RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Expensive oral specialty drugs for advanced prostate cancer can be associated with treatment disparities. The 340B program allows hospitals to purchase medications at discounts, generating savings that can improve care of the socioeconomically disadvantaged. This study assessed the effect of hospital 340B participation on advanced prostate cancer. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with advanced prostate cancer from 2012 to 2019. The primary outcome was use of an oral specialty drug. Secondary outcomes included monthly out-of-pocket costs and treatment adherence. We evaluated the effects of 1) hospital 340B participation, 2) a regional measure vulnerability, the social vulnerability index (SVI), and 3) the interaction between hospital 340B participation and SVI on outcomes. RESULTS: There were 2237 and 1100 men who received care at 340B and non-340B hospitals. There was no difference in specialty drug use between 340B and non-340B hospitals, whereas specialty drug use decreased with increased SVI (odds ratio, 0.95, p = .038). However, the interaction between hospital 340B participation and SVI on specialty drug use was not significant. Neither 340B participation, SVI, or their interaction were associated with out-of-pocket costs. Although hospital 340B participation and SVI were not associated with treatment adherence, their interaction was significant (p = .020). This demonstrated that 340B was associated with better adherence among socially vulnerable men. CONCLUSIONS: The 340B program was not associated with specialty drug use in men with advanced prostate cancer. However, among those who were started on therapy, 340B was associated with increased treatment adherence in more socially vulnerable men.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias de la Próstata/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/economía , Anciano , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos , Administración Oral , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Medicare , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Antineoplásicos/economíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Urologists practicing in single-specialty groups with ownership in radiation vaults are more likely to treat men with prostate cancer. The effect of divestment of vault ownership on treatment patterns is unclear. METHODS: A 20% sample of national Medicare claims was used to perform a retrospective cohort study of men with prostate cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2019. Urology practices were categorized by radiation vault ownership as nonowners, continuous owners, and divested owners. The primary outcome was use of local treatment, and the secondary outcome was use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). A difference-in-differences framework was used to measure the effect of divestment on outcomes compared to continuous owners. Subgroup analyses assessed outcomes by noncancer mortality risk (high [>50%] vs. low [≤50%]). RESULTS: Among 72 urology practices that owned radiation vaults, six divested during the study. Divestment led to a decrease in treatment compared with those managed at continuously owning practices (difference-in-differences estimate, -13%; p = .03). The use of IMRT decreased, but this was not statistically significant (difference-in-differences estimate, -10%; p = .13). In men with a high noncancer mortality risk, treatment (difference-in-differences estimate, -28%; p < .001) and use of IMRT (difference-in-differences estimate, -27%; p < .001) decreased after divestment. CONCLUSIONS: Urology group divestment from radiation vault ownership led to a decrease in prostate cancer treatment. This decrease was most pronounced in men who had a high noncancer mortality risk. This has important implications for health care reform by suggesting that payment programs that encourage constraints on utilization, when appropriate, may be effective in reducing overtreatment.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Urólogos , Masculino , Humanos , Anciano , Estados Unidos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Propiedad , Medicare , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnósticoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of adding advanced practice providers to surgical practices on surgical complications, readmissions, mortality, episode spending, length of stay, and access to care. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: There has been substantial growth in the number of nurse practitioners and physician assistants (ie, advanced practice providers) in the United States. The extent to which advanced practice providers have been integrated into surgical practice, and their impact on surgical outcomes and access is unclear. METHODS: Using a 20% sample of national Medicare claims, we performed a retrospective cohort study of fee-for-service beneficiaries undergoing one of 4 major procedures (coronary artery bypass graft, colectomy, major joint replacement, and cystectomy) between 2010 and 2016. We limited our study population for each procedure to patients treated by single-specialty surgical groups to ensure that the advanced practice providers have direct interactions with its surgeons and patients. All outcomes were measured at the practice level for the year before and the year after the addition of the first advanced practice provider. Outcomes included: complications, readmission, mortality, episode payments, length of stay. Models were adjusted for age, race, sex, comorbidity, socioeconomic class and procedure type. Secondary outcome: practice-level office visits by surgical group type. RESULTS: The number of advanced practice providers increased by 13%, from 6713 to 7596 between 2010 and 2016. The largest relative increases occurred in general (46.9%) and urologic (27.6%) surgical practices. The year after an advanced practice provider was added to a surgical practice, the odds of complications were 17% and 16% lower at 30- and 90-days postprocedure, respectively. Additionally, 90-day readmissions were 18% less likely and length of stay was 0.33 days shorter (a 7.1% reduction). Average 30-day and90-day episode spending was $1294.73 and $1427.76 lower, respectively ( P < 0.001). General surgical, orthopedic, and urology practices realized increases of 49.0 (95% CI 13.5-84.5), 112.0 (95% CI 83.0-140.5), and 205.0 (95% CI 117.5-292.0) in-office visits per surgeon, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of advanced practice providers to single-specialty surgical groups is associated with improvements in surgical outcomes and access. Future work should clarify the mechanisms by which advanced practice providers within surgical practices contribute to health outcomes to identify best practices for deployment.
