Search

Background: Telehealth can be defined as using remote technologies to provide health care. It may increase access to care among people with sickle cell disease (SCD). This study examined (1) telehealth use, (2) characteristics of telehealth use, and (3) differences between telehealth users and nonusers among people with SCD during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of Medicaid claims among four states [California (CA), Georgia (GA), Michigan (MI), Tennessee (TN)] participating in the Sickle Cell Data Collection program. Study participants were individuals ≥1 year old with SCD enrolled in Medicaid September 2019-December 2020. Telehealth encounters during the pandemic were characterized by provider specialty. Health care utilization was compared between those who did (users) and did not (nonusers) use telehealth, stratified by before and during the pandemic. Results: A total of 8,681 individuals with SCD (1,638 CA; 3,612 GA; 1,880 MI; and 1,551 TN) were included. The proportion of individuals with SCD that accessed telehealth during the pandemic varied across states from 29% in TN to 80% in CA. During the pandemic, there was a total of 21,632 telehealth encounters across 3,647 users. In two states (MI and GA), over a third of telehealth encounters were with behavioral health providers. Telehealth users had a higher average number of health care encounters during the pandemic: emergency department (pooled mean = 2.6 for users vs. 1.5 for nonusers), inpatient (1.2 for users vs. 0.6 for nonusers), and outpatient encounters (6.0 for users vs. 3.3 for nonusers). Conclusions: Telehealth was frequently used at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic by people with SCD. Future research should focus on the context, facilitators, and barriers of its implementation in this population.

Sickle cell disease (SCD) remains a public health priority in the United States because of its association with complex health needs, reduced life expectancy, lifelong disabilities, and high cost of care. A cross-sectional analysis was conducted to calculate the crude and race-specific birth prevalence for SCD using state newborn screening program records during 2016-2020 from 11 Sickle Cell Data Collection program states. The percentage distribution of birth mother residence within Social Vulnerability Index quartiles was derived. Among 3,305 newborns with confirmed SCD (including 57% with homozygous hemoglobin S or sickle β-null thalassemia across 11 states, 90% of whom were Black or African American [Black], and 4% of whom were Hispanic or Latino), the crude SCD birth prevalence was 4.83 per 10,000 (one in every 2,070) live births and 28.54 per 10,000 (one in every 350) non-Hispanic Black newborns. Approximately two thirds (67%) of mothers of newborns with SCD lived in counties with high or very high levels of social vulnerability; most mothers lived in counties with high or very high levels of vulnerability for racial and ethnic minority status (89%) and housing type and transportation (64%) themes. These findings can guide public health, health care systems, and community program planning and implementation that address social determinants of health for infants with SCD. Implementation of tailored interventions, including increasing access to transportation, improving housing, and advancing equity in high vulnerability areas, could facilitate care and improve health outcomes for children with SCD., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Sophia S. Horiuchi reports ownership of Natera stock and stock options and of Roche stock by her spouse. Mariam Kayle reports institutional support from Agios Medical Education Program and Novo Nordisk Independent Medical Education Activity to support the 11th Annual Sickle Cell Conference, September 8–9, 2023; receipt of consulting fees from Loyola University; receipt of honorarium for being an ad hoc reviewer from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Center for Scientific Review, Social and Environmental Determinants of Health Study Section; and uncompensated membership in the American Society of Hematology Research Collaborative Data Hub Oversight Group, Sickle Cell Disease Subcommittee. Carri S. Polick reports support from the Veterans Administration and Duke University Clinical and Translational Science Institute. Ashima Singh reports institutional support from NIH, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, and the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Sickle Cell Treatment Demonstration Program. John J. Strouse reports institutional support from the HRSA Southeast Region Coordinating Center Sickle Cell Treatment Demonstration Program and the North Carolina State Department of Health Sickle Cell Syndrome Program for the Duke Adult and Pediatric Sickle Cell Program; royalties from UpToDate for preparation of guidance on the use of hydroxyurea for sickle cell disease (SCD); consulting fees for GLG telephone consultation on SCD and Guidepoint telephone consultation on SCD; receipt of honoraria from the University of Rochester-Equity in Sickle Cell Disease Care; payment for medical legal expert testimony from Emory University in a case involving emergency department care of an adult with sickle beta thalassemia; travel support from the American Society of Hematology Sickle Cell Learning Community Meeting and Sickle Cell Disease Association of America Meeting to speak on behalf of the American Society of Hematology and travel support from the American Thrombosis Hemostasis Network Data Summit as an invited speaker on gene therapy for SCD: Design for Equity; payment for participation on a data safety monitoring board for disc medicines for phase 1 trial planning for bitopertin for SCD; and service as vice president of the Sickle Cell Adult Provider Network. