Reducing Ophthalmic Antibiotic Use for Non-severe Conjunctivitis in Children.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are often overprescribed for pediatric conjunctivitis. We implemented a system-level quality improvement (QI) intervention to reduce unnecessary ophthalmic antibiotic use. METHODS: The multi-faceted intervention in Denver, CO comprised a clinical care pathway, nurse protocol modifications, electronic health record (EHR) changes, parent education materials, and clinician education. We evaluated children aged 6 months-17 years with conjunctivitis seen between November 2018 and December 2022. A multi-interrupted time series model evaluated the effectiveness of the intervention over three time periods: Pre-COVID, Pre-Intervention (November 2018-February 2020), COVID, Pre-Intervention (March 2020-March 2021), and Post-Intervention (April 2021-December 2022). Fisher's exact tests compared treatment failure and healthcare utilization rates between time periods and among children receiving or not receiving ophthalmic antibiotics. RESULTS: Among 6960 eligible encounters, ophthalmic antibiotic use was reduced by 18.8% (95% CI: 16.3, 21.3) from Pre-COVID, Pre-Intervention to Post-Intervention. During the Pre-Intervention period following the onset of COVID, a reduction of 16.1% (95% CI: 12.9, 19.3) was observed. Implementation of the intervention resulted in an additional 2.7% (95% CI: -0.4, 5.7) reduction in antibiotic prescribing, primarily in younger children (ages 6 months-5 years). The greatest reduction in prescribing occurred for nurse triage encounters with an 82.1% (95% CI: 76.8, 87.5) reduction in prescribing rates (92.6%-10.5%). Treatment failure occurred in 1301 (18.7%) children and was more common among children that received an ophthalmic antibiotic than those that did not (20.0 vs 17.9%; P = .03). CONCLUSION: The QI intervention significantly reduced ophthalmic antibiotic prescribing for pediatric conjunctivitis without increasing treatment failure rates or health care utilization.

Total cost of care associated with opioid use disorder treatment.

The opioid epidemic in the United States disproportionately affects Medicaid beneficiaries than other groups. This results in a significant financial burden on state Medicaid programs. In this analysis, we investigate the association of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) treatment initiation and linkage to ongoing care on overall healthcare costs of Medicaid Fee-for-Service patients. We conducted a retrospective study among adult patients diagnosed with opioid use disorder (OUD) and who had a clinical encounter at a safety-net institution in Denver Colorado in 2020. Three categories of MOUD status of patients were defined: 1) identified with OUD but did not receive MOUD; 2) initiated MOUD but not linked to ongoing treatment and 3) received MOUD and linked to ongoing treatment. Our outcome variable was per-member per-month total healthcare cost. We estimated a multivariable model to test the association between healthcare cost and MOUD status, while controlling for demographic and risk classification variables. We found that in individuals with OUD who initiated MOUD treatment but were not linked to ongoing care had the highest healthcare cost, while those who were linked to ongoing MOUD treatment had the lowest healthcare cost. MOUD treatment is not only effective at addressing the significant morbidity and mortality burden of OUD but also associated with decreased financial cost, which is disproportionately incurred by Medicaid. Additional policy and care delivery changes are needed to focus efforts to improve linkage to ongoing treatment.

Ophthalmic antibiotic use for acute infectious conjunctivitis in children.

BACKGROUND: Infectious conjunctivitis is among the most common pediatric infections worldwide; antibiotics are often not indicated. We aimed to determine factors associated with ophthalmic antibiotic prescribing and changes in prescribing prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic at a single center. METHODS: Encounters for children with infectious conjunctivitis from 2017 to 2020 at Denver Health and Hospital Authority clinics were analyzed retrospectively. Factors associated with prescribing were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression modeling. Encounter numbers and prescribing patterns for telephone versus in-person visits before and during the pandemic were compared and stratified. RESULTS: Of 5,283 patients encounters for conjunctivitis, 3,841 (72.7%) resulted in an ophthalmic antibiotic prescription. Concurrent diagnosis with acute otitis media (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.20 (95% CI, 0.16-0.25) and later study year (2018-aOR = 0.76 [95% CI, 0.65-0.89]; 2019- aOR = 0.57 [95% CI, 0.48-0.67]) were associated with reduced odds of prescribing. Compared with those evaluated in pediatric clinics, patients evaluated in family medicine (aOR = 0.69 [95% CI, 0.58-0.83]) or optometry/ophthalmology clinics (aOR = 0.06 [95% CI, 0.02-0.14]) were less likely to have antibiotics prescribed, whereas, patients evaluated via telephone had a 5.43 (95% CI, 3.97-7.42) greater odds of being prescribed ophthalmic antibiotics. Antibiotic prescribing increased from 67.8% prior to the COVID-19 pandemic to 81.9% during the pandemic (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Discordant with national guideline recommendations, ophthalmic antibiotic use for conjunctivitis was high. Telephone visits were associated with higher rates of prescribing. Rates of prescribing increased significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Novel Opioid Safety Clinic Initiative to Deliver Guideline-Concordant Chronic Opioid Therapy in Primary Care.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate a novel Opioid Safety Clinic (OSC) initiative to enhance adherence to guidelines on the assessment and monitoring of patients prescribed chronic opioid therapy (COT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The OSC was developed at an urban Federally Qualified Health Center to provide guideline-concordant care for COT, standardize workflows, and efficiently use clinic staff. We evaluated the OSC using a matched cohort study. Five hundred thirty-nine patients participated in the clinic between July 1, 2014, and March 31, 2016. Of these, 472 clinic participants were matched to 472 nonparticipants by sex and age on the date of the OSC visit. The OSC was evaluated by its completion rates of standardized pain assessments, urine toxicology, and naloxone dispensings. We conducted logistic regression comparing OSC participants to OSC nonparticipants. RESULTS: A total of 539 patients attended an OSC visit, representing approximately 53% of patients in the chronic opioid registry. The OSC participants were more likely than nonparticipants to have completed a pain assessment (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 169.8; 95% CI, 98.3-293.5), completed a urine toxicology (aOR, 46.1; 95% CI, 30.4-69.9), or had naloxone dispensed (aOR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.9-4.3) over 12 months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: The OSC model improved adherence to guideline-concordant COT in primary care. Future research is needed to assess the impact of these interventions on pain, quality of life, and adverse events from opioid analgesics.