Asunto(s)
Medicare , Cirujanos , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Anciano , Estudios Retrospectivos , Planes de Aranceles por Servicios , Puente de Arteria CoronariaRESUMEN
Background. While advanced practice providers (APPs) are increasingly integrated into care delivery models, little is known about their impact in surgical settings. Given that many patients undergo surgery in multispecialty group practice settings, we examined the impact of APP integration into such practices on outcomes after major surgery. Methods. We used a 20% sample of national Medicare claims to identify 190 101 patients who underwent 1 of 4 major surgeries (coronary artery bypass graft [CABG], colectomy, major joint replacement, and cystectomy) at multispecialty group practices from 2010 through 2016. The level of APP integration was measured as the ratio of APPs to physicians within each practice. Rates of mortality, major complications, and readmission within 30 days of discharge after the index surgery were compared between patients treated in practices with low, medium, and high levels of APP integration using multivariable regression analysis. Results. Relative to patients treated in practices with low APP integration, those treated in practices with medium or high APP integration had significantly lower rates of mortality (2.4% [low integration] vs 1.9% [medium integration] vs 2.0% [high integration]; P < .01), major complications (34.1% [low] vs 31.2% [medium] vs 30.2% [high]; P < .01), and readmission (11.7% [low] vs 10.6% [medium] vs 10.1% [high]; P < .01). This relationship was consistent for virtually all outcomes when considering each surgery type individually. Conclusions. Integration of APPs into multispecialty group practices was associated with improved postoperative outcomes after major surgery. Future research should identify the mechanisms by which APPs improve outcomes to inform optimal utilization.
Asunto(s)
Práctica de Grupo , Médicos , Anciano , Colectomía , Puente de Arteria Coronaria/efectos adversos , Humanos , Medicare , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Abiraterone and enzalutamide are high-cost oral therapies that increasingly are used to treat patients with advanced prostate cancer; these agents carry the potential for significant financial consequences to patients. In the current study, the authors investigated coping and material measures of the financial hardship of these therapies among patients with Medicare Part D coverage. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective cohort study on a 20% sample of Medicare Part D enrollees who underwent treatment with abiraterone or enzalutamide between July 2013 and June 2015. The authors described the variability in adherence rates and out-of-pocket payments among hospital referral regions in the first 6 months of therapy and determined whether adherence and out-of-pocket payments were associated with patient factors and the socioeconomic characteristics of where a patient was treated. RESULTS: There were 4153 patients who filled abiraterone or enzalutamide prescriptions through Medicare Part D in 228 hospital referral regions. The mean adherence rate was 75%. The median monthly out-of-pocket payment for abiraterone and enzalutamide was $706 (range, $0-$3505). After multilevel, multivariable adjustment for patient and regional factors, adherence was found to be lower in patients who were older (69% for patients aged ≥85 years vs 76% for patients aged <70 years; P < .01) and in those with low-income subsidies (69% in those with a subsidy vs 76% in those without a subsidy; P < .01). Both Hispanic ethnicity and living in a hospital referral region with a higher percentage of Hispanic beneficiaries were found to be independently associated with higher out-of-pocket payments for abiraterone and enzalutamide. CONCLUSIONS: There were substantial variations in the adherence rate and out-of-pocket payments among Medicare Part D beneficiaries who were prescribed abiraterone and enzalutamide. Sociodemographic patient and regional factors were found to be associated with both adherence and out-of-pocket payments.