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Introduction: Individuals living with sickle cell disease experience high levels of morbidity that result in frequent utilization of the emergency department. The objective of this study was to provide updated national estimates of emergency department utilization associated with sickle cell disease in the U.S., Methods: Data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey for the years 1999-2020 were analyzed. Complex survey analysis was utilized to produce national estimates overall and by patient age groups., Results: On average, approximately 222,612 emergency department visits occurred annually among individuals with sickle cell disease, a nearly 13% increase from prior estimates. The annual volume of emergency department visits steadily increased over time, and pain remains the most common patient-cited reason for visiting the emergency department. Patient-reported pain levels for individuals with sickle cell disease were high, with 64% of visits associated with severe pain and 21% associated with moderate pain. Public insurance sources continue to cover most visits, with Medicaid paying for 60% of visits and Medicare paying for 12% of visits. The average time spent in the emergency department increased from previous estimates by about an hour, rising to approximately 6 hours. The average wait time to see a provider was 53 minutes., Conclusions: Utilization of the emergency department by individuals living with sickle cell disease remains high, especially for pain. With more than half of patients with sickle cell disease reporting severe pain levels, emergency department staff should be prepared to assess and treat sickle cell disease-related pain following evidence-based guidelines and recommendations. The findings of this study can help improve care in this population., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Problem/condition: Sickle cell disease (SCD), an inherited blood disorder affecting an estimated 100,000 persons in the United States, is associated with multiple complications and reduced life expectancy. Complications of SCD can include anemia, debilitating acute and chronic pain, infection, acute chest syndrome, stroke, and progressive organ damage, including decreased cognitive function and renal failure. Early diagnosis, screenings and preventive interventions, and access to specialist health care can decrease illness and death. Population-based public health surveillance is critical to understanding the course and outcomes of SCD as well as the health care use, unmet health care needs, and gaps in essential services of the population affected by SCD., Period Covered: 2004-2018., Description of the Program: In 2015, CDC established the Sickle Cell Data Collection (SCDC) program to characterize the epidemiology of SCD in two states (California and Georgia). Previously, surveillance for SCD was conducted by two short-term projects: Registry and Surveillance System for Hemoglobinopathies (RuSH), which was conducted during 2010-2012 and included 2004-2008 data, and Public Health Research, Epidemiology, and Surveillance for Hemoglobinopathies (PHRESH), which was conducted during 2012-2014 and included 2004-2008 data. Both California and Georgia participated in RuSH and PHRESH, which guided the development of the SCDC methods and case definitions. SCDC is a population-based tracking system that uses comprehensive data linkages in state health systems. These linkages serve to synthesize and disseminate population-based, longitudinal data for persons identified with SCD from multiple sources using selected International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification, and Tenth Revision codes and laboratory results confirmed through state newborn screening (NBS) programs or clinic case reporting. Administrative and clinical data sources include state Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program databases, death certificates, NBS programs, hospital discharge and emergency department records, and clinical records or case reports. Data from multiple sources and years are linked and deduplicated so that states can analyze and report on SCD population prevalence, demographic characteristics, health care access and use, and health outcomes. The SCD case definition is based on an algorithm that classifies cases with laboratory confirmation as confirmed cases and those with a reported clinical diagnosis or three or more diagnostic codes over a 5-year period from an administrative data source as probable cases. In 