RESUMO
BACKGROUND: High-dose (≥24 mg) buprenorphine daily doses (BDD) may be important in treating patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) to improve retention and prevent overdose, particularly in the context of increased illicit fentanyl use. This study sought to: (1) identify trajectories for average BDD among patients initiating buprenorphine treatment for OUD and (2) assess patient characteristics associated with these identified trajectories. METHODS: Buprenorphine treatment episodes among patients in the US Veterans Healthcare Administration (VHA) from federal fiscal years 2006 to 2020 were identified. Group-based trajectory modeling (GBTM) was used to identify BDD trajectories based on weekly averages of BDD over the 180 days after buprenorphine episode initiation. RESULTS: A total of 79 303 buprenorphine treatment episodes among 44 583 patients were included in the analytic sample. GBTM identified 9 latent trajectories for BDD: (1) moderate dose, early discontinuation (10.1%), (2) moderate dose, delayed discontinuation (4.5%), (3) moderate dose, moderate-paced discontinuation (5.2%), (4) low-moderate dose, delayed discontinuation (7.0%), and (5) low-moderate dose, early discontinuation (21.1%), (6) low dose retention (9.6%), (7) low-moderate dose retention (16.7%), (8) moderate dose retention (18.6%), and (9) high dose retention (7.4%). Patient BDD can broadly be characterized as low [2-4 mg/day], low-moderate (6-8 mg/day), moderate (12-18 mg/day), and high dose (≥ 24 mg/day). Patients with episodes in the high BDD trajectory have the lowest social risk (eg, lowest rate of past-year history of homelessness) and the lowest diagnosed rate of physical and mental health-related comorbidities compared to those following other trajectories. CONCLUSIONS: BDD ranges widely and patient characteristics are significantly different between those episodes following differing BDD trajectories. Future research on the association between BDD and subsequent patient outcomes (eg, overdose) needs to carefully consider these differences in baseline characteristics.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (B-MOUD) is essential to improving patient outcomes; however, retention is essential. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate machine-learning algorithms predicting retention, overdoses, and all-cause mortality among US military veterans initiating B-MOUD. METHODS: Veterans initiating B-MOUD from fiscal years 2006-2020 were identified. Veterans' B-MOUD episodes were randomly divided into training (80%;n = 45,238) and testing samples (20%;n = 11,309). Candidate algorithms [multiple logistic regression, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression, random forest (RF), gradient boosting machine (GBM), and deep neural network (DNN)] were used to build and validate classification models to predict six binary outcomes: 1) B-MOUD retention, 2) any overdose, 3) opioid-related overdose, 4) overdose death, 5) opioid overdose death, and 6) all-cause mortality. Model performance was assessed using standard classification statistics [e.g., area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC)]. RESULTS: Episodes in the training sample were 93.0% male, 78.0% White, 72.3% unemployed, and 48.3% had a concurrent drug use disorder. The GBM model slightly outperformed others in predicting B-MOUD retention (AUC-ROC = 0.72). RF models outperformed others in predicting any overdose (AUC-ROC = 0.77) and opioid overdose (AUC-ROC = 0.77). RF and GBM outperformed other models for overdose death (AUC-ROC = 0.74 for both), and RF and DNN outperformed other models for opioid overdose death (RF AUC-ROC = 0.79; DNN AUC-ROC = 0.78). RF and GBM also outperformed other models for all-cause mortality (AUC-ROC = 0.76 for both). No single predictor accounted for >3% of the model's variance. CONCLUSIONS: Machine-learning algorithms can accurately predict OUD-related outcomes with moderate predictive performance; however, prediction of these outcomes is driven by many characteristics.
