Uptake and Equity in Influenza Vaccination Among Veterans with VA Coverage, Veterans Without VA Coverage, and Non-Veterans in the USA, 2019-2020.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is a primary method of reducing the burden of influenza, yet uptake is neither optimal nor equitable. Single-tier, primary care-oriented health systems may have an advantage in the efficiency and equity of vaccination. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of Veterans' Health Administration (VA) coverage with influenza vaccine uptake and disparities. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. PARTICIPANTS: Adult respondents to the 2019-2020 National Health Interview Survey. MAIN MEASURES: We examined influenza vaccination rates, and racial/ethnic and income-based vaccination disparities, among veterans with VA coverage, veterans without VA coverage, and adult non-veterans. We performed multivariable logistic regressions adjusted for demographics and self-reported health, with interaction terms to examine differential effects by race/ethnicity and income. KEY RESULTS: Our sample included n=2,277 veterans with VA coverage, n=2,821 veterans without VA coverage, and n=46,456 non-veterans. Veterans were more often White and male; among veterans, those with VA coverage had worse health and lower incomes. Veterans with VA coverage had a higher unadjusted vaccination rate (63.0%) than veterans without VA coverage (59.1%) and non-veterans (46.5%) (p<0.05 for each comparison). In our adjusted model, non-veterans were 11.4 percentage points (95% CI -14.3, -8.5) less likely than veterans with VA coverage to be vaccinated, and veterans without VA coverage were 6.7 percentage points (95% CI -10.3, -3.0) less likely to be vaccinated than those with VA coverage. VA coverage, compared with non-veteran status, was also associated with reduced racial/ethnic and income disparities in vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: VA coverage is associated with higher and more equitable influenza vaccination rates. A single-tier health system that emphasizes primary care may improve the uptake and equity of vaccination for influenza, and possibly other pathogens, like SARS-CoV2.

Less Care at Higher Cost-The Medicare Advantage Paradox.

This Viewpoint makes the case for eliminating Medicare Advantage and doubling down on Traditional Medicare.

Redefining and redesigning hospital discharge to enhance patient care: a randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Patients are routinely ill-prepared for the transition from hospital to home. Inadequate communication between Hospitalists and primary care providers can further compromise post-discharge care. Redesigning the discharge process may improve the continuity and the quality of patient care. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate a low-cost intervention designed to promptly reconnect patients to their "medical home" after hospital discharge. DESIGN: Randomized controlled study. Intervention patients received a "user-friendly" Patient Discharge Form, and upon arrival at home, a telephone outreach from a nurse at their primary care site. PARTICIPANTS: A culturally and linguistically diverse group of patients admitted to a small community teaching hospital. MEASUREMENTS: Four undesirable outcomes were measured after hospital discharge: (1) no outpatient follow-up within 21 days; (2) readmission within 31 days; (3) emergency department visit within 31 days; and (4) failure by the primary care provider to complete an outpatient workup recommended by the hospital doctors. Outcomes of the intervention group were compared to concurrent and historical controls. RESULTS: Only 25.5% of intervention patients had 1 or more undesirable outcomes compared to 55.1% of the concurrent and 55.0% of the historical controls. Notably, only 14.9% of the intervention patients failed to follow-up within 21 days compared to 40.8% of the concurrent and 35.0% of the historical controls. Only 11.5% of recommended outpatient workups in the intervention group were incomplete versus 31.3% in the concurrent and 31.0% in the historical controls. CONCLUSIONS: A low-cost discharge-transfer intervention may improve the rates of outpatient follow-up and of completed workups after hospital discharge.

Identifying individual risk factors and documenting the pattern of heat-related illness through analyses of hospitalization and patterns of household cooling.

BACKGROUND: As climate change increases the frequency and intensity of extreme heat events researchers and public health officials must work towards understanding the causes and outcomes of heat-related morbidity and mortality. While there have been many studies on both heat-related illness (HRI), there are fewer on heat-related morbidity than on heat-related mortality. OBJECTIVE: To identify individual and environmental risk factors for hospitalizations and document patterns of household cooling. METHODS: We performed a pooled cross-sectional analysis of secondary U.S. data, the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Risk ratios were calculated from multivariable models to identify risk factors for hospitalizations. Hierarchical modeling was also employed to identify relationships between individual and hospital level predictors of hospitalizations. Patterns of air conditioning use were analyzed among the vulnerable populations identified. RESULTS: Hospitalizations due to HRI increased over the study period compared to all other hospitalizations. Populations at elevated risk for HRI hospitalization were blacks, males and all age groups above the age of 40. Those living in zip-codes in the lowest income quartile and the uninsured were also at an increased risk. Hospitalizations for HRI in rural and small urban clusters were elevated, compared to urban areas. CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors for HRI include age greater than 40, male gender and hospitalization in rural areas or small urban clusters. Our analysis also revealed an increasing pattern of HRI hospitalizations over time and decreased association between common comorbidities and heat illnesses which may be indicative of underreporting.

Giving office-based physicians electronic access to patients' prior imaging and lab results did not deter ordering of tests.

Policy-based incentives for health care providers to adopt health information technology are predicated on the assumption that, among other things, electronic access to patient test results and medical records will reduce diagnostic testing and save money. To test the generalizability of findings that support this assumption, we analyzed the records of 28,741 patient visits to a nationally representative sample of 1,187 office-based physicians in 2008. Physicians' access to computerized imaging results (sometimes, but not necessarily, through an electronic health record) was associated with a 40-70 percent greater likelihood of an imaging test being ordered. The electronic availability of lab test results was also associated with ordering of additional blood tests. The availability of an electronic health record in itself had no apparent impact on ordering; the electronic access to test results appears to have been the key. These findings raise the possibility that, as currently implemented, electronic access does not decrease test ordering in the office setting and may even increase it, possibly because of system features that are enticements to ordering. We conclude that use of these health information technologies, whatever their other benefits, remains unproven as an effective cost-control strategy with respect to reducing the ordering of unnecessary tests.