Search

Background: Frailty is characterised by a decline in physical, cognitive, energy, and health reserves and is linked to greater functional dependency and higher social care utilisation. However, the relationship between receiving care, or receiving insufficient care among older people with different frailty status and the risk of unplanned admission to hospital for any cause, or the risk of falls and fractures remains unclear. Methods and findings: This study used information from 7,656 adults aged 60 and older participating in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) waves 6–8. Care status was assessed through received care and self-reported unmet care needs, while frailty was measured using a frailty index. Competing-risk regression analysis was used (with death as a potential competing risk), adjusted for demographic and socioeconomic confounders. Around a quarter of the participants received care, of which approximately 60% received low levels of care, while the rest had high levels of care. Older people who received low and high levels of care had a higher risk of unplanned admission independent of frailty status. Unmet need for care was not significantly associated with an increased risk of unplanned admission compared to those receiving no care. Older people in receipt of care had an increased risk of hospitalisation due to falls but not fractures, compared to those who received no care after adjustment for covariates, including frailty status. Conclusions: Care receipt increases the risk of hospitalisation substantially, suggesting this is a group worthy of prevention intervention focus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ongoing substance misuse epidemic in the United States is complex and dynamic and should be approached as such in the development and evaluation of policy.sup.1. Drug overdose deaths (largely attributable to opioid misuse) in the United States have grown exponentially for almost four decades, but the mechanisms of this growth are poorly understood.sup.2. From analysis of 661,565 overdose deaths from 1999 to 2017, we show that the age-specific drug overdose mortality curve for each birth-year cohort rises and falls according to a Gaussian-shaped curve. The ascending portion of each successive birth-year cohort mortality curve is accelerated compared with that of all preceding birth-year cohorts. This acceleration can be attributed to either of two distinct processes: a stable peak age, with an increasing amplitude of mortality rate curves from one birth-year cohort to the next; or a youthward shift in the peak age of the mortality rate curves. The overdose epidemic emerged and increased in amplitude among the 1945-1964 cohort (Baby Boomers), shifted youthward among the 1965-1980 cohort (Generation X), and then resumed the pattern of increasing amplitude in the 1981-1990 Millennials. These shifting age and generational patterns are likely to be driven by socioeconomic factors and drug availability, the understanding of which is important for the development of effective overdose prevention measures. A new age-period-cohort analysis reveals distinct generational patterns in deaths from opioid overdose in the United States, suggesting increased risks for Baby Boomers and Millennials., Author(s): Hawre Jalal [sup.1] , Jeanine M. Buchanich [sup.2] , David R. Sinclair [sup.1] [sup.3] , Mark S. Roberts [sup.1] , Donald S. Burke [sup.4] Author Affiliations: (1) Department of [...]

Background and aimsFew studies evaluate the impact of anesthesia providers during procedures, such as colonoscopy, on low-risk patients. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of anesthesia providers on several outcome variables, including major morbidity, following screening colonoscopies.MethodsA propensity-matched cohort study of 14,006 patients who enrolled with a national insurer offering health maintenance organization (HMO), preferred provider organization (PPO), and Medicare Advantage plans for a screening colonoscopy between July 1, 2005 and June 30, 2007 were studied. Records were evaluated for completion of the colonoscopy, new cancer diagnosis (colon, anal, rectal) within 6 months of the colonoscopy, new primary diagnosis of myocardial infarction (MI), new primary diagnosis of stroke, hospital admission within 7 days of the colonoscopy, and adherence to guidelines for use of anesthesia providers.ResultsThe presence of an anesthesia provider did not affect major morbidity or the percent of completed exams. Overall morbidity within 7 days was very low. When an anesthesia provider was present, a nonsignificant trend toward greater cancer detection within 6 months of the procedure was observed. Adherence to national guidelines regarding the use of anesthesia providers for low-risk patients was poor.ConclusionA difference in outcome associated with the presence or absence of an anesthesia provider during screening colonoscopy in terms of MI, stroke, or hospital admission within 7 days of the procedure was not observed. Adherence to published guidelines for the use of anesthesia providers is low. The incidence of completed exams was unaffected by the presence of an anesthesia provider. However, a nonstatistically significant trend toward increased cancer detection requires further study.

