Search

Background: Chorea is recognized as a prototypic motor feature of Huntington’s disease (HD), but its effect on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has not been fully explored. This study describes the impact of chorea on HRQoL in patients with HD. Objective: To determine the impact of HD-related chorea on employment, self-care activities, activities of daily living, and health-care resource utilization (HCRU). Methods: Data were drawn from the Adelphi HD Disease Specific Programme, a real-world point-in-time survey of 144 neurologists and 427 patients in the United States between July and October 2017. HD patients with and without chorea were identified and examined for differences in employment status, reasons for employment changes, self-care activities, and modifications to cope with involuntary movements. Bivariate tests and inverse probability weighted regression adjustment methods were used to determine differences in outcomes between patients with and without chorea. Results: HD patients with (n=287) and without (n=140) chorea were identified. Patients with chorea were less likely to be employed full-time (16.7% vs 25.7%; PPPPP Discussion: These results demonstrate that HD patients with chorea experienced greater negative impact to employment, self-care activities, and HCRU than patients without chorea experienced. These patients were more likely to stop working due to motor, cognitive, and behavioral symptoms; require modifications in the home and workplace; and need more assistance from caregivers than patients without chorea. Conclusions: Patients with HD-related chorea have greater detriments to emotional, interpersonal, and professional functioning that could be improved by reducing chorea.

To evaluate healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) by osteoarthritis (OA) pain severity.Cross-sectional surveys of US physicians and their patients were conducted between February and May 2017. Using the Numeric Rating Scale, patients were classified by self-reported pain intensity in the last week into mild (0-3), moderate (4-6), and severe (7-10) cohorts. Parameters assessed included clinical characteristics, HCRU, and current caregiver support. Descriptive statistics were obtained, and analysis of variance and chi-square tests were performed.Patients (n = 841) were mostly female (60.9%) and white (77.8%), with mean age of 64.6 years. Patients reported mild (45.4%), moderate (35.9%), and severe (18.7%) OA pain. Mean number of affected joints varied by pain severity (range mild: 2.7 to severe: 3.6;Greater current pain was associated with more prior HCRU including imaging for monitoring progression, HCP visits including more specialty care, hospitalizations, surgery/planned surgery, and loss of independence due to functional disability. Yet rates of hospitalizations and X-ray use were still sizable even among patients with mild pain. These cross-sectional findings warrant longitudinal assessment to further elucidate the impact of pain on HCRU.

Srinivas R Nalamachu,1 Rebecca L Robinson,2 Lars Viktrup,3 Joseph C Cappelleri,4 Andrew G Bushmakin,4 Leslie Tive,5 Jennifer Mellor,6 Niall Hatchell,6 James Jackson6 1Mid America PolyClinic, Overland Park, KS, USA; 2Patient Outcomes and Real-World Evidence, Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA; 3Lilly Bio-Medicines Core Team, Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA; 4Statistics, Pfizer Inc, Groton, CT, USA; 5Medical Affairs, Pfizer Inc, New York, NY, USA; 6Real World Research, Adelphi Real World, Bollington, Cheshire, UKCorrespondence: Rebecca L RobinsonEli Lilly and Company, Lilly Research Labs, Lilly Corporate Center, Indianapolis, IN 46285, USATel +1 317-224-5833Fax +1 317-277-0490Email rlrobinson@lilly.comPurpose: The purpose of this study was to assess how patient-reported pain is related to osteoarthritis (OA) treatment patterns in routine clinical practice.Patients and Methods: Data were collected between February and May 2017 from 153 United States (US) primary care physicians, rheumatologists, and orthopedic surgeons. Each invited up to nine consecutive patients to rate their OA pain in the last week. Physicians provided demographic, clinical, and treatment information for patients, including nonpharmacologic therapies ever recommended, currently recommended over-the-counter (OTC) medications, and currently and ever prescribed medications for the management of OA. Findings for patients with mild (0─3), moderate (4─6), and severe current pain (7─10) were compared using appropriate statistics.Results: Among the 841 patients (61% female; mean 65 years; 57% knee OA), 45% reported mild, 36% moderate, and 19% severe current OA pain. Current treatment modalities differed by pain severity (P< 0.05). Most patients (70%) had been recommended nonpharmacologic therapy and 40% were currently recommended OTC medications. More patients with moderate (81%) or severe pain (78%) currently received prescription medications, with or without nonpharmacologic therapy, versus those with mild pain (67%). Overall, 47% of patients currently received just one prescription drug, while 49% had received one prescription drug ever. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were the most common current (58%) and ever received (88%) prescriptions. Current NSAID prescriptions were not associated with pain severity. Acetaminophen recommendations, opioid prescriptions (current and ever), and multiple prescription medications tried were numerically highest in the severe pain group (all P< 0.05 by pain severity). In all groups, > 80% of treatment switches were due to lack of efficacy.Conclusion: Real-life treatment patterns for OA in the US are significantly associated with current patient-reported pain. Combining nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatments is common but higher pain ratings are associated with multiple failed prescription treatments. Current use of acetaminophen and opioids, but not NSAIDs, increases alongside pain severity.Keywords: nonprescription drugs, prescription drugs, therapeutics, pain management, practice patterns, physicians

