Opioid prescription and diabetes among Medicare beneficiaries.

AIMS: To determine the prevalence of opioid prescriptions among U.S. Medicare beneficiaries by diabetes status, and predictors of opioid prescription among those with diabetes. METHODS: This retrospective study used claims data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services among beneficiaries age ≥ 65 years who were continuously enrolled in Part A, Part B, and Part D Medicare between 2017 and 2019 (N = 709,374). Logistic regression was used to determine the odds of opioid prescription among those with vs without diabetes; and, among those with diabetes, significant predictors of opioid prescription. RESULTS: Overall, the prevalence of any opioid prescription was 30.8 % among persons with diabetes and 24.2 % in those without diabetes (p < 0.001); chronic use was 8.0 % and 7.4 %, respectively (p < 0.001). Those with diabetes had a 45 % higher odds of having an opioid prescription compared to those without diabetes after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics (OR = 1.45, 1.44-1.47). After adjustment for comorbidities/complications, the association reversed (OR = 0.83, 0.82-0.84). Persons with diabetes who had hypertension, obesity, CVD, neuropathy, amputation, liver disease, COPD, cancer, osteoporosis, depression, or alcohol/drug abuse had a 20 %-140 % higher odds of opioid prescription compared to those without these conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidities and complications accounted for the higher odds of opioid prescriptions among those with diabetes.

Burden of Urological Complications in Men and Women With Long-standing Type 1 Diabetes in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Type 1 diabetes has been associated with high rates of urinary and sexual problems, but the cumulative burden and overlap of these complications are unknown. We sought to determine prevalence of urological complications in persons with type 1 diabetes, associations with clinical and diabetes-related factors, and rates of emergence, persistence, and remission. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This ancillary longitudinal study among participants in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) and observational follow-up study Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) (652 women and 713 men) was conducted in 2003 and 2010/2011. Urinary incontinence (UI), lower urinary tract symptoms, urinary tract infection, female sexual dysfunction, erectile dysfunction, low male sexual desire, and orgasmic dysfunction were measured with validated instruments. Logistic regression determined association of complications with demographics and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Of sexually active women completing the 2010/2011 survey, 35% reported no complications, 39% had one, 19% two, 5% three, and 2% four. In men, 31% had no complications, 36% had one, 22% two, 9% three, and 3% four. Sexual dysfunction was most prevalent (42% women and 45% men) followed by UI in women (31%) and low sexual desire in men (40%). Urological complications were associated with age, BMI, and HbA1c. Remission rates ranged from 4 to 12% over the 7-year interval between surveys. CONCLUSIONS: Urological complications are prevalent and frequently co-occur in persons with type 1 diabetes. Remission rates in a minority subset indicate a rationale for future studies to mitigate the onset or impact of urological complications of diabetes.

Achievement of goals in U.S. diabetes care, 1999-2010.

BACKGROUND: Tracking national progress in diabetes care may aid in the evaluation of past efforts and identify residual gaps in care. METHODS: We analyzed data for adults with self-reported diabetes from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to examine risk-factor control, preventive practices, and risk scores for coronary heart disease over the 1999-2010 period. RESULTS: From 1999 through 2010, the weighted proportion of survey participants who met recommended goals for diabetes care increased, by 7.9 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 15.0) for glycemic control (glycated hemoglobin level <7.0%), 9.4 percentage points (95% CI, 3.0 to 15.8) for individualized glycemic targets, 11.7 percentage points (95% CI, 5.7 to 17.7) for blood pressure (target, <130/80 mm Hg), and 20.8 percentage points (95% CI, 11.6 to 30.0) for lipid levels (target level of low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol, <100 mg per deciliter [2.6 mmol per liter]). Tobacco use did not change significantly, but the 10-year probability of coronary heart disease decreased by 2.8 to 3.7 percentage points. However, 33.4 to 48.7% of persons with diabetes still did not meet the targets for glycemic control, blood pressure, or LDL cholesterol level. Only 14.3% met the targets for all three of these measures and for tobacco use. Adherence to the recommendations for annual eye and dental examinations was unchanged, but annual lipid-level measurement and foot examination increased by 5.5 percentage points (95% CI, 1.6 to 9.4) and 6.8 percentage points (95% CI, 4.8 to 8.8), respectively. Annual vaccination for influenza and receipt of pneumococcal vaccination for participants 65 years of age or older rose by 4.5 percentage points (95% CI, 0.8 to 8.2) and 6.9 percentage points (95% CI, 3.4 to 10.4), respectively, and daily glucose monitoring increased by 12.7 percentage points (95% CI, 10.3 to 15.1). CONCLUSIONS: Although there were improvements in risk-factor control and adherence to preventive practices from 1999 to 2010, tobacco use remained high, and almost half of U.S. adults with diabetes did not meet the recommended goals for diabetes care.

Health insurance coverage among people with and without diabetes in the U.S. adult population.

OBJECTIVE: To compare health insurance coverage and type of coverage for adults with and without diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The data used were from 2,704 adults who self-reported diabetes and 25,008 adults without reported diabetes in the 2009 National Health Interview Survey. Participants reported on their current type of health insurance coverage, demographic information, diabetes-related factors, and comorbidities. If uninsured, participants reported reasons for not having health insurance. RESULTS: Among all adults with diabetes, 90% had some form of health insurance coverage, including 85% of people 18-64 years of age and ~100% of people ≥65 years of age; 81% of people without diabetes had some type of coverage (vs. diabetes, P < 0.0001), including 78% of people 18-64 years of age and 99% of people ≥65 years of age. More adults 18-64 years of age with diabetes had Medicare coverage (14% vs. no diabetes, 3%; P < 0.0001); fewer people with diabetes had private insurance (58% vs. no diabetes, 66%; P < 0.0001). People 18-64 years of age with diabetes more often had two health insurance sources compared with people without diabetes (13 vs. 5%, P < 0.0001). The most common private plan was a preferred provider organization (PPO) followed by a health maintenance organization/independent practice organization (HMO/IPA) plan regardless of diabetes status. For participants 18-64 years of age, high health insurance cost was the most common reason for not having coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Two million adults <65 years of age with diabetes had no health insurance coverage, which has considerable public health and economic impact. Health care reform should work toward ensuring that people with diabetes have coverage for routine care.

Mitigating case mix factors by choice of glycemic control performance measure threshold.

OBJECTIVE: Performance measures are tools for assessing quality of care but may be influenced by patient factors. We investigated how currently endorsed performance measures for glycemic control in diabetes may be influenced by case mix composition. We assessed differences in A1C performance measure threshold attainment by case mix factors for A1C >9% and examined how lowering the threshold to A1C >8% or >7% changed these differences. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Using data from the 1999-2002 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey for 843 adults self-reporting diabetes, we computed the mean difference in A1C threshold attainment of >9, >8, and >7% by various case mix factors. The mean difference is the average percentage point difference in threshold attainment for population groups compared with that for the overall population. RESULTS: Diabetes medication was the only factor for which the difference in threshold attainment increased at lower thresholds, with mean differences of 5.7 percentage points at A1C >9% (reference), 10.1 percentage points at A1C >8% (P < 0.05), and 14.1 percentage points at A1C >7% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: As 87% of U.S. adults have A1C <9%, a performance measure threshold of >9% will not drive major improvements in glycemic control. Lower thresholds do not exacerbate differences in threshold attainment for most factors. Reporting by diabetes medication use may compensate for heterogeneous case mix when a performance measure threshold of A1C >8% or lower is used.