approaches to performance measure development and creating a framework for developing high-quality performance measures by basing them directly on recommendations from well-constructed clinical practice guidelines. Workshop participants concluded that ideally performance measures addressing care processes should be linked to clinical practice guidelines that explicitly rate the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations, such as the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) process. Under this framework, process-based performance measures would only be developed from strong recommendations based on high- or moderate-quality evidence. This approach would help ensure that clinical processes specified in performance measures are both of clear benefit to patients and supported by strong evidence. Although this approach may result in fewer performance measures, it would substantially increase the likelihood that quality-improvement programs based on these measures actually improve patient care.

Background: Minority race and lower socioeconomic status are associated with poorer patient ratings of health care quality and provider communication. Objective: To examine the association of race/ethnicity or socioeconomic status with patients' and families' ratings of end-of-life care and communication about end-of-life care provided by physicians-in-training. Methods: As a component of a randomized trial evaluating a program designed to improve clinician communication about end-of-life care, patients and patients' families completed preintervention survey data regarding care and communication provided by internal medicine residents and medical subspecialty fellows. We examined associations between patient and family race or socioeconomic status and ratings they gave trainees on two questionnaires: the Quality of End-of-Life Care (QEOLC) and Quality of Communication (QOC). Results: Patients from racial/ethnic minority groups, patients with lower income, and patients with lower educational attainment gave trainees higher ratings on the end-of-life care subscale of the QOC (QOCeol). In path models, patient educational attainment and income had a direct effect on outcomes, while race/ethnicity did not. Lower family educational attainment was also associated with higher trainee ratings on the QOCeol, while family non-white race was associated with lower trainee ratings on the QEOLC and general subscale of the QOC. Conclusions: Patient race is associated with perceptions of the quality of communication about end-of-life care provided by physicians-in-training, but the association was opposite to our hypothesis and appears to be mediated by socioeconomic status. Family member predictors of these perceptions differ from those observed for patients. Further investigation of these associations may guide interventions to improve care delivered to patients and families.