RESUMO
All-cause COVID-19 hospitalization ≤ 30 days of infection is a common outcome for severe illness in observational/surveillance studies. Milder COVID-19 disease and COVID-19-specific measurements calls for an evaluation of this endpoint. This was a descriptive, retrospective cohort study of adults ≥ 18 who were established in primary care at Veteran Health Administration (VHA) facilities. The outcome was hospitalization within 30 days of a laboratory-confirmed, symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Between December 15, 2021 and May 1, 2022, a simple random sample of all VA facilities, excluding Puerto Rico or Philippines, was drawn to identify these hospitalized cases and determine whether hospitalization was due to COVID-19-specific causes. A chart review was conducted to record the inpatient clinical team's diagnosis and whether the inpatient team classified the diagnosis as COVID-19 related or not. These data were used to classify hospitalizations as either due to COVID-19-specific causes (direct manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infection) or non-COVID-19-specific hospitalizations (incidental SARS-CoV-2 infection), A simple random sample of 9966 (12.3%) all-cause hospitalizations (95% CI: 12.1%, 12.5%) was used to select 300 representative patients. Of these, 226/300 (75.3%) were determined to be COVID-19-specific. COVID-19 pneumonia was most common (147/226, 65.0%). The highest proportion of COVID-19-specific hospitalizations occurred among unvaccinated (85.0%), followed by vaccinated but not boosted (73.7%) and boosted (59.4%) (p < 0.001). The proportion of non-COVID-19-specific hospitalizations was higher in the later period (15-30 days: 55.0%) than the early (0-15 days: 22.5%) (p = 0.003). This study supports the outcome of COVID-19-specific hospitalization instead of all-cause hospitalization in observational studies. The earlier outcome period (0-15 days) was less susceptible to potential measurement bias.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Hospitalização , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Idoso , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , Adulto , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Current measures of condition-specific disabilities or those capturing only severe limitations may underestimate disability prevalence, including among Veterans. OBJECTIVES: To develop a comprehensive measure to characterize and compare disabilities among US Veterans and non-Veterans. METHODS: Using 2015-2018 pooled cross-sectional National Health Interview Survey data, we compared the frequency and survey-weighted prevalence of non-mutually exclusive sensory, social, and physical disabilities by Veteran status. We developed a measure for and examined the frequency and survey-weighted prevalence of eight mutually exclusive disability categories-sensory only; physical only; social only; sensory and physical; social and sensory; physical and social; and sensory, social, and physical. RESULTS: Among 118,818 NHIS respondents, 11,943 were Veterans. Veterans had a greater prevalence than non-Veterans of non-mutually exclusive physical [52.01% vs. 34.68% (p < 0.001)], sensory [44.47% vs. 21.79% (p < 0.001)], and social [17.20% vs. 11.61% (p < 0.001)] disabilities (after survey-weighting). The most frequently reported mutually exclusive disability categories for both Veterans and non-Veterans were sensory and physical (19.20% and 8.02%, p < 0.001) and physical only (16.24% and 15.69%, p = 0.216) (after survey-weighting). The least frequently reported mutually exclusive disability categories for both Veterans and non-Veterans were social only (0.31% and 0.44%, p = 0.136) and sensory and social (0.32% and 0.20%, respectively, 0.026) (after survey-weighting). CONCLUSIONS: Our disability metric demonstrates that Veterans have a higher disability prevalence than non-Veterans, and a higher prevalence than previously reported. Public policy and future research should consider this broader definition of disability to more fully account for the variable needs of people with disabilities.
Assuntos
Avaliação da Deficiência , Pessoas com Deficiência , Inquéritos Epidemiológicos , Veteranos , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Veteranos/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoas com Deficiência/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Transversais , Prevalência , Adulto , Idoso , Adulto JovemRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Over 40 % of United States Veterans Health Administration (VHA) primary care patients have obesity. Few patients use VHA's flagship weight management program, MOVE! and there is little information on other behavioral weight management program use. METHODS: The national United States cohort included over 1.5 million primary care patients with obesity, age 18-79, based on VHA administrative data. Gender stratified multivariable logistic regression identified correlates of weight management use in the year after a patient's first primary care appointment (alpha of 0.05). Weight management use was defined as MOVE! or nutrition clinic visits. RESULTS: The cohort included 121,235 women and 1,521,547 men with 13 % and 7 % using weight management, respectively. Point estimates for specific correlates of use were similar between women and men, and across programs. Black patients were more likely to use weight management than White patients. Several physical and mental health diagnoses were also associated with increased use, such as sleep apnea and eating disorders. Age and distance from VHA were negatively associated with weight management use. CONCLUSIONS: When assessing multiple types of weight management visits, weight management care in VHA appears to be used more often by some populations at higher risk for obesity. Other groups may need additional outreach, such as those living far from VHA. Future work should focus on outreach and prevention efforts to increase overall use rates. This work could also examine the benefits of tailoring care for populations in greatest need.
