Search

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had a profound social and economic impact across the United States due to the lockdowns and consequent changes to everyday activities in social spaces. Methods: The COVID-19's Unequal Racial Burden (CURB) survey was a nationally representative, online survey of 5,500 American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Latino (English- and Spanish-speaking), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, White, and multiracial adults living in the U.S. For this analysis, we used data from the 1,931 participants who responded to the 6-month follow-up survey conducted between 8/16/2021-9/9/2021. As part of the follow-up survey, participants were asked "What was the worst thing about the pandemic that you experienced?" and "Was there anything positive in your life that resulted from the pandemic?" Verbatim responses were coded independently by two coders using open and axial coding techniques to identify salient themes, definitions of themes, and illustrative quotes, with reconciliation across coders. Chi-square tests were used to estimate the association between sociodemographics and salient themes. Results: Commonly reported negative themes among participants reflected disrupted lifestyle/routine (27.4%), not seeing family and friends (9.8%), and negative economic impacts (10.0%). Positive themes included improved relationships (16.9%), improved financial situation (10.1%), and positive employment changes (9.8%). Differences in themes were seen across race-ethnicity, gender, and age; for example, adults ≥ 65 years old, compared to adults 18–64, were more likely to report disrupted routine/lifestyle (37.6% vs. 24.2%, p < 0.001) as a negative aspect of the pandemic, and Spanish-speaking Latino adults were much more likely to report improved relationships compared to other racial-ethnic groups (31.1% vs. 14.8–18.6%, p = 0.03). Discussion: Positive and negative experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic varied widely and differed across race-ethnicity, gender, and age. Future public health interventions should work to mitigate negative social and economic impacts and facilitate posttraumatic growth associated with pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Advancing healthcare access and quality for underserved populations requires a diverse, culturally competent interprofessional workforce. However, high educational debt may influence career choice of healthcare professionals. In the United States, health professions lack insight into the maximum educational debt that can be supported by current entry-level salaries. The purpose of this interprofessional economic analysis was to examine whether average educational debt for US healthcare graduates is supportable by entry-level salaries. Additionally, the study explored whether trainees from minoritized backgrounds graduate with more educational debt than their peers in physical therapy. Methods: The study modeled maximum educational debt service ratios for 12 healthcare professions and 6 physician specialties, incorporating profession-specific estimates of entry-level salary, salary growth, national average debt, and 4 loan repayment scenarios offered by the US Department of Education Office of Student Financial Aid. Net present value (NPV) provided an estimate for lifetime "economic power" for the modeled careers. The study used a unique data source available from a single profession (physical therapy, N = 4,954) to examine whether educational debt thresholds based on the repayment model varied between minoritized groups and non-minoritized peers. Results: High salary physician specialties (e.g. obstetrics/gynecology, surgery) and professions without graduate debt (e.g. registered nurse) met debt ratio targets under any repayment plan. Professions with strong salary growth and moderate debt (e.g. physician assistant) required extended repayment plans but had high career NPV. Careers with low salary growth and high debt relative to salary (e.g. physical therapy) had career NPV at the lowest range of modeled professions. 29% of physical therapy students graduated with more debt than could be supported by entry-level salaries. Physical therapy students from minoritized groups graduated with 10–30% more debt than their non-minoritized peers. Conclusions: Graduates from most healthcare professions required extended repayment plans (higher interest) to meet debt ratio benchmarks. For several healthcare professions, low debt relative to salary protected career NPV. Students from minoritized groups incurred higher debt than their peers in physical therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Colombia, the best strategy to establish indication for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer (EBC) remains unknown. This study aimed to identify the cost-utility of Oncotype DX™ (ODX) or Mammaprint™ (MMP) tests to establish the necessity of adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods: This study used an adapted decision-analytic model to compare cost and outcomes of care between ODX or MMP tests and routine care without ODX or MMP tests (adjuvant chemotherapy for all patients) over a 5-year time horizon from the perspective of the Colombian National Health System (NHS; payer). Inputs were obtained from national unit cost tariffs, published literature, and clinical trial database. The study population comprised women with hormone-receptor-positive (HR +), HER2-negative, lymph-node-negative (LN0) EBC with high-risk clinical criteria for recurrence. The outcome measures were discounted incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR; 2021 United States dollar per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained) and net monetary benefit (NMB). Probabilistic (PSA) and deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA) were performed. Results: ODX increases QALYs by 0.05 and MMP by 0.03 with savings of $2374 and $554 compared with the standard strategy, respectively, and were cost-saving in cost-utility plane. NMB for ODX was $2203 and for MMP was $416. Both tests dominate the standard strategy. Sensitivity analysis revealed that with a threshold of 1 gross domestic product per capita, ODX will be cost-effective in 95.5% of the cases compared with 70.2% cases involving MMP.DSA showed that the variable with significant influence was the monthly cost of adjuvant chemotherapy. PSA revealed that ODX was a consistently superior strategy. Conclusions: Genomic profiling using ODX or MMP tests to define the need of adjuvant chemotherapy treatment in patients with HR + and HER2 −EBC is a cost-effective strategy that allows Colombian NHS to maintain budget. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Uncomplicated urinary tract infections (uUTIs) are one of the most common bacterial infections in the United States (US). Contemporary data are important for understanding the health economic impact of antimicrobial-resistant uUTIs. We compared the economic burden among patients with uUTI isolates susceptible or not-susceptible to the initial antibiotic prescription. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized electronic health record data (1 July 2016–31 March 2020) from a large Mid-Atlantic US integrated delivery network database. Patients were females aged ≥ 12 years with a uUTI, who received oral antibiotic treatment and had ≥ 1 urine culture within ± 5 days of diagnosis. The primary outcome was the difference in healthcare resource use and costs (all-cause, urinary tract infection [UTI]-related) among patients with susceptible versus not-susceptible isolates during the 6 months after the index uUTI diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included: pharmacy costs, hospital admissions and emergency department visits, as well as the probability of uUTI progressing to complicated UTI (cUTI) between patients with susceptible and not-susceptible isolates. Patient outcomes were compared using 1:1 propensity score matching. Winsorized costs were adjusted to 2020 quarter 1 US dollars ($). Results: A total of 2565 patients were eligible for analysis. The propensity score-matched sample comprised 2018 patients, with an average age of 44.0 and 41.0 years for the susceptible and not-susceptible populations, respectively. In the 6 months post-index uUTI event, patients with not-susceptible isolates had significantly more all-cause prescriptions orders (+ 1.41 [P = 0.001]), UTI-related prescriptions orders (+ 0.26 [P < 0.001]) and a higher probability of all-cause inpatient (+ 1.4% [P = 0.009]), outpatient (+ 6.1% [P = 0.006]), or UTI-related outpatient (+ 3.7% [P = 0.039]) encounters. Patients with a uUTI and an antibiotic-not-susceptible isolate were significantly more likely to progress to cUTI than those with susceptible isolates (odds ratio: 2.35 [confidence interval: 1.66–3.33; P < 0.001]). Over 6 months, patients with not-susceptible versus susceptible isolates had significantly higher all-cause costs (+ $426 [P = 0.031]) and UTI-related costs (+ $157 [P = 0.034]). Conclusions: Patients with a uUTI caused by antibiotic-not-susceptible isolates had higher healthcare resource usage, costs, and increased likelihood of progressing to cUTI than those with antibiotic-susceptible isolates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since COVID-19 first appeared in the United States (US) in January 2020, US states have pursued a wide range of policies to mitigate the spread of the virus and its economic ramifications. Without unified federal guidance, states have been the front lines of the policy response.Main Text: We created the COVID-19 US State Policy (CUSP) database ( https://statepolicies.com/ ) to document the dates and components of economic relief and public health measures issued at the state level in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Documented interventions included school and business closures, face mask mandates, directives on vaccine eligibility, eviction moratoria, and expanded unemployment insurance benefits. By providing continually updated information, CUSP was designed to inform rapid-response, policy-relevant research in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and has been widely used to investigate the impact of state policies on population health and health equity. This paper introduces the CUSP database and highlights how it is already informing the COVID-19 pandemic response in the US.Conclusion: CUSP is the most comprehensive publicly available policy database of health, social, and economic policies in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. CUSP documents widespread variation in state policy decisions and implementation dates across the US and serves as a freely available and valuable resource to policymakers and researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health disparities are pervasive and are linked to economic losses in the United States of up to $135 billion per year. The Flint Center for Health Equity Solutions (FCHES) is a Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center for health disparities research funded by the National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD). The purpose of this study was to estimate the economic impact of the 5-year investment in FCHES in Genesee County, Michigan.Methods: The estimated impacts of FCHES were calculated using a U.S.-specific input/output (I/O) model, IMPLAN, from IMPLAN Group, LLC., which provides a software system to access geographic specific data regarding economic sector interactions from a variety of sources. This allowed us to model the cross-sector economic activity that occurred throughout Genesee County, Michigan, as a result of the FCHES investment. The overall economic impacts were estimated as the sum of three impact types: 1. Direct (the specific expenditures impact of FCHES and the Scientific Research and Development Services sector); 2. Indirect (the impact on suppliers to FCHES and the Scientific Research and Development Services sector); and 3. Induced (the additional economic impact of the spending of these suppliers and employees in the county economy).Results: The total FCHES investment amounted to approximately $11 million between 2016 and 2020. Overall, combined direct, indirect, and induced impacts of the total FCHES federal investment in Genesee County included over 161 job-years, over $7.6 million in personal income, and more than $19.2 million in economic output. In addition, this combined economic activity generated close to $2.3 million in state/local and federal tax revenue. The impact multipliers show the ripple effect of the FCHES investment. For example, the overall output of over $19.2 million led to an impact multiplier of 1.75 - every $1 of federal FCHES investment led to an additional $.75 of economic output in Genesee County.Conclusions: The FCHES research funding yields significant direct economic impacts above and beyond the direct NIH investment of $11 million. The economic impact estimation method may be relevant and generalizable to other large research centers such as FCHES. