The effects of rheumatoid arthritis on labor force participation, work performance, and healthcare costs in two workplace samples.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the workplace costs of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the employer perspective. METHOD: Samples included 4485 manufacturing firm (MF) employees (109 with RA) and 915 commercially insured (CO) subscribers (333 with RA). Respondents completed the Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ) and the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). The effects of RA were estimated using regression analysis. RESULTS: RA was associated with increased probability of no longer working (CO), increased effort to maintain work performance (CO), increased sickness absence (MF), and increased non-RA pharmacy costs (CO). RA was not associated with hours worked or hourly wage. Indirect costs of RA did not exceed direct medical costs. CONCLUSIONS: Indirect costs of RA to employers are significant and warrant further research to increase our understanding of the contribution of different RA treatment interventions to optimizing workforce productivity.

Validity of the World Health Organization Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS) Screener in a representative sample of health plan members.

The validity of the six-question World Health Organization Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS) Screener was assessed in a sample of subscribers to a large health plan in the US. A convenience subsample of 668 subscribers was administered the ASRS Screener twice to assess test-retest reliability and then a third time in conjunction with a clinical interviewer for DSM-IV adult ADHD. The data were weighted to adjust for discrepancies between the sample and the population on socio-demographics and past medical claims. Internal consistency reliability of the continuous ASRS Screener was in the range 0.63-0.72 and test-retest reliability (Pearson correlations) in the range 0.58-0.77. A four-category version The ASRS Screener had strong concordance with clinician diagnoses, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.90. The brevity and ability to discriminate DSM-IV cases from non-cases make the six-question ASRS Screener attractive for use both in community epidemiological surveys and in clinical outreach and case-finding initiatives.

Achievement of optimal combined lipid values in a managed care setting: is a new treatment paradigm needed?

BACKGROUND: Published guidelines suggest the management of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglyceride (TG) values after the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal is achieved. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the attainment of optimal combined lipid values (LDL-C, HDL-C, and TGs) and associated therapy over time. METHODS: This retrospective cohort analysis was conducted among managed-care patients who had a baseline lipid panel taken between October 1, 1999, and September 30, 2000; were naive to lipid therapy; and had plan eligibility for at least 12 months before and 12 to 36 months after the baseline lipid values. Patients were categorized as elevated-risk primary prevention (ERP) or as coronary heart disease (CHD) and CHD risk equivalents (CHD-RE). The attainment of optimal combined lipid values was assessed at baseline and quarterly thereafter. Associations between lipid values and the use of lipid-altering therapy were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 30,348 patients were monitored for a mean (SD) duration of 27 (8) months. Mean (SD) age was 66 (12) years and 55% (16,549/30,348) were men; 43% (13,059/30,348) were categorized as ERP and 57% (17,289/30,348) as CHD-RE. Combined lipid values were optimal in 14% (4167/30,348),18% (5508/30,348), and 22% (2936/13,100) of patients at baseline, 12 months, and 36 months, respectively. After 36 months, 78% (10,164/13,100) of patients did not attain optimal combined lipid values. Lipid therapy, primarily statin monotherapy (87% [7992/ 92251), was prescribed in 30% (9225/30,348) of patients. After 36 months, 34% (4492/13,100) of patients had isolated elevated LDL-C and 20% (2588/13,100) had non-optimal HDL-C and/or TGs. Lipid therapy was associated with the attainment of optimal combined values for LDL-C and TGs (both, P < 0.05), but not for HDL-C. Because the study was retrospective, causality cannot be determined. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this study, use of combination lipid therapy and targeted therapy aimed at the specific lipid abnormalities may increase the attainment of optimal lipid parameters.

Gout medication treatment patterns and adherence to standards of care from a managed care perspective.

