Identifying Veterans Who Benefit From Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir: A Target Trial Emulation.

BACKGROUND: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is recommended for persons at risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but remains underutilized. Information on which eligible groups are likely to benefit from treatment is needed. METHODS: We conducted a target trial emulation study in the Veterans Health Administration comparing nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treated versus matched untreated veterans at risk for severe COVID-19 who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from April 2022 through March 2023. We measured incidence of any hospitalization or all-cause mortality at 30 days. Outcomes were measured for the entire cohort, as well as among subgroups defined by 30-day risk of death or hospitalization, estimated using an ensemble risk prediction model. RESULTS: Participants were 87% male with median age 66 years and 16% unvaccinated. Compared with matched untreated participants, those treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (n = 24 205) had a lower 30-day risk for hospitalization (1.80% vs 2.30%; risk difference [RD], -0.50% points [95% confidence interval {CI}: -.69 to -.35]) and death (0.11% vs 0.30%; RD, -0.20 [95% CI: -.24 to -.13]). The greatest reductions in combined hospitalization or death were observed in the highest risk quartile (RD -2.85 [95% CI: -3.94 to -1.76]), immunocompromised persons (RD -1.91 [95% CI: -3.09 to -.74]), and persons aged ≥75 years (RD -1.16 [95% CI: -1.73 to -.59]). No reductions were observed in the 2 lowest risk quartiles or persons younger than 65 years. CONCLUSIONS: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was effective in reducing 30-day hospitalization and death in older veterans, those at highest predicted risk for severe outcomes, and immunocompromised groups. Benefit was not observed in younger veterans or groups at lower predicted risk for hospitalization and death.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Infection on Long-Term Depression Symptoms among Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Prior research demonstrates that SARS-COV-2 infection can be associated with a broad range of mental health outcomes including depression symptoms. Veterans, in particular, may be at elevated risk of increased depression following SARS-COV-2 infection given their high rates of pre-existing mental and physical health comorbidities. However, few studies have tried to isolate SARS-COV-2 infection associations with long term, patient-reported depression symptoms from other factors (e.g., physical health comorbidities, pandemic-related stress). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between SARS-COV-2 infection and subsequent depression symptoms among United States Military Veterans. DESIGN: Survey-based non-randomized cohort study with matched comparators. PARTICIPANTS: A matched-dyadic sample from a larger, stratified random sample of participants with and without known to SARS-COV-2 infection were invited to participate in a survey evaluating mental health and wellness 18-months after their index infection date. Sampled participants were stratified by infection severity of the participant infected with SARS-COV-2 (hospitalized or not) and by month of index date. A total of 186 participants in each group agreed to participate in the survey and had sufficient data for inclusion in analyses. Those in the uninfected group who were later infected were excluded from analyses. MAIN MEASURES: Participants were administered the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 as part of a phone interview survey. Demographics, physical and mental health comorbidities were extracted from VHA administrative data. KEY RESULTS: Veterans infected with SARS-COV-2 had significantly higher depression symptoms scores compared with those uninfected. In particular, psychological symptoms (e.g., low mood, suicidal ideation) scores were elevated relative to the comparator group (MInfected = 3.16, 95%CI: 2.5, 3.8; MUninfected = 1.96, 95%CI: 1.4, 2.5). Findings were similar regardless of history of depression. CONCLUSION: SARS-COV-2 infection was associated with more depression symptoms among Veterans at 18-months post-infection. Routine evaluation of depression symptoms over time following SARS-COV-2 infection is important to facilitate adequate assessment and treatment.