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While the traditional Medicare program imposes a deductible for hospital admissions, many Medicare Advantage plans have instituted per-diem copayments for hospital care. Little evidence exists about the effects of changes in cost-sharing for hospital care among the elderly. Changing inpatient benefits from a deductible to a per diem may benefit enrollees with shorter lengths of stay, but adversely affect the out-of-pocket burden for hospitalized enrollees with longer lengths of stay.Methods: We used a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences study to compare longitudinal changes in proportion hospitalized, inpatient admissions and days per 100 enrollees, and hospital length of stay between enrollees in MA plans that changed inpatient benefit from deductible at admission to per diem, intervention plans, and enrollees in matched control plans - similar plans that maintained inpatient deductibles. The study population included 423,634 unique beneficiaries enrolled in 23 intervention plans and 36 matched control plans in the 2007-2010 period.Results: The imposition of per-diem copayments were associated with adjusted declines of 1.3 admissions/100 enrollees (95% CI - 1.8 to - 0.9), 6.9 inpatient days/100 enrollees (95% CI - 10.1 to - 3.8) and 0.7 percentage points in the probability of hospital admission (95% CI - 1.0 to - 0.4), with no significant change in adjusted length of stay in intervention plans relative to control plans. For persons with 2 or more hospitalizations in the year prior to the cost-sharing change, adjusted declines were 3.5 admissions/100 (95% CI - 8.4 to 1.4), 31.1 days/100 (95% CI - 75.2 to 13.0) and 2.2 percentage points in the probability of hospitalization (95% CI - 3.8 to - 0.6) in intervention plans relative to control plans.Conclusions: Instituting per-diem copayments was associated with reductions in number of admissions and hospital stays, but not length of stay once admitted. Effects of inpatient cost-sharing changes were magnified for persons with greater baseline use of hospital care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The initial days of a Medicare-covered skilled nursing facility (SNF) stay may have no cost-sharing or daily copayments depending on beneficiaries' enrollment in traditional Medicare or Medicare Advantage. Some policymakers have advocated imposing first-dollar cost-sharing to reduce post-acute expenditures. We examined the relationship between first-dollar cost-sharing for a SNF stay and use of inpatient and SNF services.Methods: We identified seven Medicare Advantage plans that introduced daily SNF copayments of $25-$150 in 2009 or 2010. Copays began on the first day of a SNF admission. We matched these plans to seven matched control plans that did not introduce first-dollar cost-sharing. In a difference-in-differences analysis, we compared changes in SNF and inpatient utilization for the 172,958 members of intervention and control plans.Results: In intervention plans the mean annual number of SNF days per 100 continuously enrolled inpatients decreased from 768.3 to 750.6 days when cost-sharing changes took effect. Control plans experienced a concurrent increase: 721.7 to 808.1 SNF days per 100 inpatients (adjusted difference-in-differences: -87.0 days [95% CI (-112.1,-61.9)]). In intervention plans, we observed no significant changes in the probability of any SNF service use or the number of inpatient days per hospitalized member relative to concurrent trends among control plans.Conclusions: Among several strategies Medicare Advantage plans can employ to moderate SNF use, first-dollar SNF cost-sharing may be one influential factor.Trial Registration: Not applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although it has long been known that a broad range of factors beyond medical diagnoses affect health and health services use, it has been unclear whether additional income can decrease health service use. We examined whether Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) receipt is associated with subsequent nursing home entry among low income older adults.Methods: We examined the 77,678 older adults dually eligible for Medicaid and Medicare in Maryland, 2010-2012. Zero inflated negative binomial regression, adjusting for demographic and health factors, tested the association of either lagged SNAP enrollment or lagged benefit amount with nursing home admission. We used Heckman two-step model results to calculate potential savings of SNAP enrollment through reduced nursing home admissions and reduced duration.Results: Only 53.4% received SNAP in 2012, despite being income-eligible. SNAP participants had a 23% reduced odds of nursing home admission than nonparticipants (95% CI: 0.75-0.78). For SNAP participants, an additional $10 of monthly SNAP assistance was associated with lower odds of admission (OR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.93-0.93), and fewer days stay among those admitted (IRR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98-0.99). Providing SNAP to all 2012 sample nonparticipants could be associated with $34 million in cost savings in Maryland.Conclusions: SNAP is underutilized and may reduce costly nursing home use among high-risk older adults. This study has policy implications at the State and Federal levels which include expanding access to SNAP and enhancing SNAP amounts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) are defined by the provision of primary care services, the relationship between the intensity of primary care and population-level utilization and costs of health care services has not been examined during early implementation of Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) ACOs. Our objective was to evaluate the association between primary care focus and healthcare utilization and spending in the first performance period of the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs).Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we divided the 220 MSSP ACOs into quartiles of primary care focus based on the percentage of all ambulatory evaluation and management services delivered by a PCP (internist, family physician, or geriatrician). Using multivariable regression, we evaluated rates of utilization and spending during the initial performance period, adjusting for the percentage of non-white patients, region, number of months enrolled in the MSSP, number of beneficiary person years, percentage of dual eligible beneficiaries and percentage of beneficiaries over the age of 74.Results: The proportion of ambulatory evaluation and management services delivered by a PCP ranged from <38% (lowest quartile, ACOs with least PCP focus) to >46% (highest quartile, ACOs with greatest PCP focus). ACOs in the highest quartile of PCP focus had higher adjusted rates of utilization of acute care hospital admissions (328 per 1000 person years vs 292 per 1000 person years, p = 0.01) and emergency department visits (756 vs 680 per 1000 person years, p = 0.02) compared with ACOs in the lowest quartile of PCP focus. ACOs in the highest quartile of PCP focus achieved no greater savings per beneficiary relative to their spending benchmarks ($142 above benchmark vs $87 below benchmark, p = 0.13).Conclusions: Primary care focus was not associated with increased savings or lower utilization of healthcare during the initial implementation of MSSP ACOs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As the emphasis in health reform shifts to value-based payments, especially through multi-payer initiatives supported by the U.S. Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation, and with the increasing availability of statewide all-payer claims databases, the need for an all-payer, "whole-population" approach to facilitate the reporting of utilization, cost, and quality measures has grown. However, given the disparities between the different populations served by Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial payers, risk-adjustment methods for addressing these differences in a single measure have been a challenge.Methods: This study evaluated different levels of risk adjustment for primary care practice populations - from basic adjustments for age and gender to a more comprehensive "full model" risk-adjustment method that included additional demographic, payer, and health status factors. It applied risk adjustment to populations attributed to patient-centered medical homes (283,153 adult patients and 78,162 pediatric patients) in the state of Vermont that are part of the Blueprint for Health program. Risk-adjusted expenditure and utilization outcomes for calendar year 2014 were reported in 102 adult and 56 pediatric primary-care comparative practice profiles.Results: Using total expenditures as the dependent variable for the adult population, the r2 for the model adjusted for age and gender was 0.028. It increased to 0.265 with the additional adjustment for 3M Clinical Risk Groups and to 0.293 with the full model. For the adult population at the practice level, the no-adjustment model had the highest variation as measured by the coefficient of variation (18.5) compared to the age and gender model (14.8); the age, gender, and CRG model (13.0); and the full model (11.7). Similar results were found for the pediatric population practices.Conclusions: Results indicate that more comprehensive risk-adjustment models are effective for comparing cost, utilization, and quality measures across multi-payer populations. Such evaluations will become more important for practices, many of which do not distinguish their patients by payer type, and for the implementation of incentive-based or alternative payment systems that depend on "whole-population" outcomes. In Vermont, providers, accountable care organizations, policymakers, and consumers have used Blueprint profiles to identify priorities and opportunities for improving care in their communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To examine key factors influencing chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients' total expenditure and offer recommendations on how to reduce total cost of CKD care without compromising quality.Methods: Using the 2002-2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) data, our cross-sectional study analyzed 197 patient records-79 patients with one record and 59 with two entries per patient (138 unique patients). We used three patient groups, based on international statistical classification of diseases version 9 code for condition (ICD9CODX) classification, to focus inference from the analysis: (a) non-dialysis dependent CKD, (b) dialysis and (c) transplant. Covariate information included region, demographic, co-morbid conditions and types of services. We used descriptive methods and multivariate generalized linear models to understand the impact of cost drivers. We compared actual and predicted CKD cost of care data using a hold-out sample of nine, randomly selected patients to validate the models.Results: Total costs were significantly affected by treatment type, with dialysis being significantly higher than non-dialysis and transplant groups. Costs were highest in the West region of the U.S. Average costs for patients with public insurance were significantly higher than patients with private insurance (p < .0743), and likewise, for patients with co-morbid conditions over those without co-morbid conditions (p < .001).Conclusions: Managing CKD patients both before and after the onset of dialysis treatment and managing co-morbid conditions in individuals with CKD are potential sources of substantial cost savings in the care of CKD patients. Comparing total costs pre and post the United States Affordable Care Act could provide invaluable insights into managing the cost-quality tradeoff in CKD care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In response to increasing fiscal pressures, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) sought to reduce Medicare Advantage plan expenses by restructuring the bidding and payment processes. The purpose of this study is to assess the effects of the ACA's payment freeze and restructuring of the bidding and payment processes on favorable risk selection in Medicare Advantage plan enrollment (objective 1) and changes in the health status of beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans over time (objective 2).Methods: We used the Medicare Health Outcome Survey baseline data (2007→2013) for analyses of the first objective (7 cohorts, 1.7 million beneficiaries) and the linked baseline and follow-up data (2007-2009→2011-2013) for analyses of the second objective (5 cohorts, 0.5 million beneficiaries). To examine favorable risk selection we used the following outcomes: self-rated health, falls, balance problems, falls management, frailty, and morbidity. To examine changes in beneficiary health status over time, we examined changes (over time) in these same outcomes. The focal independent variable is the policy implementation measure, which is time dependent and measures the accumulation of changes to Medicare Advantage payment policies resulting from the ACA. Multiple regression models were developed to examine the relationship between ACA implementation and outcomes of interest.Results: In terms of favorable selection, individuals enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans post-ACA have, on average, better self-rated health (b = 0.003, p < 0.01), lower odds of falls (AOR = 0.981, p < 0.001), higher odds of falls management (AOR = 1.040, p < 0.001), lower frailty risks (IRR = 0.983, p < 0.001), and lower risks of comorbidities (IRR = 0.989, p < 0.001). In terms of health status changes over time, the results indicate that in the post-ACA period, beneficiaries reported better self-rated health (b = 0.028, p < 0.001), lower odds of falls (AOR = 0.965, p < 0.001), lower odds of balance problems (AOR = 0.958, p < 0.001), lower odds of falls management (AOR = 0.981, p < 0.05), lower frailty risks (IRR = 0.944, p < 0.001), and lower risks of comorbidity (IRR = 0.986, p < 0.001) at follow up compared to the same risks at baseline.Conclusions: These findings suggest that as the Medicare Advantage payment policies in the ACA were being implemented, plans may have engaged in favorable selection activities, yet beneficiaries exhibited more favorable health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known about the impact of joining an Accountable Care Organization (ACO) on primary care provider organization's costs. The purpose of this study was to determine whether joining an ACO is associated with an increase in a Rural Health Clinic's (RHC's) cost per visit.Methods: The analyses focused on cost per visit in 2012 and 2013 for RHCs that joined an ACO in 2012 and cost per visit in 2013 for RHCs that joined an ACO in 2013. The RHCs were located in nine states. Data were obtained from Medicare Cost Reports. The analysis was conducted taking a treatment effects approach where the treatment is joining an ACO. Propensity-score matching was employed to provide multiple single and pooled estimates of the average treatment effect on the treated.Results: Four-hundred thirty four to 544 RHCs (depending on the type of analysis and the variables used) were used in the several analyses. Seven of the RHCs joined an ACO in 2012 and 14 joined an ACO in 2013. The mean cost per visit for RHCs that did not join an ACO rose 4.40 % from 2011 to 2012 whereas the mean cost per visit for RHCs that joined an ACO rose by triple: 13.5 %. All of the pooled estimates of the average treatment effect on the treated from the propensity-score matching showed that joining an ACO was associated with higher mean cost per visit. The range of the estimated mean cost per visit differences was $17.19 (p value = 0.00) to $25.19 (p value = 0.00).Conclusions: This study is one of the first to describe the cost of ACO participation from the perspective of primary care provider organizations. It appears that for at least one type of primary care provider - the RHC - there are substantial costs associated with ACO participation during the first two years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is not known if there is a differential impact on Alzheimer's disease (AD) diagnosis and outcomes if/when patients are diagnosed with cognitive decline by specialists versus non-specialists. This study examined the cost trajectories of Medicare beneficiaries initially diagnosed by specialists compared to similar patients who received their diagnosis in primary care settings.Methods: Patients with ≥2 claims for AD were selected from de-identified administrative claims data for US Medicare beneficiaries (5 % random sample). The earliest observed diagnosis of cognitive decline served as the index date. Patients were required to have continuous Medicare coverage for ≥12 months pre-index (baseline) and ≥12 months following the first AD diagnosis, allowing for up to 3 years from index to AD diagnosis. Time from index date to AD diagnosis was compared between those diagnosed by specialists (i.e., neurologist, psychiatrist, or geriatrician) versus non-specialists using Kaplan-Meier analyses with log-rank tests. Patient demographics, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) during baseline, and annual all-cause medical costs (reimbursed by Medicare) in baseline and follow-up periods were compared across propensity-score matched cohorts.Results: Patients first diagnosed with cognitive decline by specialists (n = 2593) were younger (78.8 versus 80.8 years old), more likely to be male (40 % versus 34 %), and had higher CCI scores and higher medical costs at baseline than those diagnosed by non-specialists (n = 13,961). However, patients diagnosed by specialists had a significantly shorter time to AD diagnosis, both before and after matching (mean [after matching]: 3.5 versus 4.6 months, p < 0.0001). In addition, patients diagnosed by specialists had significantly lower average total all-cause medical costs in the first 12 months after their index date, a finding that persisted after matching ($19,824 versus $25,863, p < 0.0001). Total per-patient annual medical costs were similar for the two groups starting in the second year post-index.Conclusions: Before and after matching, patients diagnosed by a specialist had a shorter time to AD diagnosis and incurred lower costs in the year following the initial cognitive decline diagnosis. Differences in costs converged during subsequent years. This suggests that seeking care from specialists may yield more timely diagnosis, appropriate care and reduced costs among those with cognitive decline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The County Health Rankings (CHR) system provides health rankings for U.S. counties. These factors may have utility for evaluating and predicting health outcomes. This study examined the association between CHR factors and the prevalence of child overweight/obesity (OWOB) in the state of Pennsylvania over 3 years.Methods: The prevalence of childhood OWOB was obtained for all Pennsylvania school districts for the 2009-10 through 2011-12 school years. Correlational and inferential statistical analyses were used to examine the associations between the prevalence of OWOB in grades K-6 (OWOB1) and 7-12 (OWOB2) and z-score for the overall CHR Health Factors rank, as well as for individual predictive factors (Health Behaviors, Clinical Care, Social and Economic Factors and Physical Environment).Results: Low to moderate correlations (0.29-0.43) were found between OWOB1 and CHR factors. Weaker and less consistent correlations were found for adolescents. There was a significantly higher prevalence of OWOB in counties with poorer CHR scores.Conclusions: County-level adult indicators of health are significantly associated with levels of child obesity. Future studies should examine the relationship between CHR and other