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/economía , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Cumplimiento de la Medicación/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/tratamiento farmacológico , Administración Oral , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Androstenos/administración & dosificación , Androstenos/economía , Antineoplásicos/administración & dosificación , Benzamidas/administración & dosificación , Benzamidas/economía , Costos de los Medicamentos , Humanos , Renta , Cobertura del Seguro/economía , Masculino , Medicare Part D , Nitrilos/administración & dosificación , Nitrilos/economía , Feniltiohidantoína/administración & dosificación , Feniltiohidantoína/economía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) on the use of vertebroplasty and arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, 2 procedures for which randomized controlled trials suggest similar outcomes to sham surgery and therefore may provide low value. Medicare Shared Savings Program ACOs aim to improve quality and decrease health care spending. Reducing the use of potentially low-value procedures can accomplish both of these goals. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent potentially low-value orthopedic procedures (vertebroplasty and partial meniscectomy) and a control (hip fracture) from 2010 to 2015 using a 20% sample of national Medicare claims. We performed an interrupted time-series analysis using linear spline models to evaluate the count of each procedure per 1000 patients, stratified by ACO participation. RESULTS: We identified 76 256 patients who underwent arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, 44 539 patients who underwent vertebroplasty, and 50 760 patients who underwent hip fracture admission. Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy rates decreased, vertebroplasty rates remained stable, and hip fracture rates increased for both groups during the study period, with similar trends among ACO and non-ACO patients. After January 1, 2013, ACO and non-ACO populations had similar trends for vertebroplasty (ACO incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.15 [1.08-1.23] vs non-ACO IRR = 1.11 [1.05-1.16]), meniscectomy (ACO IRR = 1.06 [1.01-1.12] vs non-ACO IRR = 1.03 [0.99-1.07]), and hip fracture (ACO IRR = 1.08 [1.01-1.14] vs non-ACO IRR = 1.08 [1.03-1.13]). CONCLUSIONS: ACOs were not associated with a reduction in the frequency of vertebroplasty and arthroscopic partial meniscectomy.
Asunto(s)
Organizaciones Responsables por la Atención/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Meniscectomía/estadística & datos numéricos , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Vertebroplastia/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Ahorro de Costo/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores Socioeconómicos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) have been shown to reduce prostate cancer treatment among men unlikely to benefit because of competing risks (ie, potential overtreatment). This study assessed whether the level of engagement in ACOs by urologists affected rates of treatment, overtreatment, and spending. METHODS: A 20% sample of national Medicare data was used to identify men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2012 and 2014. The extent of urologist engagement in an ACO, as measured by the proportion of patients in an ACO managed by an ACO-participating urologist, served as the exposure. The use of treatment, potential overtreatment (ie, treatment in men with a ≥75% risk of 10-year noncancer mortality), and average payments in the year after diagnosis for each ACO were modeled. RESULTS: Among 2822 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer, the median rates of treatment and potential overtreatment by an ACO were 71.3% (range, 23.6%-79.5%) and 53.6% (range, 12.4%-76.9%), respectively. Average Medicare payments among ACOs in the year after diagnosis ranged from $16,523.52 to $34,766.33. Stronger urologist-ACO engagement was not associated with treatment (odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.6-1.2; P = .4) or spending (9.7% decrease in spending; P = .08). However, urologist engagement was associated with a lower likelihood of potential overtreatment (odds ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.86; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: ACOs vary widely in treatment, potential overtreatment, and spending for prostate cancer. ACOs with stronger urologist engagement are less likely to treat men with a high risk of noncancer mortality, and this suggests that organizations that better engage specialists may be able to improve the value of specialty care. Cancer 2018. © 2018 American Cancer Society.