Assuntos
Obesidade , United States Department of Veterans Affairs , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Estados Unidos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto , Idoso , Obesidade/terapia , Adolescente , Programas de Redução de Peso/estatística & dados numéricos , Veteranos/estatística & dados numéricos , Veteranos/psicologia , Adulto Jovem , Terapia Comportamental/métodos , Atenção Primária à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos de Coortes , Saúde dos VeteranosRESUMO
PURPOSE: Although efficacious, intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy regimens for neovascular age-related macular degeneration can prove difficult for patients to adhere to because of high cost and burden of transportation. METHODS: Analysis of electronic health record data from the San Francisco Veterans Administration Medical Center eye clinic (January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2019) was performed, extracting demographic data, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injection history, and enrollment in the SFVA travel benefit program. Two-tailed P -values were calculated for Poisson regression examining average number of injections per year as the outcome and distance traveled as the primary predictor. Travel benefit was evaluated as a modifying effect on the distance-injection relationship. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighteen patients who received intravitreal injection for treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration were included in the analysis. Median (interquartile range) distance to clinic was 31.5 miles (7.4-69.4 miles). Driving distance in miles was inversely associated with average number of injections per year. Among all 318 patients, for every additional 100 miles a patient lived from our clinic, the patient received on average 2.5 fewer injections per year ( distance = -0.0025, P < 0.001), but this was not the case for patients with travel benefits ( distance = -0.0011, P = 0.362). CONCLUSION: The greater the distance from a patient's eye clinic, the lower the average number of injections per year. However, travel benefits mitigated this relationship, highlighting opportunities for improving patient's adherence through assistance programs.
Assuntos
Inibidores da Angiogênese , Degeneração Macular , Humanos , Fatores de Crescimento Endotelial , Degeneração Macular/tratamento farmacológico , Injeções Intravítreas , Viagem , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
Preventing suicide remains a top clinical priority of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In 2019, U.S. military veterans experienced a suicide rate of 52.3% higher than non-Veteran U.S. adults. Cigarette smoking has been found to be independently associated with an elevated risk of suicidal ideation, attempts, plans, and deaths among veterans and non-veterans. However, tobacco use is frequently overlooked in suicide risk assessment and mitigation and is not yet a target for intervention in VA suicide prevention protocols. In this commentary, we recommend that cigarette smoking be considered in suicide risk assessment protocols and that tobacco cessation interventions be considered as a potential beneficial treatment intervention to reduce the risk of suicide. Given the public health threat of suicide among veterans, it is essential to elucidate promising areas of intervention for those at high risk of suicide. Cigarette smoking is a modifiable target, associated with suicide risk, for which there are evidence-based interventions. Therefore, tobacco use disorder identification and treatment should be considered for inclusion in VA suicide risk protocols.
Assuntos
Fumar Cigarros , Suicídio , Veteranos , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Fumar Cigarros/epidemiologia , Ideação Suicida , Prevenção do SuicídioRESUMO
Female Veterans report cervical cancer risk factors at higher rates than non-Veterans. Using data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), we tested whether Veterans with a recent cervical cancer screening test were more likely than non-Veterans to have received an abnormal result. NHIS is a population-based cross-sectional household survey with a stratified, multistage sampling design. We pooled screening data from 2010, 2015, and 2018, and restricted the sample to female participants without a hysterectomy who had a cervical cancer screening test in the prior 3 years. The primary outcome was self-reported abnormal result on a Pap and/or HPV test in the prior 3 years. Our main predictor was Veteran status. We used survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression to estimate odds of an abnormal screening result in the prior 3 years as a function of Veteran status, controlling first for age and survey year, then adding sociodemographic and health factors in subsequent models. The sample included 380 Veterans and 25,102 non-Veterans (weighted total population 104.9 million). Overall, 19.0% of Veterans and 13.7% of non-Veterans reported an abnormal cervical cancer screening test result in the prior 3 years (unadjusted p = 0.03). In the adjusted regression model, the previously observed association between Veteran status and abnormal screening result was explained by differences in sociodemographic and health factors between Veterans and non-Veterans (aOR 1.21, 95%CI 0.78-1.87). Nearly 1 in 5 Veterans with a recent cervical cancer screening test received an abnormal result. Clinicians should address modifiable risk factors and provide evidence-based follow-up for abnormal results.