health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many administrative data sources are available to study the epidemiology of infectious diseases, including Clostridium difficile infection (CDI), but few publications have compared CDI event rates across databases using similar methodology. We used comparable methods with multiple administrative databases to compare the incidence of CDI in older and younger persons in the United States.Methods: We performed a retrospective study using three longitudinal data sources (Medicare, OptumInsight LabRx, and Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database (SID)), and two hospital encounter-level data sources (Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) and Premier Perspective database) to identify CDI in adults aged 18 and older with calculation of CDI incidence rates/100,000 person-years of observation (pyo) and CDI categorization (onset and association).Results: The incidence of CDI ranged from 66/100,000 in persons under 65 years (LabRx), 383/100,000 in elderly persons (SID), and 677/100,000 in elderly persons (Medicare). Ninety percent of CDI episodes in the LabRx population were characterized as community-onset compared to 41 % in the Medicare population. The majority of CDI episodes in the Medicare and LabRx databases were identified based on only a CDI diagnosis, whereas almost ¾ of encounters coded for CDI in the Premier hospital data were confirmed with a positive test result plus treatment with metronidazole or oral vancomycin. Using only the Medicare inpatient data to calculate encounter-level CDI events resulted in 553 CDI events/100,000 persons, virtually the same as the encounter proportion calculated using the NIS (544/100,000 persons).Conclusions: We found that the incidence of CDI was 35 % higher in the Medicare data and fewer episodes were attributed to hospital acquisition when all medical claims were used to identify CDI, compared to only inpatient data lacking information on diagnosis and treatment in the outpatient setting. The incidence of CDI was 10-fold lower and the proportion of community-onset CDI was much higher in the privately insured younger LabRx population compared to the elderly Medicare population. The methods we developed to identify incident CDI can be used by other investigators to study the incidence of other infectious diseases and adverse events using large generalizable administrative datasets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: All authorities recommend against prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening in men 75 years and older. However, some primary care physicians (PCPs) continue to have high rates of PSA, with large variation in testing. We assessed the tests, treatments, and payments for prostate cancer care in men aged 75 or older who have PCPs with high or low PSA testing rates.Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study using the 2010 Medicare beneficiaries aged 75 or older in Texas, United States who had no prostate cancer in 2007-2009 and had an identifiable PCP. We first identified high vs. low PSA testing PCPs, and then grouped older men in the two PCP groups. We determined health care visits to any provider and to urologists in office and outpatient settings. We estimated the direct medical payments for prostate cancer care for diagnostics, treatments and visits to providers in 2010-2011 using the generalized gamma model with log link function.Results: In multilevel, multivariable analyses, 25.4% (n = 550) of PCPs had PSA testing rates in men aged 75 or older that were significantly higher than the mean rate of all 2,169 Texas PCPs; 29.4% (n = 638) had rates that were significantly lower. In all, 22,853 vs. 23,929 older men were cared for by PCPs with high vs. low testing rates. Older men cared for by high PSA rate PCPs were more likely to receive a PSA test (OR 3.64, 95% CI 3.48-3.80), a biopsy (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.02-1.31), an ultrasound (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.07-1.32) or any radiation treatment (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.03-1.66) than men cared for by low PSA rate PCPs. Men with high PSA rate PCPs were 1.21 (95% CI 1.05-1.39) times more likely to have such outpatient visits. The average annual adjusted Medicare payments for prostate cancer care was $25.60 higher for patients cared for by PCPs with high PSA test rates.Conclusions: Older men seeing PCPs with high rates of PSA testing undergo more testing and treatments for prostate cancer, with higher Medicare insurance payments. Future studies are needed to delineate whether men seeing PCPs with low testing rates likely received PSA tests from other providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medicaid programs face growing pressure to control spending. Despite evidence of clinical harms, states continue to impose policies limiting the number of reimbursable prescriptions (caps). We examined the recent use of prescription caps by Medicaid programs and the impact of policy implementation on prescription utilization.Methods: We identified Medicaid cap policies from 2001-2010. We classified caps as applying to all prescriptions (overall caps) or only branded prescriptions (brand caps). Using state-level, aggregate prescription data, we developed interrupted time-series analyses to evaluate the impact of implementing overall caps and brand caps in a subset of states with data available before and after cap initiation. For overall caps, we examined the use of essential medications, which were classified as preventive or as providing symptomatic benefit. For brand caps, we examined the use of all branded drugs as well as branded and generic medications among classes with available generic replacements.Results: The number of states with caps increased from 12 in 2001 to 20 in 2010. Overall cap implementation (n = 3) led to a 0.52% (p < 0.001) annual decrease in the proportion of essential prescriptions but no change in cost. For preventive essential medications, overall caps led to a 1.12% (p = 0.001) annual decrease in prescriptions (246,000 prescriptions annually) and a 1.20% (p < 0.001) decrease in spending (-$12.2 million annually), but no decrease in symptomatic essential medication use. Brand cap implementation (n = 6) led to an immediate 2.29% (p = 0.16) decrease in branded prescriptions and 1.26% (p = 0.025) decrease in spending. For medication classes with generic replacements, the decrease in branded prescriptions (0.74%, p = 0.003) approximately equaled the increase in generics (0.79%, p = 0.009), with estimated savings of $17.4 