Asunto(s)
Gastos en Salud , Medicare/economía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/economía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Organizaciones Responsables por la Atención , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Ahorro de Costo/economía , Humanos , Masculino , Próstata/efectos de los fármacos , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/epidemiología , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) can improve prostate cancer care by decreasing treatment variations (ie, avoidance of treatment in low-value settings). Herein, the authors performed a study to understand the effect of Medicare Shared Savings Program ACOs on prostate cancer care. METHODS: Using a 20% Medicare sample, the authors identified men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer from 2010 through 2013. Rates of treatment, potential overtreatment (ie, treatment in men with a ≥75% chance of 10-year mortality from competing risks), and Medicare payments were measured using regression models. The impact of ACO participation was assessed using difference-in-differences analyses. RESULTS: Before implementation of ACOs, the treatment rate was 71.8% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 70.2%-73.3%) for ACO-aligned beneficiaries and 72.3% (95% CI, 71.7%-73.0% [P = .51]) for non-ACO-aligned beneficiaries. After implementation, this rate declined to 68.4% (95% CI, 66.1%-70.7% [P = .017]) for ACO-aligned beneficiaries and 69.3% (95% CI, 68.5%-70.1% [P<.001]) for non-ACO-aligned beneficiaries. There was no differential effect noted for ACO participation. The rate of potential overtreatment decreased from 48.2% (95% CI, 43.1%-53.3%) to 40.2% (95% CI, 32.4%-48.0% [P = .087]) for ACO-aligned beneficiaries and increased from 44.3% (95% CI, 42.1%-46.5%) to 47.0% (95% CI, 44.5%-49.5% [P = .11]) for non-ACO-aligned beneficiaries. These changes resulted in a significant relative decrease in overtreatment of 17% for ACO-aligned beneficiaries (difference-in-differences, 10.8%; P = .031). Payments were not found to be differentially affected by ACO alignment. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of prostate cancer and annual payments decreased significantly between 2010 and 2013, but ACO participation did not appear to impact these trends. Among men least likely to benefit, Medicare Shared Savings Program ACO alignment was associated with a significant decline in prostate cancer treatment. Cancer 2018;124:563-70. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
Asunto(s)
Organizaciones Responsables por la Atención , Ahorro de Costo , Medicare/economía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias de la Próstata/economía , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The delivery of high quality prostate cancer care is increasingly important for health systems, physicians and patients. Integrated delivery systems may have the greatest ability to deliver high quality, efficient care. We sought to understand the association between health care integration and quality of prostate cancer care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used SEER-Medicare data to perform a retrospective cohort study of men older than age 65 with prostate cancer diagnosed between 2007 and 2011. We defined integration within a health care market based on the number of discharges from a top 100 integrated delivery system, and compared rates of adherence to well accepted prostate cancer quality measures in markets with no integration vs full integration (greater than 90% of discharges from an integrated system). RESULTS: The average man treated in a fully integrated market was more likely to receive pretreatment counseling by a urologist and radiation oncologist (62.6% vs 60.3%, p=0.03), avoid inappropriate imaging (72.2% avoided vs 60.6%, p <0.001), avoid treatment when life expectancy was less than 10 years (23.7% vs 17.3%, p <0.001) and avoid multiple hospitalizations in the last 30 days of life (50.2% vs 43.6%, p=0.001) than when treated in markets with no integration. Additionally, patients treated in fully integrated markets were more likely to have complete adherence to all eligible quality measures (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.27-1.50). CONCLUSIONS: Integrated systems are associated with improved adherence to several prostate cancer quality measures. Expansion of the integrated health care model may facilitate greater delivery of high quality prostate cancer care.