Risk of Suicide-Related Outcomes After SARS-COV-2 Infection: Results from a Nationwide Observational Matched Cohort of US Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Negative mental health-related effects of SARS-COV-2 infection are increasingly evident. However, the impact on suicide-related outcomes is poorly understood, especially among populations at elevated risk. OBJECTIVE: To determine risk of suicide attempts and other self-directed violence (SDV) after SARS-COV-2 infection in a high-risk population. DESIGN: We employed an observational design supported by comprehensive electronic health records from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) to examine the association of SARS-COV-2 infection with suicide attempts and other SDV within one year of infection. Veterans with SARS-COV-2 infections were matched 1:5 with non-infected comparators each month. Three periods after index were evaluated: days 1-30, days 31-365, and days 1-365. PARTICIPANTS: VHA patients infected with SARS-COV-2 between March 1, 2020 and March 31, 2021 and matched non-infected Veteran comparators. MAIN MEASURES: Suicide attempt and other SDV events for the COVID-19 and non-infected comparator groups were analyzed using incidence rates per 100,000 person years and hazard ratios from Cox regressions modeling time from matched index date to first event. Subgroups were also examined. KEY RESULTS: 198,938 veterans with SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19 group) and 992,036 comparators were included. Unadjusted one-year incidence per 100,000 for suicide attempt and other SDV was higher among the COVID-19 group: 355 vs 250 and 327 vs 235, respectively. The COVID-19 group had higher risk than comparators for suicide attempts: days 1-30 hazard ratio (HR) = 2.54 (CI:2.05, 3.15), days 31-365 HR = 1.30 (CI:1.19, 1.43) and days 1-365 HR = 1.41 (CI:1.30, 1.54), and for other SDV: days 1-30 HR = 1.94 (CI:1.51, 2.49), days 31-365 HR = 1.32 (CI:1.20, 1.45) and days 1-365 HR = 1.38 (CI:1.26, 1.51). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients had higher risks of both suicide attempts and other forms of SDV compared to uninfected comparators, which persisted for at least one year after infection. Results support suicide risk screening of those infected with SARS-COV-2 to identify opportunities to prevent self-harm.

Application of a comprehensive disability measure: Disability prevalence among US Veterans and non-veterans from the National Health Interview Survey Data from 2015 to 2018.

BACKGROUND: Current measures of condition-specific disabilities or those capturing only severe limitations may underestimate disability prevalence, including among Veterans. OBJECTIVES: To develop a comprehensive measure to characterize and compare disabilities among US Veterans and non-Veterans. METHODS: Using 2015-2018 pooled cross-sectional National Health Interview Survey data, we compared the frequency and survey-weighted prevalence of non-mutually exclusive sensory, social, and physical disabilities by Veteran status. We developed a measure for and examined the frequency and survey-weighted prevalence of eight mutually exclusive disability categories-sensory only; physical only; social only; sensory and physical; social and sensory; physical and social; and sensory, social, and physical. RESULTS: Among 118,818 NHIS respondents, 11,943 were Veterans. Veterans had a greater prevalence than non-Veterans of non-mutually exclusive physical [52.01% vs. 34.68% (p < 0.001)], sensory [44.47% vs. 21.79% (p < 0.001)], and social [17.20% vs. 11.61% (p < 0.001)] disabilities (after survey-weighting). The most frequently reported mutually exclusive disability categories for both Veterans and non-Veterans were sensory and physical (19.20% and 8.02%, p < 0.001) and physical only (16.24% and 15.69%, p = 0.216) (after survey-weighting). The least frequently reported mutually exclusive disability categories for both Veterans and non-Veterans were social only (0.31% and 0.44%, p = 0.136) and sensory and social (0.32% and 0.20%, respectively, 0.026) (after survey-weighting). CONCLUSIONS: Our disability metric demonstrates that Veterans have a higher disability prevalence than non-Veterans, and a higher prevalence than previously reported. Public policy and future research should consider this broader definition of disability to more fully account for the variable needs of people with disabilities.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 Treatment With Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir or Molnupiravir Among U.S. Veterans: Target Trial Emulation Studies With One-Month and Six-Month Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Information about the effectiveness of oral antivirals in preventing short- and long-term COVID-19-related outcomes in the setting of Omicron variant transmission and COVID-19 vaccination is limited. OBJECTIVE: To measure the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir for outpatient treatment of COVID-19. DESIGN: Three retrospective target trial emulation studies comparing matched cohorts of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir versus no treatment, molnupiravir versus no treatment, and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir versus molnupiravir. SETTING: Veterans Health Administration (VHA). PARTICIPANTS: Nonhospitalized veterans in VHA care who were at risk for severe COVID-19 and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during January through July 2022. INTERVENTION: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir or molnupiravir pharmacotherapy. MEASUREMENTS: Incidence of any hospitalization or all-cause mortality at 30 days and from 31 to 180 days. RESULTS: Eighty-seven percent of participants were male; the median age was 66 years, and 18% were unvaccinated. Compared with matched untreated control participants, those treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (n = 9607) had lower 30-day risk for hospitalization (22.07 vs. 30.32 per 1000 participants; risk difference [RD], -8.25 [95% CI, -12.27 to -4.23] per 1000 participants) and death (1.25 vs. 5.47 per 1000 participants; RD, -4.22 [CI, -5.45 to -3.00] per 1000 participants). Among persons alive at day 31, reductions were seen in 31- to 180-day incidence of death (hazard ratio, 0.66 [CI, 0.49 to 0.89]) but not hospitalization (subhazard ratio, 0.90 [CI, 0.79 to 1.02]). Molnupiravir-treated participants (n = 3504) had lower 30-day and 31- to 180-day risks for death (3.14 vs. 13.56 per 1000 participants at 30 days; RD, -10.42 [CI, -13.49 to -7.35] per 1000 participants; hazard ratio at 31 to 180 days, 0.67 [CI, 0.48 to 0.95]) but not hospitalization. A difference in 30-day or 31- to 180-day risk for hospitalization or death was not observed between matched nirmatrelvir- or molnupiravir-treated participants. LIMITATION: The date of COVID-19 symptom onset for most veterans was unknown. CONCLUSION: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was effective in reducing 30-day hospitalization and death. Molnupiravir was associated with a benefit for 30-day mortality but not hospitalization. Further reductions in mortality from 31 to 180 days were observed with both antivirals. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Effectiveness of Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir Against the Development of Post-COVID-19 Conditions Among U.S. Veterans : A Target Trial Emulation.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has been linked to the development of many post-COVID-19 conditions (PCCs) after acute infection. Limited information is available on the effectiveness of oral antivirals used to treat acute COVID-19 in preventing the development of PCCs. OBJECTIVE: To measure the effectiveness of outpatient treatment of COVID-19 with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in preventing PCCs. DESIGN: Retrospective target trial emulation study comparing matched cohorts receiving nirmatrelvir-ritonavir versus no treatment. SETTING: Veterans Health Administration (VHA). PARTICIPANTS: Nonhospitalized veterans in VHA care who were at risk for severe COVID-19 and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during January through July 2022. INTERVENTION: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment for acute COVID-19. MEASUREMENTS: Cumulative incidence of 31 potential PCCs at 31 to 180 days after treatment or a matched index date, including cardiac, pulmonary, renal, thromboembolic, gastrointestinal, neurologic, mental health, musculoskeletal, endocrine, and general conditions and symptoms. RESULTS: Eighty-six percent of the participants were male, with a median age of 66 years, and 17.5% were unvaccinated. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between participants treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and matched untreated comparators. No differences were observed between participants treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (n = 9593) and their matched untreated comparators in the incidence of most PCCs examined individually or grouped by organ system, except for lower combined risk for venous thromboembolism and pulmonary embolism (subhazard ratio, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.97]; cumulative incidence difference, -0.29 percentage points [CI, -0.52 to -0.05 percentage points]). LIMITATIONS: Ascertainment of PCCs using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, codes may be inaccurate. Evaluation of many outcomes could have resulted in spurious associations with combined thromboembolic events by chance. CONCLUSION: Out of 31 potential PCCs, only combined thromboembolic events seemed to be reduced by nirmatrelvir-ritonavir. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

