Search

Hearing loss is common among older adults. Thus, it was of interest to explore differences in health care utilization and costs associated with hearing loss and hearing aid use. Hearing loss and hearing aid use were assessed through self-reports and included 5 categories: no hearing loss, aided mild, unaided mild, aided severe, and unaided severe hearing loss. Health care utilization and costs were obtained from medical claims. Those with aided mild or severe hearing loss were significantly more likely to have an emergency department visit. Conversely, those with aided severe hearing loss were about 15% less likely to be hospitalized. Individuals with unaided severe hearing loss had the highest annual medical costs ($14349) compared with those with no hearing loss ($12118, P < .001). In this study, those with unaided severe hearing loss had the highest medical costs. Further studies should attempt to better understand the relationship between hearing loss, hearing aid use, and medical costs.

The objective of this study was to define the risk of hearing loss among US military members in relation to their deployment experiences. Data were drawn from the Millennium Cohort Study. Self-reported data and objective military service data were used to assess exposures and outcomes. Among all 48,540 participants, 7.5% self-reported new-onset hearing loss. Self-reported hearing loss showed moderate to substantial agreement (k = 0.57-0.69) with objective audiometric measures. New-onset hearing loss was associated with combat deployment (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.49-1.77), as well as male sex and older age. Among deployers, new-onset hearing loss was also associated with proximity to improvised explosive devices (AOR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.62-2.73) and with experiencing a combat-related head injury (AOR = 6.88, 95% CI = 3.77-12.54). These findings have implications for health care and disability planning, as well as for prevention programs.

The effect of military deployments to combat environments on disordered eating and weight changes is unknown. Using longitudinal data from Millennium Cohort Study participants who completed baseline (2001–2003) and follow-up (2004–2006) questionnaires (n = 48,378), the authors investigated new-onset disordered eating and weight changes in a large military cohort. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare these outcomes among those who deployed and reported combat exposures, those who deployed but did not report combat exposures, and those who did not deploy in support of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Deployment was not significantly associated with new-onset disordered eating in women or men, after adjustment for baseline demographic, military, and behavioral characteristics. However, in subgroup comparison analyses of deployers, deployed women reporting combat exposures were 1.78 times more likely to report new-onset disordered eating (95% confidence interval: 1.02, 3.11) and 2.35 times more likely to lose 10% or more of their body weight compared with women who deployed but did not report combat exposures (95% confidence interval: 1.17, 4.70). Despite no significant overall association between deployment and disordered eating and weight changes, deployed women reporting combat exposures represent a subgroup at higher risk for developing eating problems and weight loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of the Study: Many adults 65 years or older have high health care needs and costs. Here, we describe their care coordination challenges., Primary Practice Setting: Individuals with an AARP Medicare Supplement Insurance plan insured by UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company (for New York residents, UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company of New York)., Methodology and Sample: The three groups included the highest needs, highest costs (the "highest group"), the high needs, high costs (the "high group"), and the "all other group." Eligibility was determined by applying an internally developed algorithm based upon a number of criteria, including hierarchical condition category score, the Optum ImpactPro prospective risk score, as well as diagnoses of coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, or diabetes., Results: The highest group comprised 2%, although consumed 12% of health care expenditures. The high group comprised 20% and consumed 46% of expenditures, whereas the all other group comprised 78% and consumed 42% of expenditures. On average, the highest group had $102,798 in yearly health care expenditures, compared with $34,610 and $7,634 for the high and all other groups, respectively. Fifty-seven percent of the highest group saw 16 or more different providers annually, compared with 21% and 2% of the high and all other groups, respectively. Finally, 28% of the highest group had prescriptions from at least seven different providers, compared with 20% and 5% of the high and all other groups, respectively., Implications for Case Management Practice: Individuals with high health care needs and costs have visits to numerous health care providers and receive multiple prescriptions for pharmacotherapy. As a result, these individuals can become overwhelmed trying to manage and coordinate their health care needs. Care coordination programs may help these individuals coordinate their care.

Purpose of the Study: To find out why individuals choose to engage, disengage, or not to engage in care coordination programs that are meant to improve their health and better navigate the medical care system., Primary Practice Setting: Care coordination program designed for individuals with an AARP Medicare Supplement Insurance Plan., Methodology and Sample: A 2-phase study was used involving insureds eligible for disease, depression, or case management programs. The study focused on those who participated in these programs (i.e., the engaged group), those who left the programs after starting their participation (the disengaged group), and those who never engaged in these programs. A telephone survey was conducted first, followed by focus groups and in-depth telephone interviews to address interesting findings from the survey., Results: The top reasons for program engagement included believing that the program would be helpful (39%), liking its convenience (14%), and because participation was at no additional cost (9%). The top reasons for not engaging included not seeing potential benefit from engagement (28%) and being comfortable with current health care processes (19%). Reasons given for disengaging included lack of time (15%), not believing the program was helpful (13%), not understanding what the program provided (13%), or being unaware of the program (11%). Among the key findings from the focus groups were that individuals who felt they were not getting sufficient support from their medical providers or those needing a sounding board were more likely to engage., Implications for Case Management Practice: This study provides valuable insight regarding how to best engage individuals with such a plan and who are qualified for care coordination programs. These results suggest that those most motivated to engage are those who are well informed of the program benefits and have a perceived need, such as living alone and needing a sounding board.