Assuntos
Neoplasias , Abandono do Uso de Tabaco , Veteranos , Humanos , Prescrições , Fumar/epidemiologiaRESUMO
Importance: While rates of cigarette use are declining, more US adults are using cannabis. Perceptions of safety are important drivers of substance use and public policy; however, little is known about the comparative views of US adults on tobacco and cannabis safety. Objective: To compare public perceptions of safety of cannabis vs tobacco smoke and evaluate how perceptions may be changing over time. Design, Setting, and Participants: This longitudinal survey study was conducted using a web-based survey administered in 2017, 2020, and 2021. US adults participating in Ipsos KnowledgePanel, a nationally representative, population-based survey panel, were included. Data were analyzed from March 2021 through June 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Two questions directly compared the perception of safety of cannabis vs tobacco in terms of daily smoking and secondhand smoke exposure. Additional questions assessed perceptions of safety of secondhand tobacco smoke for adults, children, and pregnant women, with an analogous set of questions for secondhand cannabis smoke. Results: A total of 5035 participants (mean [SD] age, 53.4 [16.2] years; 2551 males [50.7%]) completed all 3 surveys and provided responses for tobacco and cannabis risk questions. More than one-third of participants felt that daily smoking of cannabis was safer than tobacco, and their views increasingly favored safety of cannabis vs tobacco over time (1742 participants [36.7%] in 2017 vs 2107 participants [44.3%] in 2021; P < .001). The pattern was similar for secondhand cannabis smoke, with 1668 participants (35.1%) responding that cannabis was safer than tobacco in 2017 vs 1908 participants (40.2%) in 2021 (P < .001). Participants who were younger (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for ages 18-29 years vs ≥60 years, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.1-1.8]; P = .01) or not married (aOR, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.0-1.4]; P = .01) were more likely to move toward safer views of cannabis use over time, while those who were retired (aOR vs working, 0.8 [95% CI, 0.7-0.9]; P = .01) were less likely to move toward a safer view of cannabis. Participants were also more likely to rate secondhand smoke exposure to cannabis vs tobacco as completely or somewhat safe in adults (629 participants [12.6%] vs. 119 participants [2.4%]; P < .001), children (238 participants [4.8%] vs. 90 participants [1.8%]; P < .001), and pregnant women (264 participants [5.3%] vs. 69 participants [1.4%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that US adults increasingly perceived daily smoking and secondhand exposure to cannabis smoke as safer than tobacco smoke from 2017 to 2021. Given that these views do not reflect the existing science on cannabis and tobacco smoke, the findings may have important implications for public health and policy as the legalization and use of cannabis increase.
Assuntos
Cannabis , Alucinógenos , Poluição por Fumaça de Tabaco , Gravidez , Masculino , Adulto , Criança , Humanos , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Poluição por Fumaça de Tabaco/efeitos adversos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Política Pública , Fumar TabacoRESUMO
Studies of comparative mRNA booster effectiveness among high-risk populations can inform mRNA booster-specific guidelines. The study emulated a target trial of COVID-19 vaccinated U.S. Veterans who received three doses of either mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 vaccines. Participants were followed for up to 32 weeks between July 1, 2021 to May 30, 2022. Non-overlapping populations were average and high risk; high-risk sub-groups were age ≥65 years, high-risk co-morbid conditions, and immunocompromising conditions. Of 1,703,189 participants, 10.9 per 10,000 persons died or were hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia over 32 weeks (95% CI: 10.2, 11.8). Although relative risks of death or hospitalization with COVID-19 pneumonia were similar across at-risk groups, absolute risk varied when comparing three doses of BNT162b2 with mRNA-1273 (BNT162b2 minus mRNA-1273) between average-risk and high-risk populations, confirmed by the presence of additive interaction. The risk difference of death or hospitalization with COVID-19 pneumonia for high-risk populations was 2.2 (0.9, 3.6). Effects were not modified by predominant viral variant. In this work, the risk of death or hospitalization with COVID-19 pneumonia over 32 weeks was lower among high-risk populations who received three doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine instead of BNT162b2 vaccine; no difference was found among the average-risk population and age >65 sub-group.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Veteranos , Humanos , Idoso , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , Vacina BNT162 , Hospitalização , RNA MensageiroRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The Veterans Health Administration (VA) provides low- to no-cost care to enrolled veterans with low incomes. This study assessed the associations between VA coverage and medical financial hardship among U.S. veterans with low incomes. METHODS: Using 2015-2018 National Health Interview Survey data, veterans aged ≥18 years with incomes <200% of the Federal Poverty Level were identified (crude n=2,468, weighted n=3,872,252). Four types of medical financial hardship were assessed: objective, and subjective material, psychologic, and behavioral medical financial hardship. Survey-weighted proportions of veterans with medical financial hardship were calculated, and adjusted probabilities of medical financial hardship that accounted for Veteran characteristics, year-fixed effects, and survey sampling design were estimated. Analyses were conducted from August through December 2022. RESULTS: Overall, 34.5% of veterans with low incomes had VA coverage. Among veterans without VA coverage, 38.7% had Medicare insurance, 18.2% had Medicaid insurance, 16.5% had private insurance, 13.5% had other public insurance, and 13.1% were uninsured. In adjusted analyses, veterans with VA coverage had lower probabilities of objective (-8.13 percentage point, p=0.008), subjective material (-6.55 percentage point, p=0.034), subjective psychologic (-10.33 percentage point, p=0.003), and subjective behavioral (-6.72 percentage point, p=0.031) medical financial hardship than veterans with Medicare and no VA coverage. CONCLUSIONS: VA coverage was associated with protection against four types of medical financial hardship among veterans with low incomes, yet many are not enrolled. Research is needed to understand reasons these veterans lack VA coverage and to identify strategies to address medical financial hardship.