Asunto(s)
Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Cohortes , Intervalos de Confianza , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare , Invasividad Neoplásica/patología , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Oportunidad Relativa , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Programa de VERF , Tasa de Supervivencia , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: We evaluated whether patients with prostate cancer who received best care according to a set of 5 nationally endorsed quality measures had decreased treatment related morbidity and improved cancer control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study we included 38,055 men from the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results)-Medicare database treated for localized prostate cancer between 2004 and 2010. We determined whether each patient received best care, defined as care adherent to all applicable measures. We measured associations of best care with the need for interventions, addressing treatment related morbidity, and with the need for secondary cancer therapy using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Only 3,412 men (9.0%) received best care. Five years after treatment these men and men who did not receive best care had a similar likelihood of undergoing procedures for urinary morbidity (prostatectomy subset 10.7% vs 12.9%, p = 0.338) and secondary cancer therapy (prostatectomy for high risk prostate cancer subset 40.9% vs 37.3%, p = 0.522). However, they were more likely to be treated with a procedure for sexual morbidity (prostatectomy 17.3% vs 10.8%, p <0.001). Similar trends were observed in men treated with radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Overall men who received best care did not fare better in regard to treatment related morbidity or cancer control. Collectively our findings suggest that the current process of care measures are not tightly linked to outcomes and further research is needed to identify better measures that are meaningful and important to patients.
Asunto(s)
Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Compared with white patients, black patients are more likely to undergo cardiac surgery at low-quality hospitals, even when they live closer to high-quality ones. Opportunities for organizational interventions to alleviate this problem remain elusive. OBJECTIVES: To explore physician isolation in communities with high proportions of black residents as a factor contributing to racial disparities in access to high-quality hospitals for cardiac surgery. RESEARCH DESIGN: Using national Medicare data (2008-2011), we mapped physician social networks at hospitals where coronary artery bypass grafting procedures were performed, measuring their degree of connectedness. We then fitted a series of multivariate regression models to examine for associations between physician connectedness and the proportion of black residents in the hospital service area (HSA) served by each network. MEASURES: Measures of physician connectedness (ie, repeat-tie fraction, clustering, and number of external ties). RESULTS: After accounting for regional differences in healthcare capacity, the social networks of physicians practicing in areas with more black residents varied in many important respects from those of HSAs with fewer black residents. Physicians serving HSAs with many black residents had a smaller number of repeated interactions with each other than those in other HSAs (P<0.001). When these physicians did interact, they tended to assemble in smaller groups of highly interconnected colleagues (P<0.001). They also had fewer interactions with physicians outside their immediate geographic area (P=0.048). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians in HSAs with many black residents are more isolated than those in HSAs with fewer black residents. This isolation may negatively impact on care coordination and information sharing. As such, planned delivery system reforms that encourage minorities to seek care within their established local networks may further exacerbate existing surgical disparities.
Asunto(s)
Negro o Afroamericano , Puente de Arteria Coronaria/estadística & datos numéricos , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/organización & administración , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Red Social , Población Blanca , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Femenino , Humanos , Relaciones Interpersonales , Masculino , Modelos Estadísticos , Análisis Multivariante , Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Racismo , Análisis de Regresión , Apoyo Social , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Secondary prevention has an important role in urinary stone disease. The core of secondary prevention is the identification of modifiable risk factors by a 24-hour urine collection, which then directs selective medical therapy. While this decreases the recurrence rate, little is known about the frequency with which 24-hour urine collections are obtained. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using medical claims from 2002 to 2006 we identified adults with incident urinary stone episodes. With appropriate diagnosis codes we determined those at high risk for recurrence. Of these patients we determined the proportion in whom a 24-hour urine collection was done within 6 months of diagnosis. Finally, we fitted regression models to measure associations between patient and provider level factors, and obtaining a 24-hour urine collection. RESULTS: We identified 28,836 patients at high risk for recurrence. The prevalence of 24-hour urine testing increased from 7.0% in 2003 to 7.9% in 2006 (p = 0.011), although the overall prevalence was exceedingly low at 7.4%. Multivariable regression revealed that region of residence and level of comorbid illness were independently associated with 24-hour urine collection, as was the type of physician who performed the followup. For instance, the odds of metabolic evaluation were 2.9 times higher when a patient was seen by a nephrologist (OR 2.92, 95% CI 2.32-3.67), and more than threefold higher when seen by a urologist (OR 3.87, 95% CI 3.48-4.30). CONCLUSIONS: Obtaining 24-hour urine collections in stone formers at high risk is uncommon, raising a quality of care concern.