Introduction To evaluate, from the patient’s perspective, the burden of pain associated with hip/knee osteoarthritis (OA) in the USA and selected European Union (EU) countries. Methods Data were drawn from the 2017 global Adelphi OA Disease Specific Programme™ (DSP). Patients with hip/knee OA were stratified based on pain intensity and the presence/absence of current opioid use. Outcomes included Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores, functional limitations, unmet treatment needs, Charlson Comorbidity Index, relevant comorbid conditions, the 5-dimension 5-level EuroQol, and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem. Bivariate testing compared outcomes using patients with no/mild pain without opioid use as the reference group. Results The study population comprised 2170 patients (US: n = 623 [28.7%]; EU: n = 1547 [71.3%]) with knee (54.9%), hip (24.6%), or knee/hip (20.5%) OA. Mean (SD) age was 66.4 (11.2) years. Patients had no/mild pain without opioid use (39.6%), no/mild pain with opioid use (10.2%), moderate/severe pain without opioid use (30.6%), and moderate/severe pain with opioid use (19.7%). Compared with the reference group, patients with moderate/severe pain reported significantly (p

Progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is a rare, relentlessly progressive, ultimately fatal neurodegenerative brain disease. The objective of this study was to assess the burden of PSP on patients, caregivers, and healthcare systems by PSP phenotype. Data were drawn from the Adelphi PSP Disease Specific Programme™, a cross-sectional study of neurologists and people living with PSP in the United States of America, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom. All people living with PSP with a reported phenotype were included. PSP phenotype was reported for 242 patients (mean age: 70.2 years, 58% male): PSP-Richardson's syndrome, n = 96; PSP-predominant Parkinsonism, n = 88; PSP-predominant corticobasal syndrome, n = 28; PSP-predominant speech/language disorder, n = 12; PSP-progressive gait freezing, n = 9; PSP-predominant frontal presentation, n = 9. Most patients reported impaired cognitive, motor, behavioral and ocular functionality; 67–100% of patients (across phenotypes) had moderate-to-severe disease at the time of data collection. Post-diagnosis, the majority were provided with a visual and/or mobility aid (55–100%, across phenotypes), and/or required home modification to facilitate their needs (55–78%, across phenotypes). Patients required multiple types of healthcare professionals for disease management (mean 3.6–4.4, across phenotypes), and the majority reported receiving care from at least one caregiver (mean 1.3–1.8, across phenotypes). There is a high burden on patients, caregivers, and healthcare systems across all PSP phenotypes. Although phenotypes manifest different symptoms and are associated with different diagnostic pathways, once diagnosed with PSP, patients typically receive similar care.

Standard-of-care treatment for haemophilia A or B is to maintain adequate coagulation factor levels through clotting factor administration. The current study aimed to evaluate annualised bleeding rates (ABR) and treatment adherence for haemophilia A or B patients receiving standard half-life (SHL) vs. extended half-life (EHL) factor replacement products. We analysed data from the Adelphi Disease-Specific Programmes, a health record-based survey of United States and European haematologists. Analysis included 651 males with moderate-to-severe haemophilia A or B (the United States, n = 132; Europe, n = 519). The haemophilia A analysis included 501 patients (SHL, n = 435; EHL, n = 66). In the combined United States/European population, mean (SD) ABR was 1.7 (1.69) for the SHL group and 1.8 (2.00) for the EHL group. A total of 72% of patients receiving SHL factor VIII and 75% of patients receiving EHL factor VIII in the combined population were fully adherent (no doses missed of the last 10 doses), as reported by physicians. The haemophilia B analysis included 150 patients (SHL, n = 114; EHL, n = 36). The mean (SD) ABR in the combined population was 2.1 (2.16) for patients receiving SHL factor IX (FIX) and 1.4 (1.48) for patients receiving EHL FIX. The percentage of fully adherent patients (physician-reported) was similar in both treatment groups (SHL FIX, 68%; EHL FIX, 73%). In this preliminary real-world survey in a relatively small sample of patients, measures of ABR and adherence between SHL and EHL products were evaluated. Additional real-world research on prescribing patterns, SHL vs. EHL effectiveness, and adherence is warranted.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the leading cause of disability in older adults. Total healthcare costs tend to rise as pain severity associated with OA increases. To understand treatment and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) by OA pain severity, data were collected from Feb-May 2017 using US Adelphi Disease Specific Programme, a cross-sectional survey of primary care physicians, rheumatologists, orthopedists and their patients. Descriptive statistics were used and all data were analysed using SPSS v6 and Stata v14.1. A total of 841 patients seeking care for OA were included. Patient-reported pain severity (Numeric Rating Scale; 0-10) over the last week was categorized as none/mild (45.4%; 0-3), moderate (35.9%, 4-6) and severe (18.7%; 7-10) pain. The majority of patients were female (61%) and white (78%) and the average age was 64.6 years. Increased pain severity was associated with a higher Body Mass Index and increased reliance on walking aids (21%, 38%, 47%), modifications to home (9%, 19%, 31%), and need for caregivers (5%, 14%, 31%) (all p

To incentivize hospitals to provide better quality care at a lower cost, the Affordable Care Act of 2010 included the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP), which reduces payments to hospitals with excess 30-day readmissions for Medicare patients treated for certain conditions. We use triple difference estimation to identify the HRRP's effects in Virginia hospitals; this method estimates the difference in changes in readmission over time between patients targeted by the policy and a comparison group of patients and then compares those difference-in-differences estimates in patients treated at hospitals with readmission rates above the national average (i.e., those at risk for penalties) and patients treated at hospitals with readmission rates below or equal to the national average (those not at risk). We find that the HRRP significantly reduced readmission for Medicare patients treated for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We find no evidence that hospitals delay readmissions, treat patients with greater intensity, or alter discharge status in response to the HRRP, nor do we find changes in the age, race/ethnicity, health status, and socioeconomic status of patients admitted for AMI. Future research on the specific mechanisms behind reduced AMI readmissions should focus on actions by healthcare providers once the patient has left the hospital. Copyright © 2016 John WileySons, Ltd.