School-Based Services May Eliminate Substance Treatment Disparities: Results From a Nonrandomized Program Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: There are known health disparities in adolescent substance treatment access and engagement. The purpose of this project is to compare outcomes from school- and clinic-based substance treatment and to evaluate if providing school-based substance treatment reduces disparities in treatment access and engagement. METHOD: This quality improvement retrospective chart review compares baseline and outcome data for adolescents accessing school-based (n = 531) and clinic-based (n = 523) substance treatment in a natural quasi-experimental study with nonequivalent control group design. Baseline demographic and clinical measures include age, sex, ethnicity, race, and clinical diagnoses. Outcome measures include the number of sessions completed, proportion reaching a week of self-reported abstinence, and proportion providing a negative urine drug screen. RESULTS: Compared to the clinic-based sample, the school-based sample includes more female (47.65% vs 26.77%) and Hispanic/Latinx (59.89% vs 46.46%) adolescents. The school-based group has a similar proportion reaching a negative urine drug screen (31.84% vs 28.83%, p = .5259) or a week of abstinence (43.15% vs 41.03%, p = .6718) as the clinic-based sample. There are significant differences in total session completion over a period of 16 weeks between school-based and clinic-based adolescents. In multivariable analyses, there was a significant interaction effect of race/ethnicity by location on the number of sessions completed. CONCLUSION: Providing school-based substance treatment increases access to care and treatment engagement for female, African American, and Hispanic/Latinx adolescents without diminishing outcomes.

Association Between Dialysis Facility Ownership and Access to the Waiting List and Transplant in Pediatric Patients With End-stage Kidney Disease in the US.

Importance: Care of adults at profit vs nonprofit dialysis facilities has been associated with lower access to transplant. Whether profit status is associated with transplant access for pediatric patients with end-stage kidney disease is unknown. Objective: To determine whether profit status of dialysis facilities is associated with placement on the kidney transplant waiting list or receipt of kidney transplant among pediatric patients receiving maintenance dialysis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study reviewed the US Renal Data System records of 13 333 patients younger than 18 years who started dialysis from 2000 through 2018 in US dialysis facilities (followed up through June 30, 2019). Exposures: Time-updated profit status of dialysis facilities. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cox models, adjusted for clinical and demographic factors, were used to examine time to wait-listing and receipt of kidney transplant by profit status of dialysis facilities. Results: A total of 13 333 pediatric patients who started receiving maintenance dialysis were included in the analysis (median age, 12 years [IQR, 3-15 years]; 6054 females [45%]; 3321 non-Hispanic Black patients [25%]; 3695 Hispanic patients [28%]). During a median follow-up of 0.87 years (IQR, 0.39-1.85 years), the incidence of wait-listing was lower at profit facilities than at nonprofit facilities, 36.2 vs 49.8 per 100 person-years, respectively (absolute risk difference, -13.6 (95% CI, -15.4 to -11.8 per 100 person-years; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for wait-listing at profit vs nonprofit facilities, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.75-0.83). During a median follow-up of 1.52 years (IQR, 0.75-2.87 years), the incidence of kidney transplant (living or deceased donor) was also lower at profit facilities than at nonprofit facilities, 21.5 vs 31.3 per 100 person-years, respectively; absolute risk difference, -9.8 (95% CI, -10.9 to -8.6 per 100 person-years) adjusted HR for kidney transplant at profit vs nonprofit facilities, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.67-0.74). Conclusions and Relevance: Among a cohort of pediatric patients receiving dialysis in the US from 2000 through 2018, profit facility status was associated with longer time to wait-listing and longer time to kidney transplant.

Functional dyspepsia leads to more healthcare utilization in secondary care compared with other functional gastrointestinal disorders.

