Use of electronic health data to identify patients with moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis of the hip and/or knee and inadequate response to pain medications.

BACKGROUND: No algorithms exist to identify important osteoarthritis (OA) patient subgroups (i.e., moderate-to-severe disease, inadequate response to pain treatments) in electronic healthcare data, possibly due to the complexity in defining these characteristics as well as the lack of relevant measures in these data sources. We developed and validated algorithms intended for use with claims and/or electronic medical records (EMR) to identify these patient subgroups. METHODS: We obtained claims, EMR, and chart data from two integrated delivery networks. Chart data were used to identify the presence or absence of the three relevant OA-related characteristics (OA of the hip and/or knee, moderate-to-severe disease, inadequate/intolerable response to at least two pain-related medications); the resulting classification served as the benchmark for algorithm validation. We developed two sets of case-identification algorithms: one based on a literature review and clinical input (predefined algorithms), and another using machine learning (ML) methods (logistic regression, classification and regression tree, random forest). Patient classifications based on these algorithms were compared and validated against the chart data. RESULTS: We sampled and analyzed 571 adult patients, of whom 519 had OA of hip and/or knee, 489 had moderate-to-severe OA, and 431 had inadequate response to at least two pain medications. Individual predefined algorithms had high positive predictive values (all PPVs ≥ 0.83) for identifying each of these OA characteristics, but low negative predictive values (all NPVs between 0.16-0.54) and sometimes low sensitivity; their sensitivity and specificity for identifying patients with all three characteristics was 0.95 and 0.26, respectively (NPV 0.65, PPV 0.78, accuracy 0.77). ML-derived algorithms performed better in identifying this patient subgroup (range: sensitivity 0.77-0.86, specificity 0.66-0.75, PPV 0.88-0.92, NPV 0.47-0.62, accuracy 0.75-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Predefined algorithms adequately identified OA characteristics of interest, but more sophisticated ML-based methods better differentiated between levels of disease severity and identified patients with inadequate response to analgesics. The ML methods performed well, yielding high PPV, NPV, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy using either claims or EMR data. Use of these algorithms may expand the ability of real-world data to address questions of interest in this underserved patient population.

Concern about addiction is associated with lower quality of life in patients with osteoarthritis: an exploratory, real-world data analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relationship between self-reported concerns about becoming addicted to a medication and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: This real-world study used patient-level cross-sectional survey data collected from the US Adelphi Disease Specific Programme (DSP). The DSP for OA selected 153 physicians who collected de-identified data on their next nine adult patients with OA. Each patient completed a disease-relevant survey, which included the Likert-scale question, "I am concerned about becoming addicted to my medicine," (CAA) with responses ranging from "completely disagree" [1] to "completely agree" [5]. HRQoL was measured by the EQ-5D-5L index value and the EQ Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). A set of ordinary least squares regressions using HRQoL measures as outcomes and CAA as a continuous predictor were estimated. Standardized effect size (ES) was used to gauge the magnitude of effects. RESULTS: A total of 866 patients with OA completed the survey (female, 61.2%; White, 77.7%; mean age, 64.2 years). Of the 775 patients who completed the CAA question, almost one-third responded that they "agree" (18%) or "completely agree" (11%), while 27% responded "completely disagree" and 20% "disagree." Regression analyses found that patients who have concerns about medication addiction have significantly different EQ-5D-5L index values and EQ VAS scores compared with patients who do not have this concern (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that concern about medication addiction in patients with OA may have an impact on patient HRQoL, with more concerned patients reporting poorer HRQoL outcomes.

