Search

National and international guidelines for asthma recommend the assessment and documentation of severity as the basis for patient management. However, studies show that there are problems with application of the severity assessment to children in clinical practice. More recently, asthma control has been introduced as a method to assess the adequacy of current treatment and inform asthma management. In this article we review the application and limitations of the severity assessment and the asthma-control tools that have been tested for use in children. A system of using asthma severity for disease assessment in the absence of treatment and using asthma-control assessment to guide management decisions while a child is receiving treatment appears to be a promising approach to tailor treatment to improve care and outcomes for children with asthma. www.pediatrics.org/cgi/doi/10.1542/ peds.2005-2576 doi:10.1542/peds.2005 2576 Key Words asthma, assessment, asthma severity, asthma control, children Abbreviations NAEPP--National Asthma Education and Prevention Program GINA--Global Initiative for Asthma FE[V.sub.1]--forced expiratory volume in 1 second ATAQ--Asthma Therapy Assessment Questionnaire ACT--Asthma Control Test, ASTHMA IS THE most common chronic childhood illness, affecting >4.8 million children in the United States and resulting in high levels of preventable morbidity and mortality. (1) National and international [...]

Background: Treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infection (cSSSI) places a tremendous burden on the health care system. Understanding relative resource utilization associated with different antimicrobials is important for decision making by patients, health care providers, and payers.Methods: The authors conducted an open-label, pragmatic, randomized (1:1) clinical study (N = 250) to compare the effectiveness of daptomycin with that of vancomycin for treatment of patients hospitalized with cSSSI caused by suspected or documented methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection. The primary study end point was infection-related length of stay (IRLOS). Secondary end points included health care resource utilization, cost, clinical response, and patient-reported outcomes. Patient assessments were performed daily until the end of antibiotic therapy or until hospital discharge, and at 14 days and 30 days after discharge.Results: No difference was found for IRLOS, total LOS, and total inpatient cost between cohorts. Hospital LOS contributed 85.9% to the total hospitalization cost, compared with 6.4% for drug costs. Daptomycin showed a nonsignificant trend toward a higher clinical success rate, compared with vancomycin, at treatment days 2 and 3. In the multivariate analyses, vancomycin was associated with a lower likelihood of day 2 clinical success (odds ratio [OR] = 0.498, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.249-0.997; P < 0.05).Conclusion: This study did not provide conclusive evidence of the superiority of one treatment over the other in terms of clinical, economic, or patient outcomes. The data suggest that physician and patient preference, rather than drug acquisition cost, should be the primary driver of initial antibiotic selection for hospitalized patients with cSSSI.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01419184 (Date: August 16, 2011). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Moderate to severe plaque psoriasis has a serious effect on health-related quality of life. Patients treated with biologic medications place importance on satisfaction and treatment frequency options. We assessed patient-reported treatment satisfaction and dosing frequency choice with biologics. Methods: We used a health care claims database to identify patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Participants completed the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication. Results were compared between patients experienced with biologics (adalimumab, etanercept, or ustekinumab) or not (cyclosporine or methotrexate). Participants were asked for their choices of dosing options of once every 1-2 weeks, 3-4 weeks, 1-2 months, or 2-3 months. Participants were also asked for their choices of dosing options of every 1, 2, 3, and so on up to every 12+ weeks. Results: A total of 426 patients completed the survey (263 biologic-experienced and 163 biologic-naïve patients). Patient satisfaction with psoriasis treatment was significantly higher in the biologic-experienced cohort. The most frequently chosen option (38.8% of all participating patients) was every 2-3 months; 37.3% chose once every 1-2 weeks. Significant differences were found in the percentage of biologic-naïve patients choosing 2-3-month (49.7%) over 1-2-week (20.9%) dosing (P<0.001). Among biologic-experienced patients, the difference between the percentage of patients choosing the 2-3-month (35.7%) and 1-2-week (41.8%) options was not significant (P=0.264). The two most often week-specific intervals chosen by biologic-naïve patients were 12+ weeks (42.3%) and 4 weeks (15.6%). The biologic-experienced patients most often chose 12+ weeks (31.2%) and 1 week (25.9%). Conclusion: Patients using biologics reported satisfaction with their treatment, which may positively affect outcomes. Longer dosing intervals were chosen most frequently among all patients combined. Reports of patient satisfaction with prior treatments and choices regarding