OBJECTIVE: Functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) are known to have a significant impact on patients' quality of life and lead to a greater healthcare burden. In this study we aimed to investigate whether this healthcare burden differs among various types of FGIDs in secondary care. METHODS: A retrospective study of consecutive adults with luminal gastrointestinal (GI) diseases in a secondary healthcare gastroenterology clinic was conducted. The frequency of FGIDs and differences in healthcare utilization among different types of FGIDs were explored. RESULTS: Among 1206 patients with luminal GI disease, 442 (36.7%) had FGIDs. FGIDs patients were older (67 y vs 62 y, P < 0.001) with a higher proportion of women (61.8% vs 50.4%, P < 0.001) than those without FGIDs. Functional dyspepsia (FD) was the most common FGIDs (36.9%), followed by irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) (30.3%). A high healthcare burden (defined as over one GI endoscopy or imaging examination over 5 years, or one or more unscheduled visit to general practitioner or emergency department or hospitalization annually) was observed among 53.8% of the FGIDs patients. FD was associated with a high healthcare burden (high vs low burden: 43.7% vs 28.9%, P = 0.001) while IBS was associated with lower healthcare burden (high vs low burden: 25.2% vs 36.3%, P = 0.012). On multivariate analysis, only FD was significantly associated with high healthcare burden (adjusted odds ratio 1.996, 95% confidence interval 1.117-3.567, P = 0.020). CONCLUSION: Compared with other FGIDs, FD was the most common condition in secondary care, and it was associated with the greatest healthcare burden.

Are We Reaching Everyone? A Cross-Sectional Study of Telehealth Inequity in the COVID-19 Pandemic in an Urban Academic Pediatric Primary Care Clinic.

The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic brought rapid expansion of pediatric telehealth to maintain patient access to care while decreasing COVID-19 community spread. We designed a retrospective, serial, cross-sectional study to investigate if telehealth implementation at an academic pediatric practice led to disparities in health care access. Significant differences were found in pre-COVID-19 versus during COVID-19 patient demographics. Patients seen during COVID-19 were more likely to be younger, White/Caucasian or Asian, English speaking, and have private insurance. They were less likely to be Black/African American or Latinx and request interpreters. Age was the only significant difference in patient demographics between in-person and telehealth visits during COVID-19. A multivariate regression showed older age as a significant positive predictor of having a video visit and public insurance as a significant negative predictor. Our study demonstrates telehealth disparities based on insurance existed at our clinic as did inequities in who was seen before versus during COVID-19.

Paediatric NHS 111 Clinical Assessment Services pilot: an observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and impact of having paediatric clinicians working in the Clinical Assessment Services (CAS) within NHS 111, a national telephone advice service. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Six NHS 111 providers across England with CAS where volunteer paediatric clinicians (doctors and advanced nurse practitioners (ANPs)) worked between May and December 2020. A data reporting framework was used to compare the outcomes of calls taken by paediatric vs non-paediatric clinicians. PATIENTS: Under 16-year-olds prompting calls to NHS 111 over the study period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The disposition (final outcome of calls) taken by paediatric versus non-paediatric clinicians, paediatric clinicians' and patient experience. RESULTS: 70 paediatric clinicians (66 doctors and 4 ANPs) worked flexible shifts in six NHS 111 providers' CAS over the study period: 2535 calls for under 16-year-olds were taken by paediatric clinicians and 137 008 by non-paediatric clinicians. Overall, disposition rates differed significantly between the calls taken by paediatric versus (vs) non-paediatric clinicians: 69% vs 43% were advised on self-care only, 13% vs 18% to attend emergency departments (EDs), 13% vs 29% to attend primary care, 1% vs 4% to receive an urgent ambulance call out and 4% vs 6% referred to another health service, respectively. When compared with recent (all age) national whole data sets, the feedback from calls taken by paediatricians noted a greater proportion of patients/carers reporting that their problem was fully resolved (92% vs 27%). CONCLUSIONS: Introducing paediatric specialists into NHS 111 CAS is likely to increase self-care dispositions, and reduce onward referrals to primary care, ED and ambulances. Future work will evaluate the impact of a national paediatric clinical assessment service to which specific case types are streamed.

Asthma Surveillance - United States, 2006-2018.

