Providing Epidemiological Data in Lumbar Spine Imaging Reports Did Not Affect Subsequent Utilization of Spine Procedures: Secondary Outcomes from a Stepped-Wedge Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of inserting epidemiological information into lumbar spine imaging reports on subsequent nonsurgical and surgical procedures involving the thoracolumbosacral spine and sacroiliac joints. DESIGN: Analysis of secondary outcomes from the Lumbar Imaging with Reporting of Epidemiology (LIRE) pragmatic stepped-wedge randomized trial. SETTING: Primary care clinics within four integrated health care systems in the United States. SUBJECTS: 238,886 patients ≥18 years of age who received lumbar diagnostic imaging between 2013 and 2016. METHODS: Clinics were randomized to receive text containing age- and modality-specific epidemiological benchmarks indicating the prevalence of common spine imaging findings in people without low back pain, inserted into lumbar spine imaging reports (the "LIRE intervention"). The study outcomes were receiving 1) any nonsurgical lumbosacral or sacroiliac spine procedure (lumbosacral epidural steroid injection, facet joint injection, or facet joint radiofrequency ablation; or sacroiliac joint injection) or 2) any surgical procedure involving the lumbar, sacral, or thoracic spine (decompression surgery or spinal fusion or other spine surgery). RESULTS: The LIRE intervention was not significantly associated with subsequent utilization of nonsurgical lumbosacral or sacroiliac spine procedures (odds ratio [OR] = 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93-1.09; P = 0.79) or any surgical procedure (OR = 0.99, 95 CI 0.91-1.07; P = 0.74) involving the lumbar, sacral, or thoracic spine. The intervention was also not significantly associated with any individual spine procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Inserting epidemiological text into spine imaging reports had no effect on nonsurgical or surgical procedure utilization among patients receiving lumbar diagnostic imaging.

Subsequent health-care utilization associated with early physical therapy for new episodes of low back pain in older adults.

BACKGROUND: The association between early physical therapy (PT) and subsequent health-care utilization following a new visit for low back pain is not clear, particularly in the setting of acute low back pain. PURPOSE: This study aimed to estimate the association between initiating early PT following a new visit for an episode of low back pain and subsequent back pain-specific health-care utilization in older adults. DESIGN/SETTING: This is a prospective cohort study. Data were collected at three integrated health-care systems in the United States through the Back Pain Outcomes using Longitudinal Data (BOLD) registry. PATIENT SAMPLE: We recruited 4,723 adults, aged 65 and older, presenting to a primary care setting with a new episode of low back pain. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was total back pain-specific relative value units (RVUs), from days 29 to 365. Secondary outcomes included overall RVUs for all health care and use of specific health-care services including imaging (x-ray and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] or computed tomography [CT]), emergency department visits, physician visits, PT, spinal injections, spinal surgeries, and opioid use. METHODS: We compared patients who had early PT (initiated within 28 days of the index visit) with those not initiating early PT using appropriate, generalized linear models to adjust for potential confounding variables. RESULTS: Adjusted analysis found no statistically significant difference in total spine RVUs between the two groups (ratio of means 1.19, 95% CI of 0.72-1.96, p=.49). For secondary outcomes, only the difference between total spine imaging RVUs and total PT RVUs was statistically significant. The early PT group had greater PT RVUs; the ratio of means was 2.56 (95% CI of 2.17-3.03, p<.001). The early PT group had greater imaging RVUs; the ratio of means was 1.37 (95% CI of 1.09-1.71, p=.01.) CONCLUSIONS: We found that in a group of older adults presenting for a new episode of low back pain, the use of early PT is not associated with any statistically significant difference in subsequent back pain-specific health-care utilization compared with patients not receiving early PT.

Back pain in seniors: the Back pain Outcomes using Longitudinal Data (BOLD) cohort baseline data.

BACKGROUND: Back pain represents a substantial burden globally, ranking first in a recent assessment among causes of years lived with disability. Though back pain is widely studied among working age adults, there are gaps with respect to basic descriptive epidemiology among seniors, especially in the United States. Our goal was to describe how pain, function and health-related quality of life vary by demographic and geographic factors among seniors presenting to primary care providers with new episodes of care for back pain. METHODS: We examined baseline data from the Back pain Outcomes using Longitudinal Data (BOLD) registry, the largest inception cohort to date of seniors presenting to a primary care provider for back pain. The sample included 5,239 patients ≥ 65 years old with a new primary care visit for back pain at three integrated health systems (Northern California Kaiser-Permanente, Henry Ford Health System [Detroit], and Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates [Boston]). We examined differences in patient characteristics across healthcare sites and associations of patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics with baseline patient-reported measures of pain, function, and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: Patients differed across sites in demographic and other characteristics. The Detroit site had more African-American patients (50%) compared with the other sites (7-8%). The Boston site had more college graduates (68%) compared with Detroit (20%). Female sex, lower educational status, African-American race, and older age were associated with worse functional disability as measured by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. Except for age, these factors were also associated with worse pain. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline pain and functional impairment varied substantially with a number of factors in the BOLD cohort. Healthcare site was an important factor. After controlling for healthcare site, lower education, female sex, African-American race, and older age were associated with worse physical disability and all of these factors except age were associated with worse pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov NCT01776242; Registration date: June 13, 2012.