Asunto(s)
Prevención Secundaria/métodos , Cálculos Urinarios/diagnóstico , Toma de Muestras de Orina/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Humanos , Prevalencia , Factores de Riesgo , Cálculos Urinarios/epidemiología , Cálculos Urinarios/prevención & controlRESUMEN
PURPOSE: We assessed the relationship between health care system performance on nationally endorsed prostate cancer quality of care measures and prostate cancer treatment outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 48,050 men from SEER-Medicare linked data diagnosed with localized prostate cancer between 2004 and 2009, and followed through 2010. Based on a composite quality measure we categorized the health care systems in which these men were treated into 1-star (bottom 20%), 2-star (middle 60%) and 3-star (top 20%) systems. We then examined the association of health care system level quality of care with outcomes using multivariable logistic and Cox regression. RESULTS: Patients who underwent prostatectomy in 3-star vs 1-star health care systems were at lower risk for perioperative complications (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.64-1.00). However, they were more likely to undergo a procedure addressing treatment related morbidity, eg for sexual morbidity (11.3% vs 7.8%, p = 0.043). In patients who received radiotherapy star ranking was not associated with treatment related morbidity. In all patients star ranking was not significantly associated with all-cause mortality (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.84-1.15) or secondary cancer therapy (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91-1.20). CONCLUSIONS: We found no consistent association between health care system quality and outcomes, which questions how meaningful these measures ultimately are for patients. Thus, future studies should focus on developing more discriminative quality measures.
Asunto(s)
Adhesión a Directriz , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Humanos , Masculino , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/clasificación , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/normas , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Despite the endorsement of several quality measures for prostate cancer by the National Quality Forum and the Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement, how consistently physicians adhere to these measures has not been examined. We evaluated regional variation in adherence to these quality measures to identify targets for future quality improvement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this retrospective cohort study we used SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results)-Medicare data for 2001 to 2007 to identify 53,614 patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. Patients were assigned to 661 regions (Hospital Service Areas). Hierarchical generalized linear models were used to examine reliability adjusted regional adherence to the endorsed quality measures. RESULTS: Adherence at the patient level was highly variable, ranging from 33% for treatment by a high volume provider to 76% for receipt of adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy while undergoing radiotherapy for high risk cancer. In addition, there was considerable regional variation in adherence to several measures, including pretreatment counseling by a urologist and radiation oncologist (range 9% to 89%, p <0.001), avoiding overuse of bone scans in low risk cancer (range 16% to 96%, p <0.001), treatment by a high volume provider (range 1% to 90%, p <0.001) and followup with radiation oncologists (range 14% to 86%, p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found low adherence rates for most established prostate cancer quality of care measures. Within most measures regional variation in adherence was pronounced. Measures with low adherence and a large amount of regional variation may be important low hanging targets for quality improvement.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: While medical expulsive therapy is associated with lower health care expenditures compared to early endoscopic stone removal in patients with renal colic, little is known about the effect of medical expulsive therapy on indirect costs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a previously validated claims based algorithm we identified a cohort of patients with acute renal colic. After determining the up-front treatment type (ie an initial course of medical expulsive therapy vs early endoscopic stone removal) we compared differences in rates of short-term disability filing. We used propensity score matching to account for differences between treatment groups such that patients treated with medical expulsive therapy vs early endoscopic stone removal were similar with regard to measured characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 257 (35.8%) and 461 (64.2%) patients were treated with medical expulsive therapy or early endoscopic stone removal, respectively. There were no differences between treatment groups after propensity score matching. In the matched cohort the patients treated with medical expulsive therapy had a 6% predicted probability of filing a claim for short-term disability compared to 16.5% in the early endoscopic stone removal cohort (p <0.0001). Among the patients who filed for short-term disability those prescribed medical expulsive therapy had on average 1 fewer day of disability than those treated surgically (0.9 vs 1.8 days, p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An initial trial of medical expulsive therapy is associated with significantly lower indirect costs to the patient compared to early endoscopic stone removal. These findings have implications for providers when counseling patients with acute renal colic.