PROBLEM: Asthma is a chronic disease of the airways that requires ongoing medical management. Socioeconomic and demographic factors as well as health care use might influence health patterns in urban and rural areas. Persons living in rural areas tend to have less access to health care and health resources and worse health outcomes. Characterizing asthma indicators (i.e., prevalence of current asthma, asthma attacks, emergency department and urgent care center [ED/UCC] visits, and asthma-associated deaths) and determining how asthma exacerbations and health care use vary across the United States by geographic area, including differences between urban and rural areas, and by sociodemographic factors can help identify subpopulations at risk for asthma-related complications. REPORTING PERIOD: 2006-2018. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) is an annual cross-sectional household health survey among the civilian noninstitutionalized population in the United States. NHIS data were used to produce estimates for current asthma and among them, asthma attacks and ED/UCC visits. National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) data were used to estimate asthma deaths. Estimates of current asthma, asthma attacks, ED/UCC visits, and asthma mortality rates are described by demographic characteristics, poverty level (except for deaths), and geographic area for 2016-2018. Trends in asthma indicators by metropolitan statistical area (MSA) category for 2006-2018 were determined. Current asthma and asthma attack prevalence are provided by MSA category and state for 2016-2018. Detailed urban-rural classifications (six levels) were determined by merging 2013 National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) urban-rural classification data with 2016-2018 NHIS data by county and state variables. All subregional estimates were accessed through the NCHS Research Data Center. RESULTS: Current asthma was higher among boys aged <18 years, women aged ≥18 years, non-Hispanic Black (Black) persons, non-Hispanic multiple-race (multiple-race) persons, and Puerto Rican persons. Asthma attacks were more prevalent among children, females, and multiple-race persons. ED/UCC visits were more prevalent among children, women aged ≥18 years, and all racial and ethnic groups (i.e., Black, non-Hispanic Asian, multiple race, and Hispanic, including Puerto Rican, Mexican, and other Hispanic) except American Indian and Alaska Native persons compared with non-Hispanic White (White) persons. Asthma deaths were higher among adults, females, and Black persons. All pertinent asthma outcomes were also more prevalent among persons with low family incomes. Current asthma prevalence was higher in the Northeast than in the South and the West, particularly in small MSA areas. The prevalence was also higher in small and medium metropolitan areas than in large central metropolitan areas. The prevalence of asthma attacks differed by MSA category in four states. The prevalence of ED/UCC visits was higher in the South than the Northeast and the Midwest and was also higher in large central metropolitan areas than in micropolitan and noncore areas. The asthma mortality rate was highest in non-MSAs, specifically noncore areas. The asthma mortality rate was also higher in the Northeast, Midwest, and West than in the South. Within large MSAs, asthma deaths were higher in the Northeast and Midwest than the South and West. INTERPRETATION: Despite some improvements in asthma outcomes over time, the findings from this report indicate that disparities in asthma indicators persist by demographic characteristics, poverty level, and geographic location. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION: Disparities in asthma outcomes and health care use in rural and urban populations identified from NHIS and NVSS can aid public health programs in directing resources and interventions to improve asthma outcomes. These data also can be used to develop strategic goals and achieve CDC's Controlling Childhood Asthma and Reducing Emergencies (CCARE) initiative to reduce childhood asthma hospitalizations and ED visits and prevent 500,000 asthma-related hospitalizations and ED visits by 2024.

Mobile Crisis Outreach and Emergency Department Utilization: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Mental health and substance use disorder (MHSUD) patients in the emergency department (ED) have been facing increasing lengths of stay due to a shortage of inpatient beds. Previous research indicates mobile crisis outreach (MCO) reduces long ED stays for MHSUD patients. Our objective was to assess the impact of MCO contact on future ED utilization. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients presenting to a large Midwest university ED with an MHSUD chief complaint from 2015-2018. We defined the exposure as those who had MCO contact and any MHSUD-related ED visit within 30 days of MCO contact. The MCO patients were 2:1 propensity score-matched by demographic data and comorbidities matched to patients with no MCO contact. Outcomes were all-cause and psychiatric-specific reasons for return to the ED within one year of the index ED visit. We report descriptive statistics and odds ratios (OR) to describe the difference between the two groups, and hazard ratios (HR) to estimate the risk of return ED visit. RESULTS: The final sample included 106 MCO and 196 non-MCO patients. The MCO patients were more likely to be homeless (OR 14.8; 95% confidence interval [CI],1.87, 117), less likely to have adequate family or social support (OR 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31, 0.84), and less likely to have a hospital bed requested for them in the index visit by ED providers (OR 0.50; 95% CI, 0.29, 0.88). For those who returned to the ED, the median time for all-cause return to the ED was 28 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 6-93 days) for the MCO patients and 88 days (IQR: 20-164 days) for non-MCO patients. The risk of all-cause return to the ED was greater among MCO patients (67%) compared to non-MCO patients (49%) (adjusted HR: 1.66; 95% CI, 1.22, 2.27). CONCLUSION: The MCO patients had less family and social support; however, they were less likely to require hospitalization for each visit, likely due to MCO involvement. Patients with MCO contact presented to the ED more frequently than non-MCO patients, which implies a strong linkage between the ED and MCO in our community. An effective referral to community service from the ED and MCO and collaboration could be the next step to improve healthcare utilization.

