Risk of hospitalization associated with different constellations of home & community based services.

BACKGROUND: Identify the association between specific combinations of home and community-based services (HCBS) and risk of acute hospitalization. METHODS: Data for this study came from Pennsylvania Medicaid claims and Medicare records. This was a retrospective, observational cohort study that examined hospitalization, HCBS service use and patient characteristics between July, 2014 and December, 2016. This analysis compared risk of inpatient hospitalization risk for community dwelling disabled older adults using a range of Medicaid financed HCBS. Twelve constellations of HCBS were identified representing different combinations of common services (personal assistive services [PAS], delivered meals, and adult day care). Since HCBS users are not randomly assigned to different combinations of services, we used logistic regression to estimate the predicted probability of experiencing hospitalization conditional on the constellation of services, and adjusting for demographics, health and level of disability. RESULTS: The most common constellation was people who used under four hours of PAS per person per day. This group experienced a hospitalization rate of 13.7%. however, those individuals receiving more than 4 h per person per day experienced only a 10.2% hospitalization rate. Similar trends were seen for people who used PAS in combination with home delivered meals. However, those who used adult day care experienced higher hospitalization rates as the number of hours of personal assistive service increased: increasing from 6.8% among those with under 4 h, to 8.6% among those with 8 or more hours per person per day. CONCLUSION: Using medium and high levels of PAS was associated with lower hospitalization risk for people who PAS alone or in combination with delivered meals. By contrast, higher levels of PAS was associated with increased hospitalization for adult day users (both alone or in combination). Policy makers should consider offering higher levels of PAS to offset potential risk of hospitalization. Future research is needed to explain the association between adult day care and risk.

Delphi study to explore a new diagnosis for "ineffective" long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain.

ABSTRACT: A challenge in clinical, research, and policy spheres is determining whether and how to apply the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-5 Opioid Use Disorder criteria to patients receiving long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for the management of chronic pain. This study explored perspectives on the merits of creating a new diagnostic entity to characterize the problems that arise for certain patients prescribed LTOT and develop consensus on its definition and diagnostic criteria. We conducted 3 rounds of online surveys and held one discussion-based workshop to explore a new diagnostic entity and generate consensus with subject matter experts (n = 51) in pain and opioid use disorder, including a wide range of professional disciplines. The first survey included open-ended questions and rapid qualitative analysis to identify potential diagnostic criteria. Rounds 2 and 3 involved rating potential diagnostic criteria on a Likert-type scale to achieve consensus. The workshop was a facilitated conversation aimed at further refining criteria. Three-quarters of Delphi panelists were in favor of a new diagnostic entity; consensus was reached for 19 potential diagnostic criteria including benefits of LTOT no longer outweighing harms and a criterion related to difficulty tapering. A subgroup of expert panelists further refined the new diagnostic entity definition and criteria. Consensus on potential criteria for the new diagnostic entity was reached and further refined by a subgroup of experts. This Delphi study represents the opinions of a small group of subject matter experts; perspectives from other experts and additional stakeholder groups (including patients) are warranted.

Patient Characteristics Associated With Occurrence of Preoperative Goals-of-Care Conversations.

Importance: Communication about patients' goals and planned and potential treatment is central to advance care planning. Undertaking or confirming advance care plans is also essential to preoperative preparation, particularly among patients who are frail or will undergo high-risk surgery. Objective: To evaluate the association between patient risk of hospitalization or death and goals-of-care conversations documented with a completed Life-Sustaining Treatment (LST) Decisions Initiative note among veterans undergoing surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cross-sectional study included 190 040 veterans who underwent operations between January 1, 2017, and February 28, 2020. Statistical analysis took place from November 1, 2021, to November 17, 2022. Exposure: Patient risk of hospitalization or death, evaluated with a Care Assessment Need (CAN) score (range, 0-99, with a higher score representing a greater risk of hospitalization or death), dichotomized as less than 80 or 80 or more. Main Outcomes and Measures: Preoperative LST note completion (30 days before or on the day of surgery) or no LST note completion within the 30-day preoperative period prior to or on the day of the index operation. Results: Of 190 040 veterans (90.8% men; mean [SD] age, 65.2 [11.9] years), 3.8% completed an LST note before surgery, and 96.2% did not complete an LST note. In the groups with and without LST note completion before surgery, most were aged between 65 and 84 years (62.1% vs 56.7%), male (94.3% vs 90.7%), and White (82.2% vs 78.3%). Compared with patients who completed an LST note before surgery, patients who did not complete an LST note before surgery tended to be female (9.3% vs 5.7%), Black (19.2% vs 15.7%), married (50.2% vs 46.5%), and in better health (Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 0, 25.9% vs 15.2%); to have a lower risk of hospitalization or death (CAN score <80, 98.3% vs 96.9%); or to undergo neurosurgical (9.8% vs 6.2%) or urologic surgical procedures (5.9% vs 2.0%). Over the 3-year interval, unadjusted rates of LST note completion before surgery increased from 0.1% to 9.6%. Covariate-adjusted estimates of LST note completion indicated that veterans at a relatively elevated risk of hospitalization or death (CAN score ≥80) had higher odds of completing an LST note before surgery (odds ratio [OR], 1.29; 95% CI, 1.09-1.53) compared with those with CAN scores less than 80. High-risk surgery was not associated with increased LST note completion before surgery (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.86-1.01). Veterans who underwent cardiothoracic surgery had the highest likelihood of LST note completion before surgery (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.24-1.47). Conclusions and Relevance: Despite increasing LST note implementation, a minority of veterans completed an LST note preoperatively. Although doing so was more common among veterans with an elevated risk compared with those at lower risk, improving proactive communication and documentation of goals, particularly among higher-risk veterans, is needed. Doing so may promote goal-concordant surgical care and outcomes.