Assuntos
Seguro Saúde , Veteranos , Humanos , Idoso , Estados Unidos , Adolescente , Adulto , Medicare , Estresse Financeiro , Saúde dos Veteranos , Cobertura do Seguro , Pobreza , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de SaúdeRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Substance use disorder (SUD) represents a substantial health burden to US Veterans. We aimed to quantify recent time trends in Veterans' substance-specific disorders using Veterans Health Administration (VA) data. METHODS: We identified Veteran VA patients for fiscal years (FY) 2010-2019 (October 1, 2009-September 9, 2019) and extracted patient demographics and diagnoses from electronic health records (~6 million annually). We defined alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, opioid, sedative, and stimulant use disorders with ICD-9 (FY10-FY15) or ICD-10 (FY16-FY19) codes and variables for polysubstance use disorder, drug use disorder (DUD), and SUD. RESULTS: Diagnoses for substance-specific disorders (excluding cocaine), polysubstance use disorder, DUD, and SUD increased 2%-13% annually for FY10-FY15. Alcohol, cannabis, and stimulant use disorders increased 4%-18% annually for FY16-FY19, while cocaine, opioid, and sedative use disorders changed by ≤1%. Stimulant and cannabis use disorder diagnoses increased most rapidly, and older Veterans had the largest increases across substances. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Rapid increases in cannabis and stimulant use disorder present a treatment challenge and key subgroups (e.g., older adults) may require tailored screening and treatment options. Diagnoses for SUD are increasing among Veterans overall, but there is important heterogeneity by substance and subgroup. Efforts to ensure access to evidence-based treatment for SUD may require greater focus on cannabis and stimulants, particularly for older adults. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: These findings represent the first assessment of time trends in substance-specific disorders among Veterans, overall and by age and sex. Notable findings include large increases in diagnoses for cannabis and stimulant use disorder and among older adults.
Assuntos
Cocaína , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias , Veteranos , Humanos , Idoso , Analgésicos Opioides , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/diagnóstico , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/epidemiologia , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/terapia , Hipnóticos e SedativosRESUMO
PURPOSE: Genetic tests have become widely available. We sought to understand the use of genetic tests in the practice of frontline clinicians within the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). METHODS: We administered a web-based survey to clinicians at 20 VA facilities. Physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and pharmacists were eligible. We excluded genetics providers and clinicians not seeing patients. We used multiple logistic regression to evaluate the associations between clinician characteristics and experience with genetics. RESULTS: The response rate was 11.3% (1207/10,680) and of these, 909 respondents were eligible. Only 20.8% of the respondents reported feeling prepared to use genetic tests and 13.0% of the respondents were currently ordering genetic tests; although, it was usually only 1 or 2 a year. Delivery of genetic tests without involving genetics providers was preferred by only 7.9% of the respondents. Characteristics positively associated with currently ordering genetic tests included practice in clinical and research settings, believing improving genetics knowledge could alter their practice, feeling prepared to use genetic tests, and referral of at least 1 patient to genetics in the past year. CONCLUSION: Most VA clinicians don't feel prepared to use genetic tests. Those with genetic testing experience are more likely to consult genetics providers. The demand for genetics providers should increase as frontline clinicians use genetic tests in their practice.