2019, nine states (Alabama, California, Georgia, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia) were funded as part of an SCDC capacity-building initiative. The newly funded states developed strategies for SCD case identification and data linkage similar to those used by California and Georgia. As of 2021, the SCDC program had expanded to 11 states with the addition of Colorado and Wisconsin., Results: During 2004-2018, the cumulative prevalence of confirmed and probable SCD cases identified in California and Georgia was 9,875 and 14,777 cases, respectively. The 2018 annual prevalence count was 6,027 cases for California and 9,141 for Georgia. Examination of prevalence counts by contributing data source during 2014-2018 revealed that each data source captured 16%-71% of cases in California and 17%-87% in Georgia; therefore, no individual source is sufficient to estimate statewide population prevalence. The proportion of pediatric SCD patients (children aged 0-18 years) was 27% in California and 40% in Georgia. The percentage of females with SCD in California and Georgia was 58% and 57%, respectively. Of the cases with SCD genotyping data available (n = 5,856), 63% of patients had sickle cell anemia. SCDC data have been used to directly apprise health care providers and policymakers about health care needs and gaps for patients with SCD. For example, an SCDC Georgia assessment indicated that 10% of babies born during 2004-2016 with SCD lived more than a 1-hour drive from any SCD specialty care option, and another 14% lived within a 1-hour drive of a periodic SCD specialty clinic only. Likewise, an SCDC California assessment indicated that during 2016-2018, most patients with SCD in Los Angeles County lived approximately 15-60 miles from hematologists experienced in SCD care. A surveillance capacity and performance assessment of all 11 SCDC states during 2020-2021 indicated that states differed in the availability of data sources used for SCD surveillance and the time frames for accessing each state data source. Nonetheless, methods for standardizing reporting were developed across all participating states., Interpretation: This report is the first comprehensive description of CDC's efforts in collaboration with participating states to establish, maintain, and expand SCD surveillance through the SCDC program to improve health outcomes for persons living with SCD. Findings from California and Georgia analyses highlighted a need for additional SCD specialty clinics. Despite different approaches, expansion of SCDC to multiple states was possible using standardized, rigorous methods developed across all participating states for reporting on disease prevalence, health care needs and use, and deaths., Public Health Action: Findings from surveillance can be used to improve and monitor care and outcomes for persons with SCD. These and other SCDC analyses have had a role in opening new SCD clinics, educating health care providers, developing state health care policies, and guiding new research initiatives. Public health officials can use this report as a guiding framework to plan or implement surveillance programs for persons with SCD. Both data-related activities (data sources; patient identifiers; and obtaining, transferring, and linking data) and the administrative considerations (stakeholder engagement, costs and resources, and long-term sustainability) are crucial to the success of these programs., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Sickle cell disease affects more than 100,000 individuals in the United States, among whom disease severity varies considerably. One factor that influences disease severity is the sickle cell disease genotype. For this reason, clinical prevention and treatment guidelines tend to differentiate between genotypes. However, previous research suggests caution when using a claimsbased determination of sickle cell disease genotype in healthcare quality studies. The objective of this study was to describe the extent of miscoding for the major sickle cell disease genotypes in hospital discharge data. Individuals with sickle cell disease were identified through newborn screening results or hemoglobinopathy specialty care centers, along with their sickle cell disease genotypes. These genotypes were compared to the diagnosis codes listed in hospital discharge data to assess the accuracy of the hospital codes in determining sickle cell disease genotype. Eighty-three percent (sickle cell anemia), 23% (Hemoglobin SC), and 31% (Hemoglobin Sβ + thalassemia) of hospitalizations contained a diagnosis code that correctly reflected the individual's true sickle cell disease genotype. The accuracy of the sickle cell disease genotype coding was indeterminate in 11% (sickle cell anemia), 12% (Hemoglobin SC), and 7% (Hemoglobin Sβ + thalassemia) and incorrect in 3% (sickle cell anemia), 61% (Hemoglobin SC), and 52% (Hemoglobin Sβ + thalassemia) of the hospitalizations. The use of ICD-9-CM codes from hospital discharge data for determining specific sickle cell disease genotypes is problematic. Research based solely on these or other types of administrative data could lead to incorrect understanding of the disease.