Trends in Spinal Orthosis Utilization Among Patients Insured through Medicare Part B.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective population-based database analysis from the Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Medicare/Medicaid Dataset. OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive analysis of trends in spinal orthosis utilization over a 12-year period. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Widespread prescription of spinal orthosis persists, despite evidence suggesting equivocal efficacy in many spinal conditions. The utilization of spinal orthosis on a national level, including prescribing specialty data, has not been previously analyzed. METHODS: Healthcare common procedure coding system (HCPCS) codes for cervical (CO), thoracic-lumbar-sacral (TLSO), lumbar (LO), lumbar-sacral (LSO), and cervical-thoracic-lumbar-sacral (CTLSO) orthosis were used to determine spinal orthosis utilization from 2010 to 2021. Provider specialty codes were utilized to compare trends between select specialties. Additionally, a neurosurgical CO analysis, based on subclassifications of cervical bracing, was performed. Linear trendlines were implemented to elucidate and present trends by slope (ß). RESULTS: Among 332,241 claims, decreases in CO (ß=-0.3387), TLSO (ß=-0.0942), LO (ß=-0.3485), and LSO (ß=-0.1545) per 100,000 Medicare Part B enrollees and CTLSO (ß=-0.052) per 1,000,000 Medicare Part B enrollees were observed. Decreases among neurosurgery (ß=-7.9208), family medicine (ß=-1.0097), emergency medicine (ß=-2.1958), internal medicine (ß=-1.1151), interventional pain management (ß=-5.0945), and chiropractic medicine (ß=-49.012), and increases among orthopedic surgery (ß=5.5891), pain management (ß=30.416), physical medicine and rehabilitation (ß=4.6524), general practice (ß=79.111), and osteopathic manipulative medicine (ß=45.303) in total spinal orthosis use per 100,000 specialty claims were observed. Analysis on subclassifications of cervical orthosis among neurosurgeons revealed decreases in flexible (ß=-1.7641), semi-rigid (ß=-0.6157), and collar bracing (ß=-2.7603), and an increase in multi-post collar bracing (ß=2.2032) per 100 neurosurgical cervical orthosis claims. CONCLUSIONS: While utilization of spinal orthosis decreased between 2010-2021, increased utilization was observed among a subset of specialties. Identifying these specialties allows for focused research and educational efforts to minimize unnecessary durable medical equipment use for effective healthcare spending.

Process evaluation of complex interventions in non-communicable and neglected tropical diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review is to map out the use of process evaluation (PE) in complex interventions that address non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) to identify gaps in the design and conduct, as well as strengths, limitations and implications, of this type of research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). DESIGN: Scoping review of PE studies of complex interventions implemented in LMICs. Six databases were searched focused on studies published since 2008. DATA SOURCES: Embase, PubMed, EbscoHost, Web of Science (WOS), Virtual Health Library (VHL) Regional Portal and Global Index Medicus: Regional Indexes AIM (AFRO), LILACS (AMRO/PAHO), IMEMR (EMRO), IMSEAR (SEARO), WPRIM (WPRO) Global Index Regional Indexes, MEDLINE, SciELO. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies conducted in LMICs on PEs of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs published between January 2008 and January 2020. Other criteria were studies of interventions for people at risk or having physical and mental NCDs, and/or NTDs, and/or their healthcare providers and/or others related to achieve better health for these two disease groups. Studies were excluded if they were not reported in English or Spanish or Portuguese or French, not peer-reviewed articles, not empirical research and not human research. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extracted to be evaluated were: available evidence in the utilisation of PE in the areas of NCDs and NTDs, including frameworks and theories used; methods applied to conduct PEs; and in a subsample, the barriers and facilitators to implement complex interventions identified through the PE. Variables were extracted and categorised. The information was synthesised through quantitative analysis by reporting frequencies and percentages. Qualitative analysis was also performed to understand facilitators and barriers presented in these studies. The implications for PEs, and how the information from the PE was used by researchers or other stakeholders were also assessed in this approach. RESULTS: 303 studies were identified, 79% were for NCDs, 12% used the label 'PE', 27% described a theory or framework for the PE, and 42% used mixed methods to analyse their findings. Acceptability, barriers and facilitators to implement the interventions, experiences and perceptions, and feasibility were the outcomes most frequently evaluated as part of the PEs. Barriers and facilitators themes identified were contextual factors, health system factors, human resources, attitudes and policy factors. CONCLUSIONS: PEs in NCDs and NTDs are used in LMICs with a wide variety of methods. This review identified many PEs that were not labelled by the authors as such, as well as a limited application of PE-related theories and frameworks, and heterogeneous reporting of this type of study.

Características de patentes de dispositivos para rehabilitación física registradas en los Estados Unidos / Characteristics of patents of physical rehabilitation devices registered in the United States

Introducción: La rehabilitación física puede verse beneficiada con el uso de dispositivos, los cuales en su mayoría suelen ser patentados. La oficina de patentes y marcas de los Estados Unidos (USPTO) es una de las oficinas de patentes y marcas más grandes y reconocidas. Resulta de interés evaluar las características y la evolución de las patentes para la rehabilitación física; sin embargo, existen pocos estudios al respecto. Objetivo: Identificar las características de las patentes de dispositivos de rehabilitación física de extremidades, registradas en la oficina de patentes y marcas de los Estados Unidos. Material y métodos: Estudio descriptivo transversal. Se realizó una búsqueda en UPSTO usando una lista de palabras clave relacionadas con la rehabilitación. Se eligieron 10 grupos de patentes relacionados con la rehabilitación. Las variables estudiadas fueron: número de la patente, fecha de publicación, país, titular, área de la patente, extremidades para las cuales es útil la patente y portabilidad. Se realizó un análisis descriptivo usando STATA v.14. Resultados: Se analizaron 1971 patentes, de las cuales 16,2 por ciento fueron incluidas en los grupos de rehabilitación y 83,8 por ciento en ejercicio físico. El 36,6 por ciento de todas las patentes fueron patentadas por un titular corporativo, el 29,9 por ciento fueron portables, y el 46,3 por ciento tenían utilidad para ambas extremidades. Conclusiones: De las patentes encontradas las enfocadas para ejercicio físico fueron las predominantes. Existe una mayor cantidad de patentes útiles para ambas extremidades. Además, existe una tendencia ascendente en el tiempo, en el número de patentes del área de rehabilitación y de las invenciones portables(AU)

ABSTRACT Introduction: Physical rehabilitation can be benefitted from the use of devices, which are usually patented. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is one of the largest and most recognized patent and trademark offices. The characteristics and evolution of patents for physical rehabilitation is of great interest; however, there are few studies in this respect. Objective: To identify the characteristics of patents of physical rehabilitation devices for the physical rehabilitation of damaged limbs registered the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Material and methods: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted. A search was made at UPSTO using a list of keywords related to rehabilitation. Ten groups of patents related to rehabilitation were chosen. The variables studied were: patent number, publication date, country, holder, patent area, limbs for which the patent is useful, and portability. A descriptive analysis was performed by using STATA v.14. Results: A total of 1971 patents were analyzed, of which 16.2 percent were included in the rehabilitation groups and 83.8 percent in the physical exercise groups. The 36.6 percent of them were corporate-owned patents, 29.9 percent were portable, and 46.3 percent had usability which demonstrated to be useful for both extremities. Conclusions: Of the patents found, those focused on physical exercise were predominant. There is a greater number of useful patents for both extremities. In addition, there is an upward trend over time, the number of patents in the area of ​​rehabilitation, and portable inventions(AU)