VA-Delivered or VA-Purchased Care: Important Factors for Veterans Navigating Care Decisions.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The VA MISSION Act aimed to increase Veterans' access to care by allowing eligible Veterans to use VA-paid care from non-VA providers ("VA-purchased care"). We interviewed Veterans who were eligible for both VA-delivered and VA-purchased care to examine factors they consider when making decisions about whether to use VA-delivered or VA-purchased care. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 28 Veterans across the USA who were eligible for VA-delivered and VA-purchased care, using deductive and inductive analysis to develop themes. Participants were recruited from a survey about healthcare access and decision-making. More than half of participants lived in rural areas, 21 were men, and 25 were > 50 years old. KEY RESULTS: Veteran participants identified (1) high-quality relationships with providers based on mutual trust, empathy, authenticity, and continuity of care, and (2) a positive environment or "eco-system of care" characterized by supportive interactions with staff and other Veterans, and exemplary customer service as integral to their decisions about where to receive care. These preferences influenced their engagement with VA and non-VA providers. We discovered corresponding findings related to Veterans' information needs. When making decisions around where to receive care, participants said they would like more information about VA and non-VA providers and services, and about coordination of care and referrals, including understanding processes and implications of utilizing VA-purchased care. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Current VA-purchased care eligibility determinations focus on common access metrics (e.g., wait times, distance to care). Yet, Veterans discussed other important factors for navigating care decisions, including patient-provider relationship quality and the larger healthcare environment (e.g., interactions with staff and other Veterans). Our findings point to the need for health systems to collect and provide information on these aspects of care to ensure care decisions reflect what is important to Veterans when navigating where to receive care.

Early Impact of VA MISSION Act Implementation on Primary Care Appointment Wait Time.