Factors associated with physician-reported treatment status of patients with osteoarthritis pain.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is typically associated with pain, but many patients are not treated. METHODS: This point in time study explored factors associated with treatment status, using logistic regression of data from the Adelphi OA Disease Specific Programme conducted in the United States. Patients' treatment status was based on physician-reported, current: 1) prescription medication for OA vs. none; and 2) physician treatment (prescription medication and/or recommendation for specified nonpharmacologic treatment for OA [physical or occupational therapy, acupuncture, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, or cognitive behavior therapy/psychotherapy]) vs. self-management (no prescription medication or specified nonpharmacologic treatment). RESULTS: The 841 patients (including 57.0% knee OA, 31.9% hip OA) reported mild (45.4%) or moderate or severe (54.6%) average pain intensity over the last week. The majority were prescribed medication and/or recommended specified nonpharmacologic treatment; 218 were not prescription-medicated and 122 were self-managed. Bivariate analyses showed less severe patient-reported pain intensity and physician-rated OA severity, fewer joints affected by OA, lower proportion of joints affected by knee OA, better health status, lower body mass index, and lower ratings for cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risks, for those not prescribed medication (vs. prescription-medicated). Multivariate analyses confirmed factors significantly (p < 0.05) associated with prescription medication included (odds ratio): physician-rated current moderate OA severity (vs. mild, 2.03), patient-reported moderate OA severity 6 months ago (vs. mild, 1.71), knee OA (vs. not, 1.81), physician-recommended (0.28) and patient-reported (0.43) over-the-counter medication use (vs. not), prior surgery for OA (vs. not, 0.37); uncertain income was also significant. Factors significantly (p < 0.05) associated with physician treatment included (odds ratio): physician-recommended nonpharmacologic therapy requiring no/minimal medical supervision (vs. not, 2.21), physician-rated current moderate OA severity (vs. mild, 2.04), patient-reported over-the-counter medication use (vs. not, 0.26); uncertain time since diagnosis was also significant. Patient-reported pain intensity and most demographic factors were not significant in either model. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 1 in 4 patients were not prescribed medication and 1 in 7 were self-managed, although many were using over-the-counter medications or nonpharmacologic therapies requiring no/minimal medical supervision. Multiple factors were significantly associated with treatment status, including OA severity and over-the-counter medication, but not pain intensity or most demographics.

Clinical Characteristics and Treatment Patterns Among Patients Diagnosed With Cluster Headache in U.S. Healthcare Claims Data.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment patterns of patients with cluster headache (CH). BACKGROUND: CH is an uncommon trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia with limited evidence-based treatment options. Patients suffer from extremely painful unilateral headache attacks and autonomic symptoms with episodic and chronic cycles. DESIGN/METHODS: This retrospective analysis used insurance claims from Truven Health Analytics MarketScan® research databases from 2009 to 2014. Two cohorts were compared: CH patients (with ≥2 CH claims) were propensity score matched with 4 non-headache controls, all with continuous enrollment for 12 months before and after the date of first CH claim or matched period among controls. RESULTS: CH patients (N = 7589) were mainly male (57.4%) and 35-64 years old (73.2%), with significantly more claims for comorbid conditions vs controls (N = 30,341), including depressive disorders (19.8% vs 10.0%), sleep disturbances (19.7% vs 9.1%), anxiety disorders (19.2% vs 8.7%), and tobacco use disorders (12.8% vs 5.3%), with 2.5 times greater odds of suicidal ideation (all P < .0001). Odds of drug dependence were 3-fold greater among CH patients (OR = 2.8 [95% CI 2.3-3.4, P < .0001]). CH patients reported significantly greater use of prescription medications compared with controls; 25% of CH patients had >12 unique prescription drug claims. Most commonly prescribed drug classes for CH patients included: opiate agonists (41%), corticosteroids (34%), 5HT-1 agonists (32%), antidepressants (31%), NSAIDs (29%), anticonvulsants (28%), calcium antagonists (27%), and benzodiazepines (22%). Only 30.4% of CH patients received recognized CH treatments without opioids during the 12-month post-index period. These patients were less likely to visit emergency departments or need hospitalizations (26.8%) as compared to CH patients with no pharmacy claims for recognized CH treatments or opioids (33.6%; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The burden of CH is associated with significant co-morbidity, including substance use disorders and suicidal ideation, and treatment patterns indicating low use of recognized CH treatments.

The importance of unresolved fatigue in depression: costs and comorbidities.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost outcomes of patients with a history of depression and clinically significant fatigue. METHODS: Adults with ≥ 2 claims with depression diagnosis codes identified from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database were invited to participate in this study linking survey data with retrospective claims data (12-mo presurvey and postsurvey periods). Patient surveys included measures for depression (Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology), fatigue (Fatigue Associated with Depression Questionnaire), anxiety (7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale), sleep difficulty (Athens Insomnia Scale), and pain (Brief Pain Inventory). After adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics using propensity scores, postsurvey costs were compared between patients with and without fatigue using nonparametric bootstrapping methods. RESULTS: Of the 1982 patients who had completed the survey and had complete claims data, 653 patients had significant levels of fatigue. Patients with fatigue reported significantly higher scores, indicating greater severity, on measures of depression, pain, sleep difficulty, and anxiety (all p < 0.05). These patients also had higher levels of overall medication use and were more likely to have lower measures of socioeconomic status than patients without significant levels of fatigue (all p < 0.05). Mean annual total costs were greater for patients with fatigue than those without fatigue ($14,462 vs $9971, respectively, p < 0.001). These cost differences remained statistically significant after adjusting for clinical and demographic differences. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically significant fatigue appears to add to the economic burden of depression. This reinforces the need for aggressive treatment of all symptoms and further examination of the variability of this relationship as patients approach remission.