Asunto(s)
Antagonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos alfa 1/economía , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/economía , Endoscopía/economía , Gastos en Salud , Cólico Renal/tratamiento farmacológico , Cólico Renal/cirugía , Antagonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos alfa 1/uso terapéutico , Algoritmos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Endoscopía/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Deciding whether to treat or conservatively manage patients with prostate cancer is challenging. Recent changes in guidelines, advances in treatment technologies, and policy can influence decision making surrounding management, particularly for those for whom the decision to treat is discretionary. Contemporary trends in management of newly diagnosed prostate cancer are unclear. METHODS: Using national Medicare data, men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer were identified between 2014 and 2019. Patients were classified by 5- and 10-year noncancer mortality risk. Multinomial logistic regression models were fit to assess adjusted trends in management over time. The primary outcome was management of prostate cancer: local treatment (inclusive of surgery, radiation, brachytherapy, or cryotherapy), hormone therapy, or observation. RESULTS: Local treatment was the most common form of management and stable across years (68%). Use of observation increased (21%-23%, P < .001) and use of hormone therapy decreased (11%-8%, P < 0.001). After stratifying by 10-year non-cancer mortality risk, observation increased among men with low (22.3%-26.1%, P < .001) and moderate (19.9%-23.5%, P < .001) mortality risk. Conversely, use of treatment increased among those with high (62.8%-68.0%, P = .004) and very high (45.5%-54.1%, P < .001) risk of noncancer mortality. These trends were similar across groups when stratified by 5-year noncancer mortality risk. CONCLUSION: Nationally, use of local treatment remains common and was stable throughout the study period. However, while local treatment declined among men with a lower risk of noncancer mortality, it increased among men with a higher risk of non-cancer mortality.
Asunto(s)
Braquiterapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Anciano , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Medicare , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Modelos Logísticos , HormonasRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: We performed a study to evaluate the association between urologist performance in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), and quality and spending for prostate cancer care. METHODS: Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer diagnosed between 2017 and 2019 were assigned to their primary urologist. Associated MIPS scores were identified and categorized based on thresholds for payment adjustment as low (worst), moderate, and high (best). Multivariable mixed effects models were used to measure the association between MIPS performance and adherence to quality measures and price standardized spending for prostate cancer. RESULTS: Adherence to quality measures did not vary across MIPS performance groups for pretreatment counselling by both a urologist and radiation oncologist (low-76%, [95% CI 73%-80%], moderate-77% [95% CI 74%-79%], and high-75% [95% CI 74%-76%]) and avoiding treatment in men with a high risk of noncancer mortality within 10 years of diagnosis (low-40% [95% CI 35%-45%], moderate-39% [95% CI 36%-43%], high-38% [95% CI 36%-39%]). Men on active surveillance managed by high performers more likely received a confirmatory test (44% [95% CI 43%-46%]) compared to those managed by moderate (38% [95% CI 33%-42%]) performers, but not low performers (36% [95% CI 29%-44%]). There was no difference in adjusted spending across MIPS performance groups. CONCLUSIONS: Better performance in MIPS is associated with a higher rate of confirmatory testing in men initiating active surveillance for prostate cancer. However, performance was not associated with other dimensions of quality nor spending.