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to propose a new crosswalk using the resource-based relative value system (RBRVS) that preserves the time unit component of the anesthesia service and disaggregates anesthesia billing into component parts (preoperative evaluation, intraoperative management, and postoperative evaluation). The study was designed as an observational chart and billing data review of current and proposed payments, in the setting of a preoperative holing area, intraoperative suite, and post anesthesia care unit. In total, 1,195 charts of American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical status 1 through 5 patients were reviewed. No direct patient interventions were undertaken.ResultsSpearman correlations between the proposed RBRVS billing matrix payments and the current ASA relative value guide methodology payments were strong (r=0.94-0.96, P

It is unclear whether polypharmacy is associated with difficulty taking medications amongst people aged ≥85 living at home. This is despite the projected decline in availability of family carers, who may support independent living. Using Newcastle 85+ Study data and mixed‐effects modelling, we investigated the association between polypharmacy and difficulty taking medications amongst 85‐year‐olds living at home, over a 10‐year time period. Polypharmacy was not associated with difficulty taking medications as either a continuous (OR = 0.99 [0.91–1.08]) or categorical variable (5–9 medications, OR = 0.69 [0.34–1.41]; ≥10 medications, OR = 0.85 [0.34–2.07]). The significant predictors included disability, visual impairment and cognitive impairment. Our results suggest that people aged ≥85 living at home with disability, visual impairment and/or cognitive impairment will have difficulty taking their medications, regardless of how many they are prescribed. Therefore, healthcare professionals should routinely ask about, assess and address problems that these patient groups may have with taking their medicines, independent of the number of drugs taken. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: Few studies evaluate the impact of anesthesia providers during procedures, such as colonoscopy, on low-risk patients. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of anesthesia providers on several outcome variables, including major morbidity, following screening colonoscopies. Methods: A propensity-matched cohort study of 14,006 patients who enrolled with a national insurer offering health maintenance organization (HMO), preferred provider organization (PPO), and Medicare Advantage plans for a screening colonoscopy between July 1, 2005 and June 30, 2007 were studied. Records were evaluated for completion of the colonoscopy, new cancer diagnosis (colon, anal, rectal) within 6 months of the colonoscopy, new primary diagnosis of myocardial infarction (MI), new primary diagnosis of stroke, hospital admission within 7 days of the colonoscopy, and adherence to guidelines for use of anesthesia providers. Results: The presence of an anesthesia provider did not affect major morbidity or the percent of completed exams. Overall morbidity within 7 days was very low. When an anesthesia provider was present, a nonsignificant trend toward greater cancer detection within 6 months of the procedure was observed. Adherence to national guidelines regarding the use of anesthesia providers for low-risk patients was poor. Conclusion: A difference in outcome associated with the presence or absence of an anesthesia provider during screening colonoscopy in terms of MI, stroke, or hospital admission within 7 days of the procedure was not observed. Adherence to published guidelines for the use of anesthesia providers is low. The incidence of completed exams was unaffected by the presence of an anesthesia provider. However, a nonstatistically significant trend toward increased cancer detection requires further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of this study was to propose a new crosswalk using the resource-based relative value system (RBRVS) that preserves the time unit component of the anesthesia service and disaggregates anesthesia billing into component parts (preoperative evaluation, intraoperative management, and postoperative evaluation). The study was designed as an observational chart and billing data review of current and proposed payments, in the setting of a preoperative holing area, intraoperative suite, and post anesthesia care unit. In total, 1,195 charts of American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical status 1 through 5 patients were reviewed. No direct patient interventions were undertaken. Results: Spearman correlations between the proposed RBRVS billing matrix payments and the current ASA relative value guide methodology payments were strong (r=0.94-0.96, P,0.001 for training, test, and overall). The proposed RBRVS-based billing matrix yielded payments that were 3.0%±1.34% less than would have been expected from commercial insurers, using standard rates for commercial ASA relative value units and RBRVS relative value units. Compared with current Medicare reimbursement under the ASA relative value guide, reimbursement