million.Conclusions: An increasing number of states are using prescription caps, with mixed results. Overall caps decreased the use of preventive but not symptomatic essential medications, suggesting that patients assign higher priority to agents providing symptomatic benefit when faced with reimbursement limits. Among medications with generic replacements, brand caps shifted usage from branded drugs to generics, with considerable savings. Future research should analyze the patient-level impact of these policies to measure clinical outcomes associated with these changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: ME/CFS is characterized by debilitating fatigue in addition to other physical and cognitive symptoms. It is estimated to affect over 800,000 adults in the U.S. ME/CFS often results in diminished functionality and increased economic impact. The economic impact of an illness is generally divided into two categories: direct and indirect costs. Despite high prevalence rates and the disabling nature of the illness, few studies have examined the costs of ME/CFS at the individual and societal level. In fact, of the four studies examining the economic impact of ME/ME/CFS only two used a U. S. sample. The current study used community and tertiary samples to examine the direct costs of ME/CFS. Methods: Using archival data, Study 1 examined the direct cost of ME/CFS in a community-based sample in Chicago. Study 2 estimated the direct cost of ME/CFS in a tertiary sample in Chicago. Both Study1 and Study 2 assessed direct costs using office visit costs, medical test costs, and medication costs. Results: For Study 1, the annual direct total cost per ME/CFS patient was estimated to be $2,342, with the total annual direct cost of ME/CFS to society being approximately $2 billion. In Study 2, the annual direct was estimated to be $8,675 per ME/CFS patient, with the total annual direct cost of ME/CFS to society being approximately $7 billion. Conclusion: Using ME/CFS prevalence data of 0.42 and indirect costs estimates from Reynolds et al. (2004), the direct and indirect cost of ME/CFS to society was estimated to be $18,677,912,000 for the community sample and $23,972,300,000 for the tertiary sample. These findings indicate that whether or not individuals are recruited from a community or tertiary sample, ME/CFS imposes substantial economic costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is a chronic incapacitating illness that affects between 400,000 and 800,000 Americans. Despite the disabling nature of this illness, scant research has addressed the economic impact of CFS either on those affected or on the national economy. Methods: We used microsimulation methods to analyze data from a surveillance study of CFS in Wichita, Kansas, and derive estimates of productivity losses due to CFS. Results: We estimated a 37% decline in household productivity and a 54% reduction in labor force productivity among people with CFS. The annual total value of lost productivity in the United States was $9.1 billion, which represents about $20,000 per person with CFS or approximately one-half of the household and labor force productivity of the average person with this syndrome. Conclusion: Lost productivity due to CFS was substantial both on an individual basis and relative to national estimates for other major illnesses. CFS resulted in a national productivity loss comparable to such losses from diseases of the digestive, immune and nervous systems, and from skin disorders. The extent of the burden indicates that continued research to determine the cause and potential therapies for CFS could provide substantial benefit both for individual patients and for the nation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To estimate the proportion of pregnant women in Louisiana who do not obtain abortions because Medicaid does not cover abortion.Methods: Two hundred sixty nine women presenting at first prenatal visits in Southern Louisiana, 2015-2017, completed self-administered iPad surveys and structured interviews. Women reporting having considered abortion were asked whether Medicaid not paying for abortion was a reason they had not had an abortion. Using study data and published estimates of births, abortions, and Medicaid-covered births in Louisiana, we projected the proportion of Medicaid births that would instead be abortions if Medicaid covered abortion in Louisiana.Results: 28% considered abortion. Among women with Medicaid, 7.2% [95% CI 4.1-12.3] reported Medicaid not paying as a reason they did not have an abortion. Existing estimates suggest 10% of Louisiana pregnancies end in abortion. If Medicaid covered abortion, this would increase to 14% [95% CI 12, 16]. 29% [95% CI 19, 41] of Medicaid eligible pregnant women who would have an abortion with Medicaid coverage, instead give birth.Conclusions: For a substantial proportion of pregnant women in Louisiana, the lack of Medicaid funding remains an insurmountable barrier to obtaining an abortion. Forty years after the Hyde Amendment was passed, lack of Medicaid funding for abortion continues to have substantial impacts on women's ability to obtain abortions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the United States, home-based primary care (HBPC) is increasingly proposed as a means of enabling frail elders to remain at home for as long as possible, while still receiving needed medical care. However, there are relatively few studies of either the medical outcome effects or cost benefits of HBPC. In this paper, we examine medical cost and mortality outcomes for enrollees in the HBPC program offered by Spectrum Health/Priority Health (SH/PH), a not-for-profit integrated health care/health insurance system located in Grand Rapids, MI, USA.Methods: We perform a concurrent matched cohort study. SH/PH HBPC enrollees during 2012-2014 are matched for prior costs, age, sex and comorbidities against controls selected from unenrolled insurance plan members. Twelve and twenty four-month medical costs are compared between HBPC participants and matched controls, overall and conditional on mortality status. Mortality rates of HBPC participants are studied on their own and in comparison to controls.Results: At 12 and 24 months, in comparison to matched controls HBPC participants show higher ($2933) and lower ($8620) costs respectively. Relative costs and savings of HBPC participants are a function of short term increased costs upon entry into the program (enrollees who survive the first year cost $5866 more than controls); substantial savings at end-of-life (approximately $37,037 in savings relative to controls are