dosing frequency, among all other considerations, should be evaluated in determining an appropriate biologic medication for psoriasis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many women with osteoporosis do not initiate osteoporosis treatment. Objective: To examine patients' reasons for not initiating osteoporosis treatment among women with osteoporosis. Methods: Survey recipients were identified from a national US claims database and included women $55 years with an osteoporosis diagnosis from January 1, 2010 to March 31, 2012 as defined by: 1) osteoporosis diagnosis coupled with bone mineral density test within 183 days of diagnosis and/or 2) osteoporosis-related fracture. Eligibility required no claims for osteoporosis medication 1) at least 12 months and up to 5 years prior to osteoporosis diagnosis and 2) at least 6 months after osteoporosis diagnosis. Continuous enrollment for 18 months (6 months pre-osteoporosis and 12 months post-osteoporosis diagnosis) was also required. A total of 2,000 patients with the most recent osteoporosis diagnosis were mailed a survey. Respondents reporting that they did not initiate physician-recommended osteoporosis medication, after either their physician told them they had osteoporosis or they experienced a fracture since age 45 years, were asked for reasons why they did not initiate treatment. Results: There were 430 patients who returned a complete survey; mean age was 61% and 21.6% had a fracture. A total of 197 (45.8%) patients reported their physician diagnosed osteoporosis and 117 (59.3%) of those were recommended osteoporosis medication; 44 of the 117 patients (37.6%) did not initiate recommended osteoporosis medication by the time of survey. The primary reasons for not initiating osteoporosis medication were concern over side effects (77.3%), medication costs (34.1%), and pre-existing gastrointestinal concerns (25.0%). Conclusion: Among respondents, 41% of patients whose physician diagnosed osteoporosis were not recommended osteoporosis treatment and 38% of patients who were recommended osteoporosis treatment did not initiate treatment within approximately 2 years of diagnosis. Concerns with side effects of osteoporosis treatment, medication costs, and pre-existing gastrointestinal concerns were the most common reasons for not initiating recommended treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In this secondary analysis of results of the Clinical Outcomes in MEasurement-Based Treatment (COMET) trial, patient behaviors that might account for the differences observed in clinical outcomes were examined. Methods: Patients (N=914) diagnosed as having major depressive disorder participated in telephone interviews either monthly for six months (intervention) or at three and six months (usual care) asking about antidepressant medication-taking, use of psychotherapy or counseling, and participation in depression support groups. Physicians (N=83) in the intervention arm received monthly feedback regarding their patients' depression severity. Results: A total of 664 (73%) patients completed the month 6 interview. The adjusted odds of current antidepressant use at six months were 85% greater (p= .01) for patients in the intervention (N=380) versus usual care (N=284) arms, according to multivariate regression analyses. Conclusions: More frequent measurement of depression symptoms was associated with greater medication persistence, which in turn may have mediated clinical improvements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Decision rules for intervention that utilize screening tools for bone mineral density (BMD) testing and incorporating the BMD findings and other risk factors to identify high-risk women to prevent fracture have not been evaluated. We examine the sensitivity and specificity of decision rules for intervention based on two pre-BMD screening tools: Simple Calculated Osteoporosis Risk Estimation (SCORE) and a Study of Osteoporotic Fractures (SOF)-based tool. Women 60 years of age and older without previous osteoporosis diagnosis were randomly selected from a managed care population and invited to receive a BMD test. Four hundred sixteen women had complete information and were included in the study. Women were classified as high risk requiring intervention using three different criteria: World Health Organization (t-score -2.5 or less), National Osteoporosis Foundation (t-score -2.0 or less, or -1.5 or less with one or more risk factors), and the SOF-based criteria (prior fracture; or age 60-64 with t-score less than -2.5 or age 65 or older with z-score less than -0.43 and five or more risk factors). SCORE identified 82% of the women as appropriate for BMD testing, whereas the SOF-based tool identified 26%. Sensitivity and specificity were 89.8%-96.5% and 23.8%-34.8%, respectively, for the decision rule using SCORE as the screening tool and 30.5%-84.9% and 76.0%-95.8%, respectively, for the decision rule based on SOF screening criteria. SCORE correctly identified more women who were at high risk for intervention, whereas the SOF-based tool correctly identified more women who do not meet intervention criteria. The appropriate selection of a screening tool depends upon the objective for intervention and trade-off between not identifying women for BMD testing who are at high risk and identifying more women for BMD testing who are at low risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite authority's