The impact of tailored intervention services on charges and mortality for adult super-utilizers.

BACKGROUND: Interventions designed to improve care and reduce costs for patients with the highest rates of hospital utilization (super-utilizers) continue to proliferate, despite conflicting evidence of cost savings. METHODS: We evaluated a practice transformation intervention that implemented team-based care and risk-stratification to match specific primary care resources based on need. This included an intensive outpatient clinic for super-utilizers. We used multivariate regression and a difference-in-differences approach to compare changes in mortality, utilization, and charges between the intervention group and a historical control. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of findings and revealed the inherent challenges associated with quasi-experimental designs. RESULTS: Observed charges for the intervention group were significantly lower than expected charges as derived by the trend of the historical control (p<0.04) resulting in total charge avoidance of approximately $26 million. While inpatient admissions were significantly higher (p<0.01), charges associated with total inpatient (p=0.01), intensive-care unit (p<0.05, not robust to sensitivity analyses), and surgery (p<0.01) were significantly lower than expected in the intervention group. One year mortality was significantly less in the intervention group (12.6% vs 11.5%, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The use of tailored services, including a dedicated intensive outpatient clinic, for super-utilizers within a larger primary care practice transformation reduced mortality and provided significant savings, even while total hospitalizations increased. These savings were achieved through a reduction in the intensity of inpatient services. The unexpected finding of a reduction in ICU charges deserves further exploration. IMPLICATIONS: These findings suggest that intensity of inpatient service, and not merely volume of services, should be considered a focus for future intervention design and evaluated as an outcome. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III (Quasi-Experimental Design).

Patient Perspectives of Obstetrician-Gynecologists as Primary Care Providers.

OBJECTIVE: To examine women�s perceptions of their obstetrician/gynecologist (ob-gyn) as primary care provider (PCP) and comfort in receiving primary care services in an ob-gyn setting. STUDY DESIGN: Survey regarding women�s use of their ob-gyn provider as a PCP, their desire and comfort in receiving primary care services from them, and their perceptions of their ob-gyn�s delivery of primary care. Associations were assessed between use of an ob-gyn as PCP and various demographic and attitudinal factors, as well as patients� perceptions of primary care performance RESULTS: The response rate was 48% (1,404/2,916). Overall, the majority of participants responded that routine primary care services are available at their ob-gyn office and that they were comfortable receiving those services from their ob-gyn. Twenty percent of respondents considered their ob-gyn as their PCP, 52% considered another provider their PCP, and 28% of women did not identify a PCP. Women who were pregnant, mothers of newborns, and patients without a chronic health condition were more likely to identify their ob-gyn as their PCP. CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of women consider their ob-gyn their primary care provider and do not visit another provider regularly. While ob-gyns may not consider themselves as PCPs, they are often perceived as such by patients.

For many patients who use large amounts of health care services, the need is intense yet temporary.

Patients who accumulate multiple emergency department visits and hospital admissions, known as super-utilizers, have become the focus of policy initiatives aimed at preventing such costly use of the health care system through less expensive community- and primary care-based interventions. We conducted cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses of 4,774 publicly insured or uninsured super-utilizers in an urban safety-net integrated delivery system for the period May 1, 2011-April 30, 2013. Our analysis found that consistently 3 percent of adult patients met super-utilizer criteria and accounted for 30 percent of adult charges. Fewer than half of super-utilizers identified as such on May 1, 2011, remained in the category seven months later, and only 28 percent remained at the end of a year. This finding has important implications for program design and for policy makers because previous studies may have obscured this instability at the individual level. Our study also identified clinically relevant subgroups amenable to different interventions, along with their per capita utilization and costs before and after being identified as super-utilizers. Future solutions include improving predictive modeling to identify individuals likely to experience sustained levels of avoidable utilization, better classifying subgroups for whom interventions are needed, and implementing stronger program evaluation designs.

Physician attitudes regarding school-located vaccinations.

OBJECTIVE: To assess physician attitudes regarding school-located adolescent vaccination and influenza vaccination. METHODS: From July through September 2010, a 20-item survey was mailed to 1337 practicing Colorado family physicians and pediatricians. Standard statistical methods were used to examine unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios of factors associated with physician support for school-located vaccination programs. RESULTS: Overall, 943 physicians were survey-eligible, and 584 (62%) responded. More than half of physicians supported both school-located influenza and adolescent vaccination. However, fewer physicians supported school-located adolescent vaccination compared with influenza vaccination. More physicians supported school-located vaccination for their publicly insured patients compared with their privately insured patients. Some family physicians (32%) and pediatricians (39%) believed that school-located vaccination would make their patients less likely to attend well-child visits, and half of respondents believed that school-located vaccination would have a negative financial impact on their practice. In multivariate analyses, physicians concerned about the financial impact of school-located vaccination were less likely to support such programs. CONCLUSIONS: Although a majority of Colorado physicians supported influenza and adolescent vaccination at school, they expressed concerns regarding the implications on their practice. Lesser support for vaccination of their privately insured patients and concerns regarding attendance at well-child visits suggests the perceived financial impact from school-located vaccination is a barrier and merits additional examination.