BACKGROUND: Through Community Care Networks (CCNs) implemented with the VA MISSION Act, VA expanded provider contracting and instituted network adequacy standards for Veterans' community care. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether early CCN implementation impacted community primary care (PC) appointment wait times overall, and by rural/urban and PC shortage area (HPSA) status. DESIGN: Using VA administrative data from February 2019 through February 2020 and a difference-in-differences approach, we compared wait times before and after CCN implementation for appointments scheduled by VA facilities that did (CCN appointments) and did not (comparison appointments) implement CCNs. We ran regression models with all appointments, and stratified by rural/urban and PC HPSA status. All models adjusted for Veteran characteristics and VA facility-level clustering. APPOINTMENTS: 13,720 CCN and 40,638 comparison appointments. MAIN MEASURES: Wait time, measured as number of days from authorization to use community PC to a Veteran's first corresponding appointment. KEY RESULTS: Overall, unadjusted wait times increased by 35.7 days ([34.4, 37.1] 95% CI) after CCN implementation. In adjusted analysis, comparison wait times increased on average 33.7 days ([26.3, 41.2] 95% CI, p < 0.001) after CCN implementation; there was no significant difference for CCN wait times (across-group mean difference: 5.4 days, [-3.8, 14.6] 95% CI, p = 0.25). In stratified analyses, comparison wait time increases ranged from 29.6 days ([20.8, 38.4] 95% CI, p < 0.001) to 42.1 days ([32.9, 51.3] 95% CI, p > 0.001) after CCN implementation, while additional differences for CCN appointments ranged from 13.4 days ([3.5, 23.4] 95% CI, p = 0.008) to -15.1 days ([-30.1, -0.1] 95% CI, p = 0.05) for urban and PC HPSA appointments, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After early CCN implementation, community PC wait times increased sharply at VA facilities that did and did not implement CCNs, regardless of rural/urban or PC HPSA status, suggesting community care demand likely overwhelmed VA resources such that CCNs had limited impact.

Design and analysis of outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 infection in veterans.

BACKGROUND: Understanding how SARS-CoV-2 infection impacts long-term patient outcomes requires identification of comparable persons with and without infection. We report the design and implementation of a matching strategy employed by the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) COVID-19 Observational Research Collaboratory (CORC) to develop comparable cohorts of SARS-CoV-2 infected and uninfected persons for the purpose of inferring potential causative long-term adverse effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Veteran population. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study, we identified VA health care system patients who were and were not infected with SARS-CoV-2 on a rolling monthly basis. We generated matched cohorts within each month utilizing a combination of exact and time-varying propensity score matching based on electronic health record (EHR)-derived covariates that can be confounders or risk factors across a range of outcomes. RESULTS: From an initial pool of 126,689,864 person-months of observation, we generated final matched cohorts of 208,536 Veterans infected between March 2020-April 2021 and 3,014,091 uninfected Veterans. Matched cohorts were well-balanced on all 39 covariates used in matching after excluding patients for: no VA health care utilization; implausible age, weight, or height; living outside of the 50 states or Washington, D.C.; prior SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis per Medicare claims; or lack of a suitable match. Most Veterans in the matched cohort were male (88.3%), non-Hispanic (87.1%), white (67.2%), and living in urban areas (71.5%), with a mean age of 60.6, BMI of 31.3, Gagne comorbidity score of 1.4 and a mean of 2.3 CDC high-risk conditions. The most common diagnoses were hypertension (61.4%), diabetes (34.3%), major depression (32.2%), coronary heart disease (28.5%), PTSD (25.5%), anxiety (22.5%), and chronic kidney disease (22.5%). CONCLUSION: This successful creation of matched SARS-CoV-2 infected and uninfected patient cohorts from the largest integrated health system in the United States will support cohort studies of outcomes derived from EHRs and sample selection for qualitative interviews and patient surveys. These studies will increase our understanding of the long-term outcomes of Veterans who were infected with SARS-CoV-2.