Patterns of Home and Community Based Service Use by Beneficiaries Enrolled in the Pennsylvania Medicaid Aging Waiver.

BACKGROUND: This study examines multiple services are used across a population and the association between type and amount of services use with level of disability and living arrangement. METHODS: This is a descriptive cross-sectional analysis examining HCBS use among older Pennsylvanians from 2014 to 2016 enrolled in Pennsylvania's 1915(c) waiver program. Data were derived from Medicaid claims. Logistic regression and OLS regression were used to examine the association between service use and level of disability, controlling for age, gender, race, and other covariates. RESULTS: People with Alzheimer's or a related dementia were more likely to use adult day care. People with higher ADL and IADL limitations were more likely to use higher amounts of PAS and less likely to have delivered meals. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate HCBS is a complex package of services that are allocated regarding the level of need and resources available to individual program participants.

Classification of Patients for Whom Benefit of Long-term Opioid Therapy No Longer Outweighs Harm: Protocol for a Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic pain prescribed long-term opioid therapy may come to a point where the benefits of the therapy are outweighed by the risks and tapering is indicated. At the 2019 Veterans Health Administration State of the Art Conference, there was an acknowledgment of a lack of clinical guidance with regard to treating this subset of patients. Some of the participants believed clinicians and patients would both benefit from a new diagnostic entity describing this situation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine if a new diagnostic entity was needed and what the criteria of the diagnostic entity would be. Given the ability of the Delphi method to synthesize input from a broad range of experts, we felt this technique was the most appropriate for this study. METHODS: We designed a modified Delphi technique involving 3 rounds. The first round is a series of open-ended questions asking about the necessity of this diagnostic entity, how this condition is different from opioid use disorder, and what its possible diagnostic criteria would be. After synthesizing the responses collected, a second round will be conducted to ask participants to rate the different responses offered by their peers. These ratings will be collected and analyzed, and will generate a preliminary definition for this clinical phenomena. In the third round, we will circulate this definition with the aim of achieving consensus. RESULTS: The modified Delphi study was initiated in July of 2020 and analysis is currently underway. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol has been approved by the Internal Review Board at the Connecticut Veterans Affairs and the study is in process. This protocol may assist other researchers conducting similar studies. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/33310.

Arguments for and Against a New Diagnostic Entity for Patients With Chronic Pain on Long-Term Opioid Therapy for Whom Harms Outweigh Benefits.

The goal of this study was to understand perspectives on whether a new diagnostic entity, distinct from Diagnostic and Statistical Manual - 5 (DSM-5) opioid use disorder (OUD), is needed for patients with chronic pain on long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for whom the harms of continued opioid therapy outweigh the benefits. Data were collected as part of a larger Delphi study. We used rapid and thematic qualitative methods to analyze data from 51 panelists with expertise in internal medicine, psychiatry, psychology, and related fields. Three-quarters of panelists supported a new diagnostic entity; common themes included recognizing distinct experiences of patients prescribed LTOT, addressing problems with DSM-5 OUD criteria, facilitating research and improved treatment, and reducing stigma. Thirteen panelists opposed the creation of a new diagnostic entity; common themes included similarities in biological underpinnings of patients prescribed LTOT and diagnosed with OUD, belief that the continuum of OUD captured patients' experiences, finding better ways to address problems with DSM-5 OUD criteria, and concerns about stigma. While this expert panel disagreed about the need for a new diagnostic entity, there was an overall acknowledgement that the current implementation of DSM-5's OUD diagnosis is not meeting the needs of LTOT providers or patients. PERSPECTIVE: The DSM-5's OUD diagnosis may not adequately meet the needs of patients on LTOT for whom the harms of continued opioid therapy outweigh the benefits. Experts do not agree on how to address this problem; more work is needed to determine if a new diagnostic entity would be beneficial.

Differences in COVID-19 Risk by Race and County-Level Social Determinants of Health among Veterans.

COVID-19 disparities by area-level social determinants of health (SDH) have been a significant public health concern and may also be impacting U.S. Veterans. This retrospective analysis was designed to inform optimal care and prevention strategies at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and utilized COVID-19 data from the VAs EHR and geographically linked county-level data from 18 area-based socioeconomic measures. The risk of testing positive with Veterans' county-level SDHs, adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and facility characteristics, was calculated using generalized linear models. We found an exposure-response relationship whereby individual COVID-19 infection risk increased with each increasing quartile of adverse county-level SDH, such as the percentage of residents in a county without a college degree, eligible for Medicaid, and living in crowded housing.