would almost double when converting to an RBRVS billing model. The greatest increases in Medicare reimbursement between the current system and proposed billing model occurred as anesthetic management complexity increased. Conclusion: The new crosswalk correlates with existing evaluation and management and intensive care medicine codes in an essentially revenue neutral manner when applied to the market-based rates of commercial insurers. The new system more highly values delivery of care to more complex patients undergoing more complex surgery and better represents the true value of anesthetic case management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Material disadvantage is associated with poor health, but commonly available area-based metrics provide a poor proxy for it. We investigate if a measure of material disadvantage could be constructed from UK primary care electronic health records., Methods: Using data from Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum (May 2022) linked to the 2019 English Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), we sought to (1) identify codes that signified material disadvantage, (2) aggregate these codes into a binary measure of material disadvantage and (3) compare the proportion of people with this binary measure against IMD quintiles for validation purposes., Results: We identified 491 codes related to benefits, employment, housing, income, environment, neglect, support services and transport. Participants with one or more of these codes were defined as being materially disadvantaged. Among 30,897,729 research-acceptable patients aged ≥18 with complete data, only 6.1% (n=1,894,225) were classified as disadvantaged using our binary measure, whereas 42.2% (n=13,038,085) belonged to the two most deprived IMD quintiles., Conclusion: Data in a major primary care research database do not currently contain a useful measure of individual-level material disadvantage. This represents an omission of one of the most important health determinants. Consideration should be given to creating codes for use by primary care practitioners., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Population characteristics can be used to infer vulnerability of communities to COVID-19, or to the likelihood of high levels of vaccine hesitancy. Communities harder hit by the virus, or at risk of being so, stand to benefit from greater resource allocation than their population size alone would suggest. This study reports a simple but efficacious method of ranking small areas of England by relative characteristics that are linked with COVID-19 vulnerability and vaccine hesitancy., Methods: Publicly available data on a range of characteristics previously linked with either poor COVID-19 outcomes or vaccine hesitancy were collated for all Middle Super Output Areas of England (MSOA, n=6790, excluding Isles of Scilly), scaled and combined into two numeric indices. Multivariable linear regression was used to build a parsimonious model of vulnerability (static socio-ecological vulnerability index, SEVI) in 60% of MSOAs, and retained variables were used to construct two simple indices. Assuming a monotonic relationship between indices and outcomes, Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated between the SEVI and cumulative COVID-19 case rates at MSOA level in the remaining 40% of MSOAs over periods both during and out with national lockdowns. Similarly, a novel vaccine hesitancy index (VHI) was constructed using population characteristics aligned with factors identified by an Office for National Statistics (ONS) survey analysis. The relationship between the VHI and vaccine coverage in people aged 12+years (as of 2021-06-24) was determined using Spearman correlation. The indices were split into quintiles, and MSOAs within the highest vulnerability and vaccine hesitancy quintiles were mapped., Findings: The SEVI showed a moderate to strong relationship with case rates in the validation dataset across the whole study period, and for every intervening period studied except early in the pandemic when testing was highly selective. The SEVI was more strongly correlated with case rates than any of its domains ( r s 0·59 95% CI 0.57-0.62) and outperformed an existing MSOA-level vulnerability index. The VHI was significantly negatively correlated with COVID-19 vaccine coverage in the validation data at the time of writing ( r s -0·43 95% CI -0·46 to -0·41). London had the largest number and proportion of MSOAs in quintile 5 (most vulnerable/hesitant) of SEVI and VHI concurrently., Interpretation: The indices presented offer an efficacious way of identifying geographical disparities in COVID-19 risk, thus helping focus resources according to need., Funding: Funder: Integrated Covid Hub North East., Award Number: n/a., Grant Recipient: Fiona Matthews., Competing Interests: DS and CW are part-funded by a Department of Health and Social Care grant to the Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust for the Integrated COVID Hub North East for the purposes of local pandemic response, paid via the University of Newcastle (the primary employer of all authors). Grant awarded to FM., (© 2021 The Author(s).)