Assuntos
Médicos , Estados Unidos , Humanos , Testes Genéticos , United States Department of Veterans Affairs , Inquéritos e Questionários , FarmacêuticosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Given efforts to taper patients off long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) because of known harms, it is important to understand if patients and providers align in LTOT treatment goals. OBJECTIVE: To investigate patient and provider perceptions about the harms and benefits of continuing and discontinuing LTOT. DESIGN: Qualitative study PARTICIPANTS: Patients and providers with experiences with LTOT for pain in two Veterans Health Affairs regions. APPROACH: We conducted semi-structured interviews and analyzed data using rapid qualitative analysis to describe patient and provider preferences about LTOT continuation and discontinuation and non-opioid pain treatments. KEY RESULTS: Participants (n=43) included 28/67 patients and 15/17 providers. When discussing continuing LTOT, patients emphasized the benefits outweighed the harms, whereas providers emphasized the harms. Participants agreed on the benefits of continuing LTOT for improved physical functioning. Provider-reported benefits of continuing LTOT included maintaining the status quo for patients without opioid alternatives or who were at risk for illicit drug use. Participants were aligned regarding the harms of negative side-effects (e.g., constipation) from continued LTOT. In contrast, when discussing LTOT tapering and discontinuation, providers underscored how benefits outweighed the harms, citing patients' improved well-being and pain management with tapering or alternatives. Patients did not foresee benefits to potential LTOT tapers or discontinuation and were worried about pain management in the absence of LTOT. When discussing non-opioid pain treatments, participants emphasized that they were adjunctive to opioid therapy rather than a replacement (except for cannabis). Providers described the importance of mental health services to manage pain, which differed from patients who focused on treatments to improve strength and mobility and reduce pain. CONCLUSIONS: Patients emphasized the benefits of continuing LTOT for pain management and well-being, which differed from providers' emphasis on the benefits of discontinuing LTOT. Patient and provider differences are important for informing patient-centered care and decisions around continuing, tapering, or discontinuing LTOT.
Assuntos
Dor Crônica , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias , Humanos , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Dor Crônica/terapia , Manejo da Dor , Assistência Centrada no Paciente , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
Importance: Evidence describing the incidence of severe COVID-19 illness following vaccination and booster with BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S vaccines is needed, particularly for high-risk populations. Objective: To describe the incidence of severe COVID-19 illness among a cohort that received vaccination plus a booster vaccine dose. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of adults receiving care at Veterans Health Administration facilities across the US who received a vaccination series plus 1 booster against SARS-CoV-2, conducted from July 1, 2021, to May 30, 2022. Patients were eligible if they had received a primary care visit in the prior 2 years and had documented receipt of all US Food and Drug Administration-authorized doses of the initial mRNA vaccine or viral vector vaccination series after December 11, 2020, and a subsequent documented booster dose between July 1, 2021, and April 29, 2022. The analytic cohort consisted of 1â¯610â¯719 participants. Exposures: Receipt of any combination of mRNA-1273 (Moderna), BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), and Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen/Johnson & Johnson) primary vaccination series and a booster dose. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes were breakthrough COVID-19 (symptomatic infection), hospitalization with COVID-19 pneumonia and/or death, and hospitalization with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and/or death. A subgroup analysis of nonoverlapping populations included those aged 65 years or older, those with high-risk comorbid conditions, and those with immunocompromising conditions. Results: Of 1â¯610â¯719 participants, 1â¯100â¯280 (68.4%) were aged 65 years or older and 132â¯243 (8.2%) were female; 1â¯133â¯785 (70.4%) had high-risk comorbid conditions, 155â¯995 (9.6%) had immunocompromising conditions, and 1â¯467â¯879 (91.1%) received the same type of mRNA vaccine (initial series and booster). Over 24 weeks, 125.0 (95% CI, 123.3-126.8) per 10â¯000 persons had breakthrough COVID-19, 8.9 (95% CI, 8.5-9.4) per 10â¯000 persons were hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia or died, and 3.4 (95% CI, 3.1-3.7) per 10â¯000 persons were hospitalized with severe pneumonia or died. For high-risk populations, incidence of hospitalization with COVID-19 pneumonia or death was as follows: aged 65 years or older, 1.9 (95% CI, 1.4-2.6) per 10â¯000 persons; high-risk comorbid conditions, 6.7 (95% CI, 6.2-7.2) per 10â¯000 persons; and immunocompromising conditions, 39.6 (95% CI, 36.6-42.9) per 10â¯000 persons. Subgroup analyses of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia or death by time after booster demonstrated similar incidence estimates among those aged 65 years or older and with high-risk comorbid conditions but not among those with immunocompromising conditions. Conclusions and Relevance: In a US cohort of patients receiving care at Veterans Health Administration facilities during a period of Delta and Omicron variant predominance, there was a low incidence of hospitalization with COVID-19 pneumonia or death following vaccination and booster with any of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or Ad26.COV2.S vaccines.