Unraveling the Mystery of Polyvalent Immunoglobulins in Belgium: Do We Have an Indication?

INTRODUCTION: Worldwide, polyvalent immunoglobulin (Ig) use is rising. Together with the limited supply, this puts pressure on Ig availability. A clear overview on a country's usage pattern helps in forecasting future needs. This research aims to provide an overview of Ig use in Belgium on the different indications, including an estimation of off-label use. METHODS: Multiple data sources were used. Existing claims data were explored for reimbursed Ig use between 2010 and 2018. General 2018 sales data from the firms were compared to the reimbursed use to serve as a proxy for off-label use. Indication-specific information was retrieved via a proxy: diagnostic codes available during day-care and inpatient hospitalization. RESULTS: In 2018, 7,556 patients had reimbursed Ig. The most prevalent indication, both in terms of patient numbers and volume, was primary immunodeficiency (PID). In Belgian hospitals, the currently reimbursed indications represented 84.4% of patients (PID [≈35%], secondary immunodeficiency [SID] [≈21%], primary immune thrombocytopenia [≈10%], chronic inflammatory demyelinating neuropathy [CIDP] [≈8%], Guillain-Barre syndrome [≈6%], Kawasaki [≈2%], streptococcal toxic shock [≈2%] and multiple motor neuropathy [≈1%]), and 82.4% of Ig use (predominantly PID [≈33%] and CIDP [≈21%]). Although no direct data on off-label use were available, crude estimates derived from indirect sources showed a proportion of around 15.4%. CONCLUSION: Our research offers the first comprehensive overview on Ig use in Belgium, including a detailed description of reimbursed use, as well as approximations to off-label use. In view of increasing pressure on Ig availability, better understanding Ig needs and trends, would benefit from an effective indication-specific national registry system (ideally covering both reimbursed and nonreimbursed use).

Billing patterns for in-office computerized tomography scans of the face/sinus by otolaryngologists.

PURPOSE: To evaluate billing trends, Medicare reimbursement, and practice setting for Medicare-billing otolaryngologists (ORLs) performing in-office face computerized tomography (CT) scans. METHODS: This retrospective study included data on Medicare-billing ORLs from Medicare Part B: Provider Utilization and Payment Datafiles (2012-2018). Number of Medicare-billing ORLs performing in-office CT scans, and total sums and medians for Medicare reimbursements, services performed, and number of patients were gathered along with geographic and practice-type distributions. RESULTS: In 2018, roughly 1 in 7 Medicare-billing ORLs was performing in-office CT scans, an increase from 1 in 10 in 2012 (48.2% growth). From 2012 to 2018, there has been near-linear growth in number of in-office CT scans performed (58.2% growth), and number of Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) patients receiving an in-office CT scan (64.8% growth). However, at the median, the number of in-office CT scans performed and number of Medicare FFS patients receiving an in-office CT, per physician, has remained constant, despite a decline of 42.3% (2012: $227.67; 2018: $131.26) in median Medicare reimbursements. CONCLUSION: Though sharp declines have been seen in Medicare reimbursement, a greater proportion of Medicare-billing ORLs have been performing in-office face CT scans, while median number of in-office CT scans per ORL has remained constant. Although further investigation is certainly warranted, this analysis suggests that ORLs, at least in the case of the Medicare FFS population, are utilizing in-office CT imaging for preoperative planning, pathologic diagnosis, and patient convenience, rather than increased revenue streams. Future studies should focus on observing these billing trends among private insurers.

Access to Urologic Care at Urgent Care Centers.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate Medicaid insurance access disparities for urologic care at urgent care centers (UCCs) in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study using a "secret shopper" methodology. We sampled 240 UCCs across 8 states. Using a standardized script, researchers posed as a patient with either Medicaid or commercial insurance in the clinical setting of obstructing nephrolithiasis. The primary study endpoint was whether a patient's insurance (Medicaid vs commercial) was accepted. We assessed factors associated with Medicaid acceptance using logistic regression models adjusted for state-level and facility-level characteristics. Additionally, we calculated triage rates, emergency department referral rates, and the ability of a UCC to refer the patient to a specialist. RESULTS: Of 240 UCCs contacted, 239 (99.6%) accepted commercial insurance and 159 (66.2%) accepted Medicaid. UCCs in Medicaid expansion states more frequently accepted patients with Medicaid insurance (74.2% vs 58.3%, respectively, P < .01). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, state Medicaid expansion (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.04-3.26, P = .04) and affiliation with an institution (OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.59-5.57, P < .01) were independently associated with greater odds of accepting Medicaid. Medicaid-insured patients were significantly less likely to be triaged or referred to the emergency department compared to commercial patients. CONCLUSION: We identified significant disparities in access to UCCs for Medicaid patients presenting with a urologic condition. Given the expanding national role of UCCs, these findings highlight potential sources of insurance disparity in the context of a urologic emergency.