Longitudinal observation of treatment patterns and outcomes for patients with fibromyalgia: 12-month findings from the reflections study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe 12-month treatment patterns and outcomes for patients starting a new medication for fibromyalgia in routine clinical practice. DESIGN AND OUTCOME MEASURES: Data from 1,700 patients were collected at baseline and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Repeated measures and Poisson regression models controlling for demographic, clinical, and baseline outcomes were used to assess changes in health outcomes (Brief Pain Inventory severity and interference, Sheehan Disability Scale, Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire), satisfaction, and economic factors for patients who initiated on pregabalin (214, 12.6%), duloxetine (264, 15.5%), milnacipran (134, 7.9%), or tricyclic antidepressants (66, 3.9%). Sensitivity analyses were run using propensity-matched cohorts. RESULTS: Patients started on 145 unique drugs for fibromyalgia, and over 75% of patients took two or more medications concurrently for fibromyalgia at each time point assessed. Overall, patients showed improvement on the four health outcomes, with few differences across medication cohorts. At baseline, patients reported annual averages of 20.3 visits for outpatient care, 27.7 missed days of work, and 32.6 days of care by an unpaid caregiver. The duloxetine and milnacipran (vs pregabalin or tricyclic antidepressant) cohorts had fewer outpatient visits during the 12-month study. Patients reported satisfaction with overall treatment and their fibromyalgia medication (46.0% and 42.8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world setting, patients with fibromyalgia reported modest improvements, high resource, and medication use, and were satisfied with the care they received. Cohort differences were difficult to discern because of the high rates of drug discontinuation and concomitant medication use over the 12-month study period.

Opioid Prescribing for Osteoarthritis: Cross-Sectional Survey among Primary Care Physicians, Rheumatologists, and Orthopaedic Surgeons.

Opioids are often prescribed for osteoarthritis (OA) pain, despite recommendations to limit use due to minimal benefits and associated harms. This study aimed to assess physicians' practice patterns and perceptions regarding opioids by specialty one year following the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published guidance on opioid prescribing. The 139/153 (90.8%) physicians who reported prescribing opioids in the previous year reported decreased prescribing for mild OA (51.3%, 26.5% and 33.3% of primary care physicians, rheumatologists, and orthopaedic surgeons, respectively), moderate OA (50.0%, 47.1% and 48.1%) and severe OA (43.6%, 41.2% and 44.4%). Prescribing changes were attributed to the CDC guidelines for 58.9% of primary care physicians, 59.1% of rheumatologists, and 73.3% of orthopaedic surgeons. Strong opioids were mostly reserved as third-line treatment. Although treatment effectiveness post-CDC guidelines was not assessed, perceptions of efficacy and quality of life with opioids significantly differed across specialties, whereas perceptions of safety, convenience/acceptability and costs did not. Physicians generally agreed on the barriers to opioid prescribing, with fear of addiction and drug abuse being the most important. Across specialties, physicians reported decreased opioid prescribing for OA, irrespective of OA severity, and in most cases attributed changes in prescribing to the CDC guideline.