COVID-19 Vaccination Effectiveness Against Infection or Death in a National U.S. Health Care System : A Target Trial Emulation Study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about real-world COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in racially and ethnically diverse, elderly populations with high comorbidity burden. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccines. DESIGN: Target trial emulation study comparing newly vaccinated persons with matched unvaccinated controls. SETTING: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs health care system. PARTICIPANTS: Among persons receiving care in the Veterans Affairs health care system (n = 5 766 638), those who received at least 1 dose of the Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine from 11 December 2020 to 25 March 2021 (n = 2 099 871) were matched to unvaccinated controls in a 1:1 ratio according to demographic, clinical, and geographic characteristics. INTERVENTION: Follow-up for SARS-CoV-2 infection or SARS-CoV-2-related death, defined as death within 30 days of infection, began after the vaccination date or an identical index date for the matched unvaccinated controls and continued until up to 30 June 2021. MEASUREMENTS: Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection or SARS-CoV-2-related death. RESULTS: Vaccinated and unvaccinated groups were well matched; both were predominantly male (92.9% vs. 93.4%), had advanced age (mean, 68.7 years in both groups), had diverse racial and ethnic distribution (for example, Black: 17.3% vs. 17.0%, Hispanic: 6.5% vs. 6.1%), and had substantial comorbidity burden. Vaccine effectiveness 7 or more days after the second vaccine dose was 69% (95% CI, 67% to 70%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and 86% (CI, 82% to 89%) against SARS-CoV-2-related death and was similar when follow-up was extended to 31 March versus 30 June. Vaccine effectiveness against infection decreased with increasing age and comorbidity burden. LIMITATION: Predominantly male population and lack of data on SARS-CoV-2 variants. CONCLUSION: In an elderly, diverse, high-comorbidity population, COVID-19 VE against infection was substantially lower than previously reported, but VE against death was high. Complementary infection mitigation efforts remain important for pandemic control, even with vaccination. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine Boosters Against Infection, Hospitalization, and Death: A Target Trial Emulation in the Omicron (B.1.1.529) Variant Era.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose (booster dose) against the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant is uncertain, especially in older, high-risk populations. OBJECTIVE: To determine mRNA booster vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and death in the Omicron era by booster type, primary vaccine type, time since primary vaccination, age, and comorbidity burden. DESIGN: Retrospective matched cohort study designed to emulate a target trial of booster vaccination versus no booster, conducted from 1 December 2021 to 31 March 2022. SETTING: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs health care system. PARTICIPANTS: Persons who had received 2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses at least 5 months earlier. INTERVENTION: Booster monovalent mRNA vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech's BNT162b2 or Moderna's mRNA-1273) versus no booster. MEASUREMENTS: Booster VE. RESULTS: Each group included 490 838 well-matched persons, who were predominantly male (88%), had a mean age of 63.0 years (SD, 14.0), and were followed for up to 121 days (mean, 79.8 days). Booster VE more than 10 days after a booster dose was 42.3% (95% CI, 40.6% to 43.9%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection, 53.3% (CI, 48.1% to 58.0%) against SARS-CoV-2-related hospitalization, and 79.1% (CI, 71.2% to 84.9%) against SARS-CoV-2-related death. Booster VE was similar for different booster types (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273), age groups, and primary vaccination regimens but was significantly higher with longer time since primary vaccination and higher comorbidity burden. LIMITATION: Predominantly male population. CONCLUSION: Booster mRNA vaccination was highly effective in preventing death and moderately effective in preventing infection and hospitalization for up to 4 months after administration in the Omicron era. Increased uptake of booster vaccination, which is currently suboptimal, should be pursued to limit the morbidity and mortality of SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially in persons with high comorbidity burden. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Trends in Robot-Assisted Procedures for General Surgery in the Veterans Health Administration.

INTRODUCTION: Implementation of robot-assisted procedures is growing. Utilization within the country's largest healthcare network, the Veterans Health Administration, is unclear. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using data from the Department of Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse from January 2015 through December 2019. Trends in robot utilization for cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair, and inguinal hernia repair were characterized nationally and regionally by Veterans Integrated Services Network. Patients, who underwent laparoscopic repairs for these procedures and open hernia repairs, were included to determine proportion performed robotically. RESULTS: We identified 119,191 patients, of which 5689 (4.77%) received a robotic operation. The proportion of operations performed robotically increased from 1.49% to 10.55% (7.08-fold change; slope, 2.14% per year; 95% confidence interval [0.79%, 3.49%]). Ventral hernia repair had the largest growth in robotic procedures (1.51% to 13.94%; 9.23-fold change; slope, 2.86% per year; 95% confidence interval [1.04%, 4.68%]). Regions with the largest increase in robotic utilization were primarily along the Northeast, Midwest, and West Coast. CONCLUSIONS: Robot utilization in general surgery is increasing at different rates across the United States in the Veterans Health Administration. Future studies should investigate the regional disparities and drivers of this approach.

Robot-Assisted General Surgery Procedures at the Veterans Health Administration: A Comparison of Surgical Techniques.