Assuntos
Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , Ad26COVS1 , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19 , Imunização Secundária , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV/uso terapêutico , Ad26COVS1/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Idoso , Vacina BNT162/uso terapêutico , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/mortalidade , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Feminino , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Imunização Secundária/estatística & dados numéricos , Incidência , Masculino , Pneumonia/epidemiologia , Pneumonia/etiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação , Serviços de Saúde para Veteranos Militares/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
Importance: Interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS) is an immense burden to both patients and the American healthcare system; it is notoriously difficult to diagnose. Prevalence estimates vary widely (150-fold range in women and >500-fold range in men). Objectives: We aimed to create accurate national IC/BPS prevalence estimates by employing a novel methodology combining a national population-based dataset with individual chart abstraction. Study design: In this epidemiological survey, all living patients, with ≥2 clinic visits from 2016 to 2018 in the Veterans Health Administration, with an ICD-9/10 code for IC/BPS (n = 9,503) or similar conditions that may represent undiagnosed IC/BPS (n = 124,331), were identified (other were controls n = 5,069,695). A detailed chart review of random gender-balanced samples confirmed the true presence of IC/PBS, which were then age- and gender-matched to the general US population. Results: Of the 5,203,529 patients identified, IC/BPS was confirmed in 541 of 1,647 sampled charts with an IC/BPS ICD code, 10 of 382 charts with an ICD-like code, and 3 of 916 controls. After age- and gender-matching to the general US population, this translated to national prevalence estimates of 0.87% (95% CI: 0.32, 1.42), with female and male prevalence of 1.08% (95% CI: 0.03, 2.13) and 0.66% (95% CI: 0.44, 0.87), respectively. Conclusions: We estimate the prevalence of IC/BPS to be 0.87%, which is lower than prior estimates based on survey data, but higher than prior estimates based on administrative data. These potentially represent the most accurate estimates to date, given the broader and more heterogeneous population studied and our novel methodology of combining in-depth chart abstraction with administrative data.
RESUMO
Importance: Substance use disorders (SUDs) are major contributors to morbidity and mortality globally, but they are often underrecognized and underdiagnosed, particularly in some sociodemographic subgroups. Understanding the extent to which clinical diagnoses underestimate these conditions within subgroups is imperative to achieving equitable treatment, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, or age, and to informing and improving performance monitoring. Objective: To compare clinically documented diagnosis rates of alcohol use disorder (AUD), drug use disorder (DUD), and total SUD (AUD and/or DUD) with the prevalence of these disorders as reported in surveys-based on structured, validated diagnostic assessments-across demographic subgroups. Design, Setting, and Participants: A telephone-based survey was conducted from January 8, 2018, to April 30, 2019, among 5995 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) outpatients who were randomly sampled from 30 VHA facilities and were 18 years of age or older, could complete the survey in English, and had a valid address and telephone number. Survey data were linked to electronic health record (EHR) data for all participants. Statistical analysis was performed between January 29, 2020, and April 20, 2021. Exposures: Demographic subgroups based on self-report: gender (male or female), age (18-34, 35-49, 50-64, 65-74, and ≥75 years), and race and ethnicity (Black non-Hispanic, Hispanic, multiracial, other [Asian or Asian-American, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and any other race endorsed by the participant], and White non-Hispanic). Main Outcomes and Measures: Survey-based prevalence rates of AUD, DUD, and SUD were assessed using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview, version 7.0, the only validated instrument available at study outset that measured Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition) criteria for past 12-month diagnoses. Clinically documented diagnosis rates were measured using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision diagnoses from VHA EHR data. Analyses compared survey-based prevalence rates of AUD, DUD, and SUD with diagnosis rates using sensitivity and specificity and difference-in-difference analysis. All analyses were weighted with survey weights to account for nonresponse. Results: Of 5995 participants, 4115 (68.6%) were White non-Hispanic, and 5429 (91.1%) were male; the mean (SD) age was 61.5 (15.3) years. The survey-based prevalence rates of AUD, DUD, and SUD were higher than the diagnosis rates among all patients (AUD, 608 [10.1%] vs 360 [6.0%]; DUD, 282 [4.7%] vs 275 [4.6%]; SUD, 768 [12.8%] vs 515 [8.6%]). Survey-based prevalence rates of AUD and SUD exceeded the diagnosis rates in every demographic subgroup. Gaps between diagnosis rates and survey-based prevalence rates for AUD and SUD were largest among patients aged 18 to 34 years (AUD diagnosis rate, 27 [6.9%; 95% CI, 4.8%-9.9%] vs AUD prevalence rate, 88 [22.4%; 95% CI, 17.3%-28.5%]; SUD diagnosis rate, 41 [10.5%; 95% CI, 8.1%-13.4%] vs SUD prevalence rate, 109 [27.7%; 95% CI, 22.6%-33.3%]) and Hispanic and Latinx patients (AUD diagnosis rate, 31 [7.6%; 95% CI, 5.3%-10.8%] vs AUD prevalence rate, 72 [17.7%; 95% CI, 14.0%-22.1%]; and SUD diagnosis rate, 48 [11.7%; 95% CI, 7.9%-16.9%] vs SUD prevalence rate, 88 [21.6%; 95% CI, 18.0%-25.8%]). For DUD, only patients aged 18 to 34 years had a true prevalence rate that significantly exceeded the diagnosis rate (diagnosis rate, 21 [5.4%; 95% CI, 3.7%-7.8%] vs prevalence rate, 40 [10.1%; 95% CI, 7.2%-14.0%]). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this survey study suggest that existing diagnostic procedures and tools are insufficient to capture SUD prevalence rates, particularly among younger patients and Hispanic and Latinx patients. Clinics and health systems should implement standardized SUD assessments to ensure the provision of equitable care and the optimal identification of underlying conditions for performance monitoring.