Prescription opioid utilization patterns, and associated outcomes, among privately insured patients prescribed opioids to manage pain associated with osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe utilization patterns, negative clinical outcomes and economic burden of patients diagnosed with osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip and/or knee who received a prescription for tramadol or non-tramadol opioids vs. non-opioid drugs. METHODS: Optum Healthcare Solutions, Inc. commercial claims data were used (1/2012--3/2017). Adults with ≥2 diagnoses of OA of the hip and/or knee, and ≥30 days supply of pain medications were identified during the three-year period from the date of first prescription (index date) after the first OA diagnosis. Drug utilization statistics in the follow-up period were summarized by initial treatment (i.e. tramadol, non-tramadol opioids, non-opioid drugs). Opioid initiators were matched to those initiated on non-opioid treatments using a propensity score model accounting for baseline characteristics. Matched pairs analysis compared outcomes for these cohorts. RESULTS: Of 62,715 total patients, 15,270 (24.3%) initiated treatment with opioids, including 3,513 (5.6%) on tramadol and 11,757 (18.7%) on non-tramadol opioids. Opioid initiators had more comorbidities, higher baseline healthcare costs, and were more likely to have OA of the hip. Among non-opioid initiators, 27.5% switched to tramadol and 63% switched to non-tramadol opioids. Among tramadol initiators, 71% switched to non-tramadol opioids. Patients initiated on opioids had 20.4% (p < .01) higher all-cause healthcare costs and higher percentages experiencing multiple negative clinical outcomes (all p < .01) compared to matched controls. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with OA of the hip and/or knee either initiate on or switch to opioids for long-term management of OA-related pain despite known risks. This highlights the need for new treatments that delay or prevent use of opioids.

Racial variation in healthcare resource utilization and expenditures in knee/hip osteoarthritis patients: a retrospective analysis of a Medicaid population.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of chronic pain and disability. Prior studies have documented racial disparities in the clinical management of OA. The objective of this study was to assess the racial variations in the economic burden of osteoarthritis within the Medicaid population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study using the MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid database (2012-2019). Newly diagnosed, adult, knee and/or hip OA patients were identified and followed for 24 months. Demographic and clinical characteristics were collected at baseline; outcomes, including OA treatments and healthcare resource use (HCRU) and expenditures, were assessed during the 24-month follow-up. We compared baseline patient characteristics, use of OA treatments, and HCRU and costs in OA patients by race (White vs. Black; White vs. Other) and evaluated racial differences in healthcare costs while controlling for underlying differences. The multivariable models controlled for age, sex, population density, health plan type, presence of non-knee/hip OA, cardiovascular disease, low back pain, musculoskeletal pain, presence of moderate to severe OA, and any pre-diagnosis costs. RESULTS: The cohort was 56.7% White, 39.9% Black and 3.4% of Other race (American Indian/Alaska Native, Hispanic, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, two or more races and other). Most patients (93.8%) had pharmacologic treatment for OA. Inpatient admission during the 24-month follow-up period was lowest among Black patients (25.8%, p < .001 White vs. Black). In multivariable-adjusted models, mean all-cause expenditures were significantly higher in Black patients ($25,974) compared to White patients ($22,913, p < .001). There were no significant differences between White patients and patients of Other race ($22,352). CONCLUSIONS: The higher expenditures among Black patients were despite a lower rate of inpatient admission in Black patients and comparable length and number of hospitalizations in Black and White patients, suggesting that other unmeasured factors may be driving the increased costs among Black OA patients.

Higher healthcare costs were observed in Black Medicaid patients with knee/hip osteoarthritis despite lower rates of inpatient admission. We observed these differences in this Medicaid population, where socioeconomic status is more homogeneous.Black patients had significantly higher healthcare costs compared to White patients and the difference persisted even after accounting for underlying differences in Black and White patients.Higher healthcare costs among Black patients were found in both the baseline and follow-up periods overall for all types of healthcare (hospitalizations, ER, office visit, other services).Higher hospitalization costs in Black patients were observed despite lower rates of hospitalizations in Black patients. These increased costs cannot be attributed to either longer or more frequent hospitalizations; no significant difference in either the length of stay or the number of hospitalizations was observed when comparing Black patients to White patients.

Opioids for Osteoarthritis: Cross-Sectional Survey of Patient Perspectives and Satisfaction.

Patients often take opioids to relieve osteoarthritis (OA) pain despite limited benefits and potential harms. This study aimed to compare cross-sectional perspectives of patients that were taking prescription opioid (N = 471) or nonopioid medications (N = 185) for OA in terms of satisfaction, expectations of effectiveness, and concerns. Patients prescribed opioids (>7 days) reported more prior treatments (2.47 vs. 1.74), greater mean pain intensity (5.47 vs. 4.11), and worse quality of life (EQ-5D-5L index value mean 0.45 vs. 0.71) than patients prescribed nonopioid medications (all p < 0.0001). Based on linear regression models adjusting for demographics and pain intensity, patients prescribed opioids were less satisfied with overall regimen (3.40 vs. 3.67, p = 0.0322), had less belief that medications were meeting effectiveness expectations (2.72 vs. 3.13, p < 0.0001), and had more concerns about treatments being "not very good" (3.66 vs. 3.22, p = 0.0026) and addiction (3.30 vs. 2.65, p < 0.0001) than patients prescribed nonopioid regimens. When the models were replicated for subgroups with ≥30 days' medication regimen duration, the findings were consistent with the main analyses. Patients have concerns about the risk of opioid addiction, but those with greater disease burden and more prior treatments continue taking opioid regimens.