Asunto(s)
Medicare , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Anciano , Estados Unidos , Urólogos , Motivación , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , PróstataRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of urologist participation in value-based payment models on the initial management of men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. METHODS: Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer diagnosed between 2017 and 2019, with 1 year of follow-up, were assigned to their primary urologist, each of whom was then aligned to a value-based payment model (the merit-based incentive payment system [MIPS], accountable care organization [ACO] without financial risk, and ACO with risk). Multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression was used to measure the association between payment model participation and treatment of prostate cancer. Additional models estimated the effects of payment model participation on use of treatment in men with very high risk (i.e., >75%) of non-cancer mortality within 10 years of diagnosis (i.e., a group of men for whom treatment is generally not recommended) and price-standardized prostate cancer spending in the 12 months after diagnosis. RESULTS: Treatment did not vary by payment model, both overall (MIPS-67% [95% CI 66%-68%], ACOs without risk-66% [95% CI 66%-68%], ACOs with risk-66% [95% CI 64%-68%]). Similarly, treatment did not vary among men with very high risk of non-cancer mortality by payment model (MIPS-52% [95% CI 50%-55%], ACOs without risk-52% [95% CI 50%-55%], ACOs with risk-51% [95% CI 45%-56%]). Adjusted spending was similar across payment models (MIPS-$16,501 [95% CI $16,222-$16,780], ACOs without risk-$16,140 [95% CI $15,852-$16,429], ACOs with risk-$16,117 [95% CI $15,585-$16,649]). CONCLUSIONS: How urologists participate in value-based payment models is not associated with treatment, potential overtreatment, and prostate cancer spending in men with newly diagnosed disease.
Asunto(s)
Organizaciones Responsables por la Atención , Medicare , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/economía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Medicare/economía , Estados Unidos , Anciano , Organizaciones Responsables por la Atención/economía , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Urólogos/economía , Reembolso de Incentivo/economía , Gastos en SaludRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The use of androgen biosynthesis and second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors for advanced prostate cancer is increasing. Because these therapies alter the androgen pathway, they have been associated with cardiometabolic and neurocognitive toxicities. Although their safety profiles have been assessed in clinical trials, real-world data are limited. METHODS: A 20% sample of national Medicare claims was used to perform a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with advanced prostate cancer treated with androgen biosynthesis (ie, abiraterone) and second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors between 2012 and 2019. Outcomes were assessed after the first fill of either class of drug for the 12-month period after starting therapy. The primary outcome was a hospital admission or emergency department visit for a cardiometabolic event. Secondary outcomes included neurocognitive events and fractures. Multivariable regression was used to assess the association between the class of drug and occurrence of an adverse event. RESULTS: There were 3488 (60%) men started on an androgen biosynthesis inhibitor and 2361 (40%) started on an androgen receptor inhibitor for the first time. Cardiometabolic adverse events were more common in men managed with androgen biosynthesis inhibitor (9.2% vs 7.5%, P = .027). No difference between androgen biosynthesis and androgen receptor inhibitors was observed for neurocognitive events (3.3% vs 3.4%, respectively; P = .71) or fractures (4.2% vs 3.6%, respectively; P = .26). CONCLUSIONS: Men with advanced prostate cancer initiating an androgen biosynthesis inhibitor for the first time more commonly had cardiometabolic events than those started on androgen receptor inhibitors. Neurocognitive events and fractures did not differ by drug class.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The use of expensive oral targeted agents for advanced prostate can be influenced by those who stand to gain from their use. The 340B drug pricing program allows eligible hospitals to purchase medications at steep discounts, generating millions of dollars in savings. The extent to which hospitals engage in higher-risk prescribing due to program incentives is unclear. METHODS: Medicare claims were used to perform a retrospective study of men with advanced prostate cancer. The primary outcome was targeted therapy use in men with high noncancer mortality risk. Secondary outcomes included androgen biosynthesis inhibitor use in men with cardiovascular history, androgen receptor inhibitor use in men with neurocognitive history, and therapy within 14 days of death. Proportional hazards models were used to assess time-to-event outcomes, while logistic regression was used for binary outcomes. RESULTS: In men with high noncancer mortality risk, targeted therapy use did not differ at 340B participating compared to nonparticipating hospitals (hazard ratio [HR] 1.1, 95% CI 0.67-1.5). There was no difference in androgen biosynthesis inhibitor use in men with a prior cardiac event (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.70-1.3) or androgen receptor inhibitor use in men with a prior neurocognitive event (HR 1.5, 95% CI 0.65-3.4) in those treated at 340B participating compared to nonparticipating hospitals. Therapy use in the last 14 days of life did not vary by 340B participation (odds ratio 1.3, 95% CI 0.86-1.9). CONCLUSIONS: In men with advanced prostate cancer, high-risk prescribing and futility measures did not vary by participation in the 340B drug pricing program.