Proceedings from the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology consensus conference on glucose monitoring.

This document represents the official position of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and the American College of Endocrinology. Where there were no randomized controlled trials or specific U.S. FDA labeling for issues in clinical practice, the participating clinical experts utilized their judgment and experience. Every effort was made to achieve consensus among the committee members. Position statements are meant to provide guidance, but they are not to be considered prescriptive for any individual patient and cannot replace the judgment of a clinician.

Maximizing reimbursement through correct coding initiatives.

In an effort to combat ever-rising overhead costs, it is critical that one understand proper coding for continuous glucose monitoring. By understanding correct Common Procedural Terminology (CPT, American Medical Association, Chicago, IL), Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS), and International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9) coding there will be an increased reimbursement for professional services. The process of code development, the use of proper modifiers along with appropriate CPT codes, and the appeal processes have been extensively researched using many different professional associations. The use of continuous glucose monitoring recently has greatly expanded, and with effective documentation, coding, and appeal procedures, there will be a greater rate of reimbursement.

Oseltamivir and the risk of influenza-related complications and hospitalizations in patients with diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: This subgroup analysis of a retrospective cohort study examined, from a managed care perspective, the risk of influenza-related complications and hospitalizations in patients with diabetes who were prescribed oseltamivir for the treatment of influenza and those who were not prescribed antiviral treatment. METHODS: Health insurance claims data from the Thomson Healthcare MarketScan Research Database for 6 influenza seasons (October 1-March 31) between 2000 and 2006 were used to identify patients aged >/=18 years with influenza and diabetes. Patients who received a prescription for oseltamivir within 1 day of a diagnosis of influenza were compared with those who received no antiviral treatment. Outcomes included the frequency of pneumonia, respiratory diagnoses, and otitis media and its complications, and rates of hospitalization within 14 days of the diagnosis of influenza. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to determine the relative risk (RR) of influenza-related complications and hospitalizations. RESULTS: A total of 9090 patients with diabetes and a diagnosis of influenza were identified who met all study criteria. Of these, 2919 (32%) received a prescription for oseltamivir and 6171 (68%) received no antiviral treatment. Patients receiving oseltamivir had a significant 17% reduction in the risk of respiratory illnesses (RR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73-0.93) and a 30% reduction in the risk of hospitalization for any reason (RR = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52-0.94). There were no significant differences between the oseltamivir and control groups in terms of the risks for pneumonia (RR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.64-1.18), otitis media and its complications (RR = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.48-1.91), or hospitalization for pneumonia (RR = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.41-1.58). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study, the risk of influenza-associated respiratory illnesses and the number of hospitalizations for any reason were reduced in patients with diabetes who were prescribed oseltamivir compared with an unmatched group that was not prescribed antiviral therapy.