Economic burden of osteoarthritis - multi-country estimates of direct and indirect costs from the BISCUITS study.

Data from 'BISCUITS', a large Nordic cohort study linking several registries, were used to estimate differences in average direct and indirect costs between patients with osteoarthritis and controls (matched 1:1 based on birth year and sex) from the general population in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark for 2017. Patients ≥18 years with ≥1 diagnosis of osteoarthritis (ICD-10: M15-M19) recorded in specialty or primary care (the latter available for a subset of patients in Sweden and for all patients in Finland) during 2011-2017 were included. Patients with a cancer diagnosis (ICD-10: C00-C43/C45-C97) were excluded. Productivity loss (sick leave and disability pension) and associated indirect costs were estimated among working-age adults (18-66 years). In 2017, average annual incremental direct costs among adults with osteoarthritis (n=1,157,236) in specialty care relative to controls ranged between €1,259 and €1,693 (p<0.001) per patient across all countries. Total average annual incremental costs were €3,224-€4,969 (p<0.001) per patient. Healthcare cost differences were mainly explained by osteoarthritis patients having more surgeries. However, among patients with both primary and secondary care data, primary care costs exceeded the costs of surgery. Primary care constituted 41 and 29 % of the difference in direct costs in Sweden and Finland, respectively. From a societal perspective, the total economic burden of osteoarthritis is substantial, and the incremental cost was estimated to €1.1-€1.3 billion yearly for patients in specialty care across the Nordic countries. When including patients in primary care, incremental costs rose to €3 billion in Sweden and €1.8 billion in Finland. Given the large economic impact, finding cost-effective and safe therapeutic strategies for these patients will be important.

Burden of disease and management of osteoarthritis and chronic low back pain: healthcare utilization and sick leave in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark (BISCUITS): study design and patient characteristics of a real world data study.

OBJECTIVES: Osteoarthritis (OA) and chronic low back pain (CLBP) are common musculoskeletal disorders with substantial patient and societal burden. Nordic administrative registers offer a unique opportunity to study the impact of these conditions in the real-world setting. The Burden of Disease and Management of Osteoarthritis and Chronic Low Back Pain: Health Care Utilization and Sick Leave in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark (BISCUITS) study was designed to study disease prevalence and the societal and economic burden in broad OA and CLBP populations. METHODS: Patients in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark with diagnoses of OA or CLBP (low back pain record plus ≥2 pain relief prescriptions to indicate chronicity) were identified in specialty care, in primary care (Sweden and Finland) and in a quality-of-care register (Sweden). Matched controls were identified for the specialty care cohort. Longitudinal data were extracted on prevalence, treatment patterns, patient-reported outcomes, social and economic burden. RESULTS: Almost 1.4 million patients with OA and 0.4 million with CLBP were identified in specialty care, corresponding to a prevalence in the Nordic countries of 6.3 and 1.9%, respectively. The prevalence increased to 11-14% for OA and almost 6% for CLBP when adding patients identified in primary care. OA patients had a higher Elixhauser comorbidity index (0.66 vs. 0.46) and were using opioids (44.7 vs. 10.2%) or long-term nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAIDs) (20.9 vs. 4.5%) more than four times as often as compared to controls. The differences were even larger for CLBP patients compared to their controls (comorbidity index 0.89 vs. 0.39, opioid use 77.7 vs. 9.4%, and long-term NSAID use 37.2 vs. 4.8%). CONCLUSIONS: The BISCUITS study offers an unprecedented, longitudinal healthcare data source to quantify the real-world burden of more than 1.8 million patients with OA or CLBP across four countries. In subsequent papers we aim to explore among others additional outcomes and subgroups of patients, primarily those patients who may benefit most from better healthcare management.