centrality to the medical profession, providers routinely forgo their medical authority during clinical encounters. Research focuses on patients challenging medical authority but indicates these confrontations are uncommon and providers seldom relinquish their authority in response. Using rare data of 75 audio recordings of adolescent vaccine discussions during clinical encounters and interviews with and observations of medical staff, I examine how staff leverage or abandon their medical authority to convince parents to vaccinate. I find medical professionals use less authority when at risk of stigmatizing patients: Medical professionals are less authoritative when recommending human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination versus other adolescent vaccines, particularly when addressing the need to vaccinate before sexual onset due to concerns of labeling the child as sexually active. Medical staff defer to parents in ways that potentially discourage HPV vaccine uptake: They encourage HPV vaccination less than other vaccines and infrequently challenge parents' sex-related reasons for vaccine refusal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objective: In this secondary analysis from the Clinical Outcomes in MEasurement-based Treatment trial (COMET), we evaluated whether providing primary care physicians with patient-reported feedback regarding depression severity affected pharmacological treatment patterns. Method: Intervention-arm physicians received their patients'' 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire scores monthly. Odds of having no change in antidepressant treatment during the 6-month study period were calculated. Relationships between depression symptom status (partial or nonresponse) at month 3 and treatment changes in months 3 through 6 were assessed. Results: Among 503 intervention and 412 usual care (UC) patients with major depressive disorder, most received antidepressant monotherapy at baseline (79.4% UC vs. 88.4% intervention; P=.047). Few switched their baseline antidepressant (17.4%), increased their dose (12.4%) or augmented with a second medication (2%). Odds of having no change in antidepressant therapy did not differ significantly between study arms (odds ratio 1.21; 95% confidence interval 0.78–1.88; P=.392). Few month 3 partial or nonresponders had a regimen change over the following 3 months; the study arms did not differ significantly (partial responders: 4.1% UC vs. 7.7% intervention; P=.429; nonresponders: 14.6% UC vs. 15.9% intervention; P=.888). Conclusions: Among depressed patients treated in primary care, little active management was observed. The lack of treatment modification for the majority of partial and nonresponders was notable. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Health services research aimed at understanding service use and improving resource allocation often relies on collecting subjectively reported or proxy-reported healthcare service utilization (HSU) data. It is important to know the discrepancies in such self or proxy reports, as they have significant financial and policy implications. In high-dependency populations, such as stroke survivors, with varying levels of cognitive impairment and dysphasia, caregivers are often potential sources of stroke survivors' HSU information. Most of the work conducted on agreement analysis to date has focused on validating different sources of self-reported data, with few studies exploring the validity of caregiver-reported data. Addressing this gap, our study aimed to quantify the agreement across the caregiver-reported and national claims-based HSU of stroke patients.Methods: A prospective study comprising multi-ethnic stroke patient and caregiver dyads (N = 485) in Singapore was the basis of the current analysis, which used linked national claims records. Caregiver-reported health services data were collected via face-to-face and telephone interviews, and similar health services data were extracted from the national claims records. The main outcome variable was the modified intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), which provided the level of agreement across both data sources. We further identified the amount of over- or under-reporting by caregivers across different service types.Results: We observed variations in agreement for different health services, with agreement across caregiver reports and national claims records being the highest for outpatient visits (specialist and primary care), followed by hospitalizations and emergency department visits. Interestingly, caregivers over-reported hospitalizations by approximately 49% and under-reported specialist and primary care visits by approximately 20 to 30%.Conclusions: The accuracy of the caregiver-reported HSU of stroke patients varies across different service types. Relatively more objective data sources, such as national claims records, should be considered as a first choice for quantifying health care usage before considering caregiver-reported usage. Caregiver-reported outpatient service use was relatively more accurate than inpatient service use over shorter recall periods. Therefore, in situations where objective data sources are limited, caregiver-reported outpatient information can be considered for low volumes of healthcare consumption, using an appropriate correction to account for potential under-reporting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]