Study protocol: the Back Pain Outcomes using Longitudinal Data (BOLD) registry.

BACKGROUND: Back pain is one of the most important causes of functional limitation, disability, and utilization of health care resources for adults of all ages, but especially among older adults. Despite the high prevalence of back pain in this population, important questions remain unanswered regarding the comparative effectiveness of commonly used diagnostic tests and treatments in the elderly. The overall goal of the Back pain Outcomes using Longitudinal Data (BOLD) project is to establish a rich, sustainable registry to describe the natural history and evaluate prospectively the effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of interventions for patients 65 and older with back pain. METHODS/DESIGN: BOLD is enrolling 5,000 patients ≥ 65 years old who present to a primary care physician with a new episode of back pain. We are recruiting study participants from three integrated health systems (Kaiser-Permanente Northern California, Henry Ford Health System in Detroit and Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates/ Harvard Pilgrim Health Care in Boston). Registry patients complete validated, standardized measures of pain, back pain-related disability, and health-related quality of life at enrollment and 3, 6 and 12 months later. We also have available for analysis the clinical and administrative data in the participating health systems' electronic medical records. Using registry data, we will conduct an observational cohort study of early imaging compared to no early imaging among patients with new episodes of back pain. The aims are to: 1) identify predictors of early imaging and; 2) compare pain, functional outcomes, diagnostic testing and treatment utilization of patients who receive early imaging versus patients who do not receive early imaging. In terms of predictors, we will examine patient factors as well as physician factors. DISCUSSION: By establishing the BOLD registry, we are creating a resource that contains patient-reported outcome measures as well as electronic medical record data for elderly patients with back pain. The richness of our data will allow better matching for comparative effectiveness studies than is currently possible with existing datasets. BOLD will enrich the existing knowledge base regarding back pain in the elderly to help clinicians and patients make informed, evidence-based decisions regarding their care.

Quality of life and economic burdens of malocclusion in U.S. patients enrolled in Medicaid.

BACKGROUND: Patients enrolled in Medicaid have limited access to orthodontic services in the United States. No studies are available, to the authors' knowledge, regarding the clinical and psychosocial burdens of malocclusion on these patients from an economic perspective. METHODS: The authors conducted a systematic review of the relevant economic literature. They identified issues from the perspectives of the various stakeholders (dentists, patients and parents, Medicaid programs) and developed a conceptual model for studying decision making focused on the strategy of providing early interceptive and preventive treatment rather than, or in addition to, comprehensive care in the patient's permanent dentition. RESULTS: Medicaid coverage and reimbursement amounts vary nationwide, and decision making associated with obtaining care can be complex. The perspectives of all relevant stakeholders deserve assessment. A conceptual framework of the cost-effectiveness of interceptive orthodontic treatment compared with comprehensive treatment illustrates the issues to be considered when evaluating these strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Policymakers and the dental community should identify creative solutions to addressing low-income families' limited access to orthodontic services and compare them from various perspectives with regard to their relative cost-effectiveness. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Dentists should be aware of the multiple problems faced by low-income families in obtaining orthodontic services and the impact of stakeholder issues on access to care; they also should be proactive in helping low-income patients obtain needed orthodontic services.

The burden of illness associated with psoriasis: cost of treatment with systemic therapy and phototherapy in the US.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate utilization and direct healthcare expenditures among psoriasis patients treated with systemic therapy and phototherapy in the United States. DESIGN: Cohort study using retrospective administrative medical claims. PATIENTS: Psoriasis patients treated with systemic therapy and phototherapy, as well as a matched cohort of non-psoriasis patients. All patients were covered by employer-sponsored insurance between 1 April 1996 and 31 December 2000. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Estimated risk of hospitalization and total annual healthcare expenditures overall and by comorbidity status were compared for persons with psoriasis using systemic therapy or phototherapy and persons without psoriasis. Annualized utilization rates for hospitalizations, and use of emergency department, outpatient physician, outpatient laboratory, and outpatient pharmaceutical services were also compared across the two cohorts. RESULTS: Seventeen percent of psoriasis patients were treated with systemic therapy or phototherapy. Patients with comorbid anemia, carcinoma, diabetes, depression, GI disorders, hepatotoxicity, hypertension, and nephrotoxicity had significantly higher expenditures than non-psoriasis patients with the same comorbidities (p < or =0.05). Elevated risk of hospitalization also contributed to higher expenditures in patients treated with systemic therapy or phototherapy. Limitations of this study include those inherent in using claims data such as dependence on diagnosis coding, the fact that psoriasis severity cannot be determined directly from claims data, confounding comorbidities, and the fact that only direct healthcare expenditures were considered in this analysis. CONCLUSION: Psoriasis patients treated with systemic therapies/phototherapies have significantly more comorbidities and higher mean total healthcare expenditures compared to non-psoriasis patients. Psoriasis patients with selected comorbidities have significantly higher mean total healthcare expenditures compared to non-psoriasis persons with the same comorbidities.