INTRODUCTION: The use of the robot in general surgery has exploded in the last decade. The Veterans Health Administration presents a unique opportunity to study differences between surgical approaches due to the ability to control for health system and insurance variability. This study compares clinical outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic or open techniques for three general surgery procedures. METHODS: A retrospective observational study using the Veterans Affair Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Operative time, length of stay, and complications were compared for cholecystectomy (robot-assisted versus laparoscopic), ventral, and inguinal hernia repair (robot-assisted versus laparoscopic or open) from 2015 to 2019. RESULTS: More than 80,000 cases were analyzed (21,652 cholecystectomy, 9214 ventral hernia repairs, and 51,324 inguinal hernia repairs). Median operative time was longer for all robot-assisted approaches as compared to laparoscopic or open techniques with the largest difference seen between open and robot-assisted primary ventral hernia repair (unadjusted difference of 93 min, P < 0.001). Median length of stay was between 1 and 4 d and significantly for robot-assisted ventral hernia repairs (versus open, P < 0.01; versus lap for recurrent hernia, P < 0.05). Specific postoperative outcomes of interest were overall low with few differences between techniques. CONCLUSIONS: While the robotic platform was associated with longer operative time, these findings must be interpreted in the context of a learning curve and indications for use (i.e., use of the robot for technically challenging cases). Our findings suggest that at the Veterans Health Administration, the robot is as safe a platform for common general surgery procedures as traditional approaches. Future studies should focus on patient-centered outcomes including pain and cosmesis.

Hospital Readmissions Among Veterans Within 90 Days of Discharge Following Initial Hospitalization for COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Some patients experience ongoing sequelae after discharge, including rehospitalization; therefore, outcomes following COVID-19 hospitalization are of continued interest. We examined readmissions within 90 days of hospital discharge for veterans hospitalized with COVID-19 during the first 10 months of the pandemic in the US. METHODS: Veterans hospitalized with COVID-19 at a Veterans Health Administration (VA) hospital from March 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020 were followed for 90 days after discharge to determine readmission rates. RESULTS: Of 20,414 veterans hospitalized with COVID-19 during this time period, 13% (n = 2,643) died in the hospital. Among survivors (n = 17,771), 16% (n = 2,764) were readmitted within 90 days of discharge, with a mean time to readmission of 21.6 days (SD = 21.1). Characteristics of the initial COVID-19 hospitalization associated with readmission included length of stay, mechanical ventilator use, higher comorbidity index score, current smoking, urban residence, discharged against medical advice, and hospitalized from September through December 2020 versus March through August 2020 (all P values <.02). Veterans readmitted from September through December 2020 were more often White, lived in a rural or highly rural area, and had shorter initial hospitalizations than veterans hospitalized earlier in the year. CONCLUSION: Approximately 1 of 6 veterans discharged alive following a COVID-19 hospitalization from March 1 through December 31, 2020, were readmitted within 90 days. The longer the hospital stay, the greater the likelihood of readmission. Readmissions also were more likely when the initial admission required mechanical ventilation, or when the veteran had multiple comorbidities, smoked, or lived in an urban area. COVID-19 hospitalizations were shorter from September through December 2020, suggesting that hospital over-capacity may have resulted in earlier discharges and increased readmissions. Efforts to monitor and provide support for patients discharged in high bed-capacity situations may help avoid readmissions.