Medication use and comorbidities in an increasingly younger osteoarthritis population: an 18-year retrospective open-cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: As understanding of the pathogenesis and treatment strategies for osteoarthritis (OA) evolves, it is important to understand how patient factors are also changing. Our goal was to examine demographics and known risk factors of patients with OA over time. DESIGN: Open-cohort retrospective study using electronic health records. SETTING: Large US integrated health system with 7 hospitals, 2.6 million outpatient clinic visits and 97 300 hospital admissions annually in a mostly rural geographic region. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with at least two encounters and a diagnosis of OA or OA-relevant surgery between 2001 and 2018. Because of geographic region, over 96% of participants were white/Caucasian. INTERVENTIONS: None. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive statistics were used to examine age, sex, body mass index (BMI), Charlson Comorbidity Index, major comorbidities and OA-relevant prescribing over time. RESULTS: We identified 290 897 patients with OA. Prevalence of OA increased significantly from 6.7% to 33.5% and incidence increased 37% (from 3772 to 5142 new cases per 100 000 patients per year) (p<0.0001). Percentage of females declined from 65.3% to 60.8%, and percentage of patients with OA in the youngest age bracket (18-45 years) increased significantly (6.2% to 22.7%, p<0.0001). The percentage of patients with OA with BMI ≥30 remained above 50% over the time period. Patients had low comorbidity overall, but anxiety, depression and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease showed the largest increases in prevalence. Opioid use (tramadol and non-tramadol) showed peaks followed by declines, while most other medications increased slightly in use or remained steady. CONCLUSIONS: We observe increasing OA prevalence and a greater proportion of younger patients over time. With better understanding of how characteristics of patients with OA are changing over time, we can develop better approaches for managing disease burden in the future.

Burden of illness and treatment patterns for patients with fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to describe burden of illness and treatment patterns, and to examine the patient, physician, and care factors associated with the treatment choices of individuals receiving new prescriptions for fibromyalgia (FM). DESIGN: This is a baseline assessment of the Real-World Examination of Fibromyalgia: Longitudinal Evaluation of Costs and Treatments (REFLECTIONS), a prospective observational study. Baseline data (including a physician survey, a patient visit form, and computer-assisted telephone interviews) were collected from July 2008 through May 2010 in 58 care settings in the United States, including Puerto Rico. RESULTS: Patients (N = 1,700) were mostly female (94.6%) and white (82.9%). Mean age was 50.4 years and mean duration of illness was 5.6 years. Mean Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire total score was 54.4 (range 0-80), and Brief Pain Inventory average pain severity level was 5.5 (range 0-10). Patients reported high annual health care use and numerous work limitations related to FM. Patients were taking 182 unique types of medications prescribed for FM, including duloxetine (26.8%), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (26.6%), pregabalin (24.5%), opioids (24.2%), tramadol (15.3%), benzodiazepines (15.2%), cyclobenzaprine (12.9%), milnacipran (8.9%), and others. Most patients took more than one medication concurrently (77.8%). Type of current medications used was most strongly associated with medication history and physician specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Burden of illness was high for patients with FM, and treatment patterns were highly variable. Importantly, the treatments with the most evidence to support their use were not always the most frequently chosen.

A Retrospective Claims-Based Study Evaluating Clinical and Economic Burden Among Patients With Moderate to Severe Osteoarthritis Pain in the United States.

Background: There has been limited evaluation of medication adherence, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and healthcare costs over time in patients with osteoarthritis (OA), and stratification by pain severity level has not been reported. Assessing such longitudinal changes may be useful to patients and healthcare providers for tracking disease progression, informing treatment options, and employing strategies to optimize patient outcomes. Objectives: To characterize treatment patterns, HCRU, and costs over time in patients with moderate to severe (MTS) OA pain in the United States. Methods: We conducted a retrospective claims analysis, using IBM® MarketScan® databases, from 2013-2018. Eligible patients were aged ≥45 years with ≥12 months pre-index (baseline) and ≥24 months (follow-up) of continuous enrollment; index date was defined as a physician diagnosis of hip or knee OA. An algorithm was employed to identify MTS OA pain patients, who were propensity score matched with patients having non-MTS OA pain. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics and univariate analyses. Results: After propensity score matching, the overall OA pain cohorts consisted of 186 374 patients each: 61% were female, mean age was 63 years, and two-thirds (65.6%) were of working age (45-65 years). Sleep-related conditions, anxiety, and depression were significantly higher in the MTS OA pain cohort vs non-MTS (P<0.001). At baseline and 12- and 24-month follow-ups, receipt of prescription pain medications, HCRU, and direct medical costs were significantly higher in the MTS OA pain cohort (all P<0.01). Medication adherence was significantly higher in the MTS OA pain cohort for all medication classes except analgesics/antipyretics, which were significantly lower vs the non-MTS OA pain cohort (all P<0.0001). Conclusions: The burden of MTS OA pain is substantial, with patterns that show increasing medication use, HCRU, and costs vs non-MTS OA pain patients over time. Understanding the heterogeneity within the OA population may allow us to further appreciate the true burden of illness for patients in pain.

