Search

Adherence barriers to asthma biologics may not be uniform across administration settings for patients with moderate-to-severe asthma.To examine differences in asthma biologic adherence and associated factors, as well as association with a 1-year all-cause emergency department (ED) visit, across administration settings.A retrospective study of biologic naïve moderate-to-severe asthma patients with initial biologic therapy between January 1, 2016, and April 30, 2020, in the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart was performed. Three administration settings were identified: Clinic-only (outpatient office/infusion center), Home (self-administration), and Hybrid setting (mixture of clinic and self-administration). Asthma biologic adherence was the proportion of observed over expected biologic dose administrations received within 6 months from initial therapy. Factors associated with adherence were identified by administration setting, using Poisson regression analyses. A relationship between a 1-year all-cause ED visit and adherence was assessed for each administration setting using Cox regression analyses.The study cohort was 3932 patients. Biologics adherence was 0.75 [0.5, 1] in Clinic setting, the most common administration setting, and 0.83 [0.5, 1] in both Home and Hybrid settings. Specialist access was consistently associated with better biologic adherence, whereas Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, lower education, Medicare only insurance, and higher patient out-of-pocket cost were associated with worse biologic adherence in some settings. In the Hybrid setting, hazard for a 1-year all-cause ED visit decreased with biologic adherence.Asthma biologic adherence varied by administration setting. Efforts to improve asthma biologic adherence should consider promoting self-administration when beneficial, improving prior specialist access, and targeting patients with higher risk of suboptimal adherence particularly Black and Hispanic patients.

Background We previously conducted a concept elicitation study on the impact of Staphylococcus aureus and gram-negative bacterial bloodstream infections (SAB/GNB) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) from the patient’s perspective and found significant impacts on HRQoL, particularly in the physical and functional domains. Using this information and following guidance on the development of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, we determined which combination of measures and items (ie, specific questions) would be most appropriate in a survey assessing HRQoL in bloodstream infections. Methods We selected a variety of measures/items from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) representing different domains. We purposefully sampled patients ~6–12 weeks post-SAB/GNB and conducted 2 rounds of cognitive interviews to refine the survey by exploring patients’ understanding of items and answer selection as well as relevance for capturing HRQoL. Results We interviewed 17 SAB/GNB patients. Based on the first round of cognitive interviews (n = 10), we revised the survey. After round 2 of cognitive interviewing (n = 7), we finalized the survey to include 10 different PROMIS short forms/measures of the most salient HRQoL domains and 2 adapted questions (41 items total) that were found to adequately capture HRQoL. Conclusions We developed a survey from well-established PRO measures that captures what matters most to SAB/GNB patients as they recover. This survey, uniquely tailored to bloodstream infections, can be used to assess these meaningful, important HRQoL outcomes in clinical trials and in patient care. Engaging patients is crucial to developing treatments for bloodstream infections.

Background We previously conducted a concept elicitation study on the impact of Staphylococcus aureus and gram-negative bacterial bloodstream infections (SAB/GNB) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) from the patient’s perspective and found significant impacts on HRQoL, particularly in the physical and functional domains. Using this information and following guidance on the development of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, we determined which combination of measures and items (ie, specific questions) would be most appropriate in a survey assessing HRQoL in bloodstream infections. Methods We selected a variety of measures/items from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) representing different domains. We purposefully sampled patients ~6–12 weeks post-SAB/GNB and conducted 2 rounds of cognitive interviews to refine the survey by exploring patients’ understanding of items and answer selection as well as relevance for capturing HRQoL. Results We interviewed 17 SAB/GNB patients. Based on the first round of cognitive interviews (n = 10), we revised the survey. After round 2 of cognitive interviewing (n = 7), we finalized the survey to include 10 different PROMIS short forms/measures of the most salient HRQoL domains and 2 adapted questions (41 items total) that were found to adequately capture HRQoL. Conclusions We developed a survey from well-established PRO measures that captures what matters most to SAB/GNB patients as they recover. This survey, uniquely tailored to bloodstream infections, can be used to assess these meaningful, important HRQoL outcomes in clinical trials and in patient care. Engaging patients is crucial to developing treatments for bloodstream infections.

OBJECTIVES Our primary objective was to estimate the proportion of patients with culture-proven urinary tract infection (UTI) and recurrent UTI after midurethral sling (MUS), as well as to evaluate their risk factors. Our secondary objective was to characterize the difference in the proportion of patients with recurrent UTI before and after MUS. METHODS We conducted a retrospective study of patients who underwent MUS from 2009 to 2012 within a large health maintenance organization and subsequently had documentation of at least 1 positive urine culture (>100 K CFU/mL) within 1 year. Validated procedural and diagnostic codes were used to identify patients undergoing MUS and the diagnosis of UTI, respectively. RESULTS Of the 7461 MUS performed, 883 (12%) patients had at least 1 culture-proven UTI and 258 (3.5%) patients met the definition of recurrent UTI postoperatively. Of those 883 patients, 89 (10%) patients met the definition of recurrent UTI before, and 258 (29%) patients after, MUS. McNemar χ test revealed that patients were more likely to have recurrent UTI after MUS compared with before (P < 0.0001). In multivariate logistic regression, Caucasian (odds ratio [OR], 1.60, 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.12-2.29; P = 0.01) and African-American (OR, 3.42; 95% CI, 1.42-8.29; P = 0.01) ethnicity, older age (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.04; P = 0.03), and a history of recurrent UTI (OR 3.79, 95% CI 1.88-7.93, P = 0.0003) were risk factors for postoperative recurrent UTI. CONCLUSIONS In this population, preoperative recurrent UTI was the only modifiable risk factor associated with an increased risk of postoperative recurrent UTI.