Assuntos
Alcoolismo , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias , Adolescente , Adulto , Alcoolismo/epidemiologia , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Prevalência , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/diagnóstico , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/epidemiologia , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/psicologia , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Saúde dos VeteranosRESUMO
Objective: Although long-term benzodiazepine use is not recommended, patients are often prescribed benzodiazepines for >30 days (long-term use). Data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) may inform efforts to discontinue such use. This study sought to describe benzodiazepine use and discontinuation among VHA patients and compared patients who continued and discontinued use. Methods: The study used nationwide electronic health record data for all VHA-enrolled patients (age ≥18) from fiscal year (FY) 2019 (N=6,032,613). The primary outcome, benzodiazepine discontinuation, was defined as no prescription refill for 120 days. Results: In FY2019, 3.5% of VHA enrollees were prescribed benzodiazepines for >30 days, which was 72.0% of those prescribed benzodiazepines. One-third of veterans prescribed long-term benzodiazepines discontinued use. Continuation was more likely among patients who were older, not Black, taking benzodiazepines longer, and taking higher doses. When demographic factors were controlled, patients who continued long-term use were more likely to have a diagnosis of anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), bipolar disorder, or psychosis and less likely to have depression or an alcohol or drug use disorder. Continuation was associated with a lower likelihood of sleep and cardiopulmonary disorders and of dementia. Conclusions: Higher discontinuation prevalence among patients with substance use disorders, dementia, or cardiopulmonary disorders is encouraging. However, the challenge remains of discontinuing long-term use among patients who are White, older, or diagnosed as having anxiety, PTSD, bipolar disorder, or psychosis. There is a need to identify provider, patient, and contextual factors driving long-term benzodiazepine use in these patient groups to effectively apply evidence-based discontinuation strategies.
Assuntos
Benzodiazepinas , Veteranos , Humanos , Idoso , Benzodiazepinas/efeitos adversos , Saúde dos VeteranosRESUMO
Cannabis use may confer high COVID-19 risk. This study examined self-reported changes in cannabis use that US adults attributed to the pandemic and factors associated with any changes. We conducted a national, cross-sectional survey among US adults in August 2020. The analytic sample included 957 past-year cannabis users (Mage = 43 years old; 51% male). Weighted multinomial regression examined associations between forms and reasons of cannabis used, perceived addictiveness and safety, co-use of cannabis with tobacco/alcohol, state legalization, and the outcome (self-reported increase/decrease in cannabis use vs. no change). Overall, 14.8% reported decreasing cannabis use due to the pandemic, 16.1% reported increasing, and 65.4% reported not changing. Factors associated with increased cannabis use included past-year use of vaporized (AOR = 1.7, 95% CI = 1.0, 3.0) or edible cannabis (AOR = 2.4, CI = 1.3, 4.3), and simultaneous use of cannabis and tobacco (AOR = 2.6; CI = 1.4, 5.2). Young adults (18-29 years old) had higher odds of self-reporting both increased (AOR = 4.8; CI = 1.8, 13.1) and decreased use (AOR = 3.3; CI = 1.5, 7.5). The pandemic has had a mixed impact on cannabis use, with participants reporting both increased and decreased use. Efforts may target users of vaporized and edible cannabis, co-users of cannabis and tobacco, and young adults to prevent increased cannabis use during the pandemic.