Drug utilization, clinical and economic outcomes of patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and/or knee treated with long-term use of traditional NSAIDs, topical NSAIDs, and COX-2 inhibitors.

OBJECTIVES: To describe and compare baseline characteristics, healthcare and drug utilization, and negative clinical outcomes of commercially-insured patients diagnosed with OA of the hip and/or knee who initiated treatment on traditional oral NSAIDs (tNSAIDs), topical NSAIDs, or cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (COX-2s). METHODS: A commercial claims database (1/2012-3/2017) was used to identify patients ≥18 years old, with ≥2 diagnoses of hip and/or knee OA, and ≥90 days supply of NSAIDs. Patients were assigned to cohorts based on the type of NSAID initially prescribed and observed in the 6 months before (baseline) and 36 months after (follow-up) the date of their first NSAID prescription after the first OA diagnosis. Analyses estimated baseline demographic and clinical characteristics and follow-up period drug utilization. Logistic regressions assessed the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) and acute renal failure (ARF) events. RESULTS: tNSAIDs were the most frequently prescribed treatment. During the follow-up period, less than 15% of patients prescribed tNSAIDs switched to either COX-2s or topical NSAIDs and 37% of patients prescribed a COX-2 and 56% of patients prescribed a topical NSAID switched to tNSAIDs. GI and ARF events during the follow-up period ranged from 7.3-8.1% and 8.0-11.0%, respectively, across cohorts. The tNSAIDs and COX-2s cohorts had increased risk of both types of events relative to patients prescribed topical NSAIDs, controlling for other characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses characterize the long-term real-world utilization of NSAIDs and associated outcomes for patients with OA of the hip and/or knee. Study results highlight the likelihood of switching and the risk of negative clinical outcomes associated with long-term use.

All-Cause Health Care and Work Loss Burden Associated With Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug and Opioid Treatment in Employed Patients With Osteoarthritis.

INTRODUCTION: This study estimated all-cause health care resource utilization (HRU) and costs and work loss outcomes associated with pain management of employed patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and/or knee. METHODS: Optum Health Care Solutions data were analyzed for employed patients prescribed nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, tramadol, or nontramadol opioids following diagnoses of osteoarthritis of the hip and/or knee. A pre-post design was used to evaluate changes in all-cause HRU and costs, and work loss days and associated costs. RESULTS: Costs rose for patients in all three cohorts (up to 198.3% for health care costs [tramadol] and up to 178.7% for work loss costs [tramadol]). Greatest increases in all-cause HRU included inpatient visits (237.9% [nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs]; 600% [tramadol]). CONCLUSIONS: Study results provide evidence of increases in all-cause HRU and costs and work loss days and associated costs.

Clinical and economic burden of prescribing tramadol and other opioids for patients with osteoarthritis in a commercially insured population in the United States.

ABSTRACT: In 2019, the American College of Rheumatology conditionally recommended tramadol and conditionally recommended against nontramadol opioids for patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis. Although tramadol is known to be less prone to opioid use disorders, little is known about the differing magnitude of negative clinical outcomes, health care resource utilization, and costs of tramadol relative to nontramadol opioids. Administrative claims records for commercially insured patients with osteoarthritis who were prescribed opioids were used to compare clinical and cost outcomes during a 3-year follow-up period by conducting a pre-post analysis and a matched case-cohort analysis. Data for 14,491 patients were analyzed: 4048 (28%) were initiated on tramadol, and 10,443 (72%) were initiated on nontramadol opioids. After matching, 4048 patients per cohort were analyzed. In each empirical analysis, tramadol patients did develop opioid use disorders; however, opioid use disorder rates were 3.5-fold higher in the nontramadol cohort (1.2% vs 4.2%). In addition, rates of other opioid-related clinical outcomes (falls, fractures, nausea, fatigue, and constipation) were also directionally lower among the tramadol cohort, although quantitatively similar (<5% difference) to the nontramadol cohort. Finally, in both analyses, the nontramadol cohort incurred higher levels of inpatient and emergency department visits and all-cause costs during the 3-year follow-up period. However, tramadol patients incur a higher incremental change (+$24,013) in costs relative to their pretreatment baseline compared with nontramadol (+$18,191). These real-world findings demonstrated lower risks with tramadol relative to other opioids, albeit risks and increased health care costs were present with tramadol, highlighting the need for further strategies to improve outcomes.