Changes in the associations of race and rurality with SARS-CoV-2 infection, mortality, and case fatality in the United States from February 2020 to March 2021: A population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: We examined whether key sociodemographic and clinical risk factors for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and mortality changed over time in a population-based cohort study. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In a cohort of 9,127,673 persons enrolled in the United States Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system, we evaluated the independent associations of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics with SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 216,046), SARS-CoV-2-related mortality (n = 10,230), and case fatality at monthly intervals between February 1, 2020 and March 31, 2021. VA enrollees had a mean age of 61 years (SD 17.7) and were predominantly male (90.9%) and White (64.5%), with 14.6% of Black race and 6.3% of Hispanic ethnicity. Black (versus White) race was strongly associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 5.10, [95% CI 4.65 to 5.59], p-value <0.001), mortality (AOR 3.85 [95% CI 3.30 to 4.50], p-value < 0.001), and case fatality (AOR 2.56, 95% CI 2.23 to 2.93, p-value < 0.001) in February to March 2020, but these associations were attenuated and not statistically significant by November 2020 for infection (AOR 1.03 [95% CI 1.00 to 1.07] p-value = 0.05) and mortality (AOR 1.08 [95% CI 0.96 to 1.20], p-value = 0.21) and were reversed for case fatality (AOR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.95, p-value = 0.005). American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN versus White) race was associated with higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in April and May 2020; this association declined over time and reversed by March 2021 (AOR 0.66 [95% CI 0.51 to 0.85] p-value = 0.004). Hispanic (versus non-Hispanic) ethnicity was associated with higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality during almost every time period, with no evidence of attenuation over time. Urban (versus rural) residence was associated with higher risk of infection (AOR 2.02, [95% CI 1.83 to 2.22], p-value < 0.001), mortality (AOR 2.48 [95% CI 2.08 to 2.96], p-value < 0.001), and case fatality (AOR 2.24, 95% CI 1.93 to 2.60, p-value < 0.001) in February to April 2020, but these associations attenuated over time and reversed by September 2020 (AOR 0.85, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.89, p-value < 0.001 for infection, AOR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.83, p-value < 0.001 for mortality and AOR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.93, p-value = 0.006 for case fatality). Throughout the observation period, high comorbidity burden, younger age, and obesity were consistently associated with infection, while high comorbidity burden, older age, and male sex were consistently associated with mortality. Limitations of the study include that changes over time in the associations of some risk factors may be affected by changes in the likelihood of testing for SARS-CoV-2 according to those risk factors; also, study results apply directly to VA enrollees who are predominantly male and have comprehensive healthcare and need to be confirmed in other populations. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that strongly positive associations of Black and AI/AN (versus White) race and urban (versus rural) residence with SARS-CoV-2 infection, mortality, and case fatality observed early in the pandemic were ameliorated or reversed by March 2021.

Burden and Cost of Caring for US Veterans With CKD: Initial Findings From the VA Renal Information System (VA-REINS).

Kidney disease is a common, complex, costly, and life-limiting condition. Most kidney disease registries or information systems have been limited to single institutions or regions. A national US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Renal Information System (VA-REINS) was recently developed. We describe its creation and present key initial findings related to chronic kidney disease (CKD) without kidney replacement therapy (KRT). Data from the VA's Corporate Data Warehouse were processed and linked with national Medicare data for patients with CKD receiving KRT. Operational definitions for VA user, CKD, acute kidney injury, and kidney failure were developed. Among 7 million VA users in fiscal year 2014, CKD was identified using either a strict or liberal operational definition in 1.1 million (16.4%) and 2.5 million (36.3%) veterans, respectively. Most were identified using an estimated glomerular filtration rate laboratory phenotype, some through proteinuria assessment, and very few through International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision coding. The VA spent ∼$18 billion for the care of patients with CKD without KRT, most of which was for CKD stage 3, with higher per-patient costs by CKD stage. VA-REINS can be leveraged for disease surveillance, population health management, and improving the quality and value of care, thereby enhancing VA's capacity as a patient-centered learning health system for US veterans.

Does Community Outsourcing Improve Timeliness of Care for Veterans With Obstructive Sleep Apnea?

BACKGROUND: Providing timely access to care has been a long-standing priority for the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System. Recent strategies to reduce long wait times have focused on purchasing community care by a fee-for-service model. Whether outsourcing Veterans Affairs (VA) specialty care to the community improves access is unclear. OBJECTIVES: We compared time from referral to treatment among Veterans whose care was provided by VA versus community care purchased by the VA, using obstructive sleep apnea as an example condition. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of Northern California Veterans seeking sleep apnea care through the San Francisco VA Healthcare System between 2012 and 2018. We used multivariable linear regression with propensity score matching to investigate the relationship between time to care delivery and care setting (VA provided vs. VA-purchased community care). A total of 1347 Northern California Veterans who completed sleep apnea testing within the VA and 88 Veterans who completed sleep apnea testing in the community had complete data for analysis. RESULTS: Among Northern California Veterans with obstructive sleep apnea, outsourcing of care to the community was associated with longer time from referral to therapy (mean±SD, 129.6±82.8 d with VA care vs. 252.0±158.8 d with community care, P<0.001) and greater loss to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that purchasing community care may lead to care fragmentation and not improve wait times nor improve access to subspecialty care for Veterans.