COVID-19 and Telehealth Operations in Texas Primary Care Clinics: Disparities in Medically Underserved Area Clinics.

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically altered the landscape of health care delivery, prompting a rapid, widespread adoption of telehealth in primary care practices. Using a pooled sample of 1,344 primary care clinics in Texas, we examined the adoption of telehealth in Texas during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic, by comparing medically underserved area (MUA) clinics and non-medically underserved area (non-MUA) clinics. Our analysis suggests that compared with MUA clinics, clinics in non-MUAs were more likely to conduct a majority of their visits via telehealth before May 1st, 2020. However, later surveys indicated that differences in telehealth use between MUA and non-MUA clinics lessened, suggesting that some of the barriers that MUA clinics initially faced might have resolved over time. This research provides an additional perspective in discussions about telehealth adoption on a widespread, permanent basis in Texas and the U.S.

Recent Trends in Medicare Utilization and Reimbursement for Orthopaedic Procedures Performed at Ambulatory Surgery Centers.

BACKGROUND: As part of a market-driven response to the increasing costs of hospital-based surgical care, an increasing volume of orthopaedic procedures are being performed in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). The purpose of the present study was to identify recent trends in orthopaedic ASC procedure volume, utilization, and reimbursements in the Medicare system between 2012 and 2017. METHODS: This cross-sectional, national study tracked annual Medicare claims and payments and aggregated data at the county level. Descriptive statistics and multivariate regression models were used to evaluate trends in procedure volume, utilization rates, and reimbursement rates, and to identify demographic predictors of ASC utilization. RESULTS: A total of 1,914,905 orthopaedic procedures were performed at ASCs in the Medicare population between 2012 and 2017, with an 8.8% increase in annual procedure volume and a 10.5% increase in average reimbursements per case. ASC orthopaedic procedure utilization, including utilization across all subspecialties, is strongly associated with metropolitan areas compared with rural areas. In addition, orthopaedic procedure utilization, including for sports and hand procedures, was found to be significantly higher in wealthier counties (measured by average household income) and in counties located in the South. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated increasing orthopaedic ASC procedure volume in recent years, driven by increases in hand procedure volume. Medicare reimbursements per case have steadily risen and outpaced the rate of inflation over the study period. However, as orthopaedic practice overhead continues to increase, other Medicare expenditures such as hospital payments and operational and implant costs also must be evaluated. These findings may provide a source of information that can be used by orthopaedic surgeons, policy makers, investors, and other stakeholders to make informed decisions regarding the costs and benefits of the use of ASCs for orthopaedic procedures.

The impact of urgent care centers on nonemergent emergency department visits.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the impact of urgent care centers on emergency department (ED) use. DATA SOURCES: Secondary data from a novel urgent care center database, linked to the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Emergency Department Databases (SEDD) from six states. STUDY DESIGN: We used a difference-in-differences design to examine ZIP code-level changes in the acuity mix of emergency department visits when local urgent care centers were open versus closed. ZIP codes with no urgent care centers served as a control group. We tested for differential impacts of urgent care centers according to ED wait time and patient insurance status. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Urgent care center daily operating times were determined via the urgent care center database. Emergency department visit acuity was assessed by applying the NYU ED algorithm to the SEDD data. Urgent care locations and nearby emergency department encounters were linked via zip code. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We found that having an open urgent care center in a ZIP code reduced the total number of ED visits by residents in that ZIP code by 17.2% (P < 0.05), due largely to decreases in visits for less emergent conditions. This effect was concentrated among visits to EDs with the longest wait times. We found that urgent care centers reduced the total number of uninsured and Medicaid visits to the ED by 21% (P < 0.05) and 29.1% (P < 0.05), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: During the hours they are open, urgent care centers appear to be treating patients who otherwise would have visited the ED. This suggests that urgent care centers have the potential to reduce health care expenditures, though questions remain about their net cost impact. Future work should assess whether urgent care centers can improve health care access among populations that often experience barriers to receiving timely care.