OBJECTIVE: To determine allopurinol treatment patterns and adherence to published standards of care for patients with gout. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective claims analysis in a managed care database included patients 18 years or older, with continuous eligibility for 1 year before and after the start date and 2 or more visits during which the gout disease code (274.xx) was assigned or 1 or more pharmacy prescriptions for a gout-specific medication between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2002 (intake period). Factors associated with compliance with allopurinol therapy were measured based on the medication possession ratio, and adherence to 2 quality-of-care indicators for gout management was assessed using multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 64.9% of allopurinol users had a modal daily dose or the most commonly observed daily dose of 300 mg/d, median length of therapy was 3 months, and a high proportion of patients had a medication possession ratio of 10% or less. Suggested quality-of-care Indicators for gout had low performance: 53% of patients with renal impairment received a modal daily dose of 300 mg or greater, and 83% of patients who started taking allopurinol did not have their serum urate levels measured within 180 days. Patients with gout flares were less likely to be compliant with allopurinol (odds ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.63). Patients with renal impairment at baseline were 3.2 times more likely to undergo serum urate testing than patients without renal impairment (odds ratio, 3.20; 95% confidence Interval, 1.25-8.23). CONCLUSION: There was low compliance with allopurinol therapy for treatment of gout. Patients potentially received suboptimal quality of care as measured by serum urate testing and appropriateness of allopurinol dosing in patients with renal impairment.

Risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in patients treated with thiazolidinediones in a managed-care population.

BACKGROUND: This study directly compares risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), acute heart failure (AHF), or all-cause death among pioglitazone- and rosiglitazone-treated patients in a managed-care population. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients ≥18 years of age, newly initiated on rosiglitazone or pioglitazone between January 1, 2001, and December 12, 2005, were included. The date of the first pharmacy claim for rosiglitazone or pioglitazone was defined as index date. Patients were excluded if they had <1 year continuous eligibility preindex or a preindex insulin claim. Primary outcome measure was time to composite event of AMI, AHF or death among pioglitazone- and rosiglitazone-treated patients. The National Death Index database was accessed to obtain date of death for patients who died during the study period. Propensity score matching was used to control for potential confounders. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate effects of exposure to rosiglitazone and pioglitazone on time to event. A total of 36 628 patients (58% male; mean age, 54 years) were identified. Of the rosiglitazone-treated patients, 602 (4.16%) had an AMI, AHF, or death compared with 599 (4.14%) propensity score-matched pioglitazone-treated patients. No significant difference was observed between matched groups for risk of composite event (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.91 to 1.15; P=0.666) when patients were followed from index date until end of study period, termination of enrollment status, or diagnosis of AMI/AHF/death. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective cohort study directly comparing rosiglitazone and pioglitazone with a propensity score-matched population that includes mortality data, no significant differences were found in the risk of AMI, AHF or death.

Serum urate levels and gout flares: analysis from managed care data.

BACKGROUND: The desired serum urate level (SUA) for prevention of gout attacks is widely recommended to be in the subsaturating range, <6.0 mg/dL. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to evaluate attainment of this target SUA among gout patients on allopurinol in a naturalistic setting and to assess its impact on gout flare risk. METHODS: : This was a retrospective, observational study in a southeastern U.S. managed care organization of approximately 2.2 million members. The first gout claim/prescription within the intake period (January 1, 2000-December 31, 2002) was the index date. Included patients had > or =2 visits with gout International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision code (274.xx) or > or =1 pharmacy script(s) for allopurinol, colchicine, probenecid, or sulfinpyrazone. Excluded patients were <18 years and/or did not have a 1-year continuous eligibility pre-/postindex date. Gout flares were defined by office/emergency room visit with gout or joint pain code(s) and > or =1 of the following within 7 days of the visit: intraarticular aspiration/injection, joint fluid microscopy, or pharmacy claim for nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug, colchicine, corticosteroid, or ACTH. Multivariable regression analyses were conducted to evaluate gout flare risk/rate and association with target SUA. RESULTS: Approximately 40% of 5942 gout patients identified used allopurinol postindex. Among allopurinol users with pre-/postindex SUA data (n = 162), mean SUA was lowered from 8.7 mg/dL to 7.1 mg/dL; reduction was significant (P < 0.001). Among allopurinol users who did not have SUA <6.0 mg/dL preindex (n = 147), only 25% reached target levels during postindex. Despite pharmacotherapy, patients with nontarget levels were 59% more likely to flare than those at target. Allopurinol users who were not at target were 75% more likely to flare. CONCLUSION: The failure of allopurinol users to achieve target SUA levels of <6.0 mg/dL may be attributed to lack of awareness of optimal SUA, allopurinol dosing, compliance, and efficacy. Patients who did not achieve target SUA were at increased flare risk.