Risk Factors Associated with Falls and Fractures Following Prescription of Opioids Among Privately Insured Patients with Osteoarthritis.

Background: While prior research has shown that patients with osteoarthritis (OA) who are prescribed opioids have higher rates of falls and fractures following drug initiation, there is a limited body of work establishing a comprehensive model of factors that influence the risk of falls or fractures among these patients. Objective: Opioids are associated with negative clinical outcomes, including increased risk of falls and fractures. This study assessed the frequency, treatment characteristics, and risk factors associated with falls or fractures among patients with OA taking opioids. Methods: Optum Healthcare Solutions, Inc data (January 2012-March 2017) were used to identify patients over 18 with at least 2 diagnoses of hip and/or knee OA, and at least 90 days' supply of opioids. Patients with cancer were excluded. Falls or fractures outcomes were assessed in the 36-month follow-up period after the date of the first opioid prescription after first OA diagnosis. Demographic, treatment, and clinical characteristics associated with falls or fractures were assessed using logistic regression. Results: Of 16 663 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 3886 (23%) had at least 1 fall or fracture during follow-up. Of these 3886 patients, 1349 (35%) had at least 1 fall with an average of 3 fall claims, and 3299 (85%) patients had at least 1 fracture with an average of 8 claims during follow-up. Spine (15.8%) and hip (12.5%) fractures were most common. Median time to fall or fracture was 18.6 and 13.9 months, respectively. Significant (P<.05) risk factors associated with at least 1 fall or fracture during the follow-up period included alcohol use (odds ratio [OR], 3.41), history of falling (OR, 2.19), non-tramadol opioid use (OR, 1.31), age (OR, 1.03), benzodiazepine use (OR, 1.21), and at least 1 osteoporosis diagnosis (OR, 2.06). Discussion: This study is among only a few that clearly identifies the substantial impact and frequency of falls and fractures associated with prescribing non-tramadol opioids to patients with OA. Findings suggest that fall or fracture risks need to be considered when managing OA pain with opioids. Conclusion: Falls and fractures impose a major clinical burden on patients prescribed opioids for OA-related pain management. Falls or fracture risks should be an important consideration in the ongoing treatment of patients with OA.

The Burden of Metastatic Cancer-Induced Bone Pain: A Narrative Review.

Bone pain is one of the most common forms of pain reported by cancer patients with metastatic disease. We conducted a review of oncology literature to further understand the epidemiology of and treatment approaches for metastatic cancer-induced bone pain and the effect of treatment of painful bone metastases on the patient's quality of life. Two-thirds of patients with advanced, metastatic, or terminal cancer worldwide experience pain. Cancer pain due to bone metastases is the most common form of pain in patients with advanced disease and has been shown to significantly reduce patients' quality of life. Treatment options for cancer pain due to bone metastases include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, palliative radiation, bisphosphonates, denosumab, and opioids. Therapies including palliative radiation and opioids have strong evidence supporting their efficacy treating cancer pain due to bone metastases; other therapies, like bisphosphonates and denosumab, do not. There is sufficient evidence that patients who experience pain relief after radiation therapy have improved quality of life; however, a substantial proportion are nonresponders. For those still requiring pain management, even with available analgesics, many patients are undertreated for cancer pain due to bone metastases, indicating an unmet need. The studies in this review were not designed to determine why cancer pain due to bone metastases was undertreated. Studies specifically addressing cancer pain due to bone metastases, rather than general cancer pain, are limited. Additional research is needed to determine patient preferences and physician attitudes regarding choice of analgesic for moderate to severe cancer pain due to bone metastases.