realized); and the overall mortality of HBPC participants (mean residual lifespan is 37.75 months from the time of enrollment). We project the present value of lifetime medical cost savings due to enrollment in the HBPC program to be at least $14,336.Conclusions: The SH/PC HBPC program reduces healthcare costs while enabling frail elders to remain at home. Reduction in costs is obtained at end-of-life and is offset with a smaller initial increase in costs upon enrollment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To estimate changes in the cost and utilization of Medicare among beneficiaries over age 65 who have been impacted by a natural disaster, we merged publically available county-level Medicare claims for the years 2008-2012 with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) data related to disasters in each U.S. County from 2007 to 2012.Methods: Fixed-effects generalized linear models were used to calculate change in per capita costs standardized by region and utilization per 1000 beneficiaries at the county level. Aggregate county demographic characteristics of Medicare participants were included as predictors of change in county-level utilization and cost. FEMA data was used to determine counties that experienced no, some, high, and extreme hazard exposure. FEMA data was merged with claims data to create a balanced panel dataset from 2008 to 2012.Results: In general, both cost and utilization of Medicare services were higher in counties with more hazard exposure. However, utilization of home health services was lower in counties with more hazard exposure.Conclusions: Additional research using individual-level data is needed to address limitations and determine the impacts of the substitution of services (e.g., inpatient rehabilitation for home health) that may be occurring in disaster affected areas during the post-disaster period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) adopted the Medicare Part D Tier-6 with zero patient copay for zoster vaccination in 2012. We assessed the impact of the implementation on zoster vaccination rate (GSK study identifier: HO-13-14,182).Methods: Zoster vaccination rate was examined among an open cohort of ≥65-year-old Medicare Part D beneficiaries during 01/01/2008-06/30/2014, compared to ≥65-year-old commercial health plan members and 60-64-year-old members. The demographics, vaccination records, and insurance and benefit type were confirmed through KPSC electronic medical record databases. Person-time based vaccination rate was calculated for each observation interval (calendar month or year). The changes in annual rates in one year pre- (2011) and post- (2012) Tier-6 implementation were compared in a difference-in-difference analysis. Linear spline Poisson regression models were fitted to compare the secular trend of monthly rates during pre and post Tier-6 implementation (01/2012).Results: Zoster vaccination rate increased in Medicare Part D beneficiaries after the implementation of zero copay. The increase in annual vaccination rate from 2011 to 2012 was marginally higher in Medicare Part D beneficiaries but not statistically significant (difference in rate ratio [RR] = 0.04, p > 0.05) compared to commercial health plan members. Among non-Hispanic white members, the difference of RR was 0.09 (p = 0.020) between Medicare Part D beneficiaries and ≥65-year-old commercial plan members, and it was 0.08 (p = 0.034) compared to 60-64-year-old commercial plan members. In secular trend analysis, we did not observe significant increase in overall and race stratified zoster vaccination rate attributable to the implementation of the Tier-6.Conclusions: The impact of Tier-6 on zoster vaccination was not substantial in elderly Medicare Part D beneficiaries in this population where a lower than average copay ($20 to $40) was applied prior to the Tier-6 implementation. Further research is necessary to explore the numerical relationship between vaccination and amount of copay.Trial Registration: GSK study identifier: HO-13-14,182. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Of the 4.8 million uninsured children in America, 62-72% are eligible for but not enrolled in Medicaid or CHIP. Not enough is known, however, about the impact of health insurance on outcomes and costs for previously uninsured children, which has never been examined prospectively.Methods: This prospective observational study of uninsured Medicaid/CHIP-eligible minority children compared children obtaining coverage vs. those remaining uninsured. Subjects were recruited at 97 community sites, and 11 outcomes monitored monthly for 1 year.Results: In this sample of 237 children, those obtaining coverage were significantly (P < .05) less likely than the uninsured to have suboptimal health (27% vs. 46%); no PCP (7% vs. 40%); experienced never/sometimes getting immediate care from the PCP (7% vs. 40%); no usual source of preventive (1% vs. 20%) or sick (3% vs. 12%) care; and unmet medical (13% vs. 48%), preventive (6% vs. 50%), and dental (18% vs. 62%) care needs. The uninsured had higher out-of-pocket doctor-visit costs (mean = $70 vs. $29), and proportions of parents not recommending the child's healthcare provider to friends (24% vs. 8%) and reporting the child's health caused family financial problems (29% vs. 5%), and lower well-child-care-visit quality ratings. In bivariate analyses, older age, birth outside of the US, and lacking health insurance for >6 months at baseline were associated with remaining uninsured for the entire year. In multivariable analysis, children who had been uninsured for >6 months at baseline (odds ratio [OR], 3.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-10.3) and African-American children (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1-7.3) had significantly higher odds of remaining uninsured for the entire year. Insurance saved $2886/insured child/year, with mean healthcare costs = $5155/uninsured vs. $2269/insured child (P = .04).Conclusions: Providing health insurance to Medicaid/CHIP-eligible uninsured children improves health, healthcare access and quality, and parental satisfaction; reduces unmet needs and out-of-pocket costs; and saves $2886/insured child/year. African-American children and those who have been uninsured for >6 months are at greatest risk for remaining uninsured. Extrapolation of the savings realized by insuring uninsured, Medicaid/CHIP-eligible children suggests that America potentially could save $8.7-$10.1 billion annually by providing health insurance to all Medicaid/CHIP-eligible uninsured children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]