Veterans' Use of Veterans Health Administration Primary Care in an Era of Expanding Choice.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Choice Program (VCP), aimed at improving access to care, included expanded options for Veterans to receive primary care through community providers. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to characterize and compare Veterans use of Veterans Health Administration (VA) primary care services at VA facilities and through a VA community care network (VA-CCN) provider. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was a retrospective, observational over fiscal years (FY) 2015-2018. SUBJECTS: Veterans receiving primary care services paid for by the VA. MEASURES: Veteran demographic, socioeconomic and clinical factors and use of VA primary care services under the VCP each year. RESULTS: There were 6.3 million Veterans with >54 million VA primary care visits, predominantly (98.5% of visits) at VA facility. The proportion of VA-CCN visits increased in absolute terms from 0.7% in 2015 to 2.6% in 2018. Among Veterans with any VA-CCN primary care, the proportion of VA-CCN visits increased from 22.6% to 55.3%. Logistic regression indicated that Veterans who were female, lived in rural areas, had a driving distance >40 miles, had health insurance or had a psychiatric/depression condition were more likely to receive VA-CCN primary care. Veterans who were older, identified as Black race, required to pay VA copayments, or had a higher Nosos score, were less likely to receive VA-CCN primary care. CONCLUSION: As the VA transitions from the VCP to MISSION and VA facilities gain experience under the new contracts, attention to factors that impact Veterans' use of primary care services in different settings are important to monitor to identify access barriers and to ensure Veterans' health care needs are met.

Comparing VA and Community-Based Care: Trends in Sleep Studies Following the Veterans Choice Act.

BACKGROUND: To address concerns about access to care, the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 was enacted to make care available in the community when Veterans Health Administration (VA) care was unavailable or not timely. This paper examined VA referrals for diagnostic sleep studies from federal fiscal year (FY) 2015-2018. DESIGN: Sleep studies completed between FY2015 and 2018 for Veterans tested within VA facilities (VAF) or referred to VA community care (VACC) providers were identified using VA administrative data files. Sleep studies were divided into laboratory and home studies. KEY RESULTS: The number of sleep studies conducted increased over time; the proportion of home studies increased in VAF (32 to 47%). Veterans were more likely to be referred for a sleep study to VACC if they lived in a rural or highly rural area (ORs = 1.47 and 1.55, respectively), and had public or public and private insurance (ORs = 2.01 and 1.35), and were less likely to be referred to VACC if they were age 65+ (OR = 0.72) and were in the highest utilization risk based on Nosos score (OR = 0.78). Regression analysis of sleep study type revealed that lab studies were much more likely for VACC referrals (OR = 3.16), for persons living in rural areas (OR = 1.21), with higher comorbidity scores (OR = 1.28) and for ages 44-54, 55 to 64, and 65+ (ORs = 1.12, 1.28, 1.45, respectively) compared to younger Veterans. Veterans with some or full VA copayments (ORs = 0.91 and 0.86, respectively), and overweight Veterans (OR = 0.94) were less likely to have lab studies. CONCLUSIONS: The number of sleep studies performed on Veterans increased from 2015 to 2018. Access to sleep studies improved through a combination of providing care through the Veteran Choice Program, predominantly used by rural Veterans, and increased use of home sleep studies by VA.

Integrating a Medical Home in an Outpatient Dialysis Setting: Effects on Health-Related Quality of Life.

BACKGROUND: Integrating primary care has been proposed to reduce fragmented care delivery for patients with complex medical needs. Because of their high rates of morbidity, healthcare use, and mortality, patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) may benefit from increased access to a primary care medical home. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of integrating a primary care medical home on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for patients with ESKD receiving chronic hemodialysis. DESIGN: Before-after intervention trial with repeated measures at two Chicago dialysis centers. PARTICIPANTS: Patients receiving hemodialysis at either of the two centers. INTERVENTION: To the standard hemodialysis team (nephrologist, nurse, social worker, dietitian), we added a primary care physician, a pharmacist, a nurse coordinator, and a community health worker. The intervention took place from January 2015 through August 2016. MAIN MEASURES: Health-related quality of life, using the Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQOL) measures. KEY RESULTS: Of 247 eligible patients, 175 (71%) consented and participated; mean age was 54 years; 55% were men and 97% were African American or Hispanic. In regression analysis adjusted for individual visits with the medical home providers and other factors, there were significant improvements in four of five KDQOL domains: at 12 and 18 months, the Mental Component Score improved from baseline (adjusted mean 49.0) by 2.64 (p = 0.01) and 2.96 (p = 0.007) points, respectively. At 6 and 12 months, the Symptoms domain improved from baseline (adjusted mean = 77.0) by 2.61 (p = 0.02) and 2.35 points (p = 0.05) respectively. The Kidney Disease Effects domain improved from baseline (adjusted mean = 72.7), to 6, 12, and 18 months by 4.36 (p = 0.003), 6.95 (p < 0.0001), and 4.14 (p = 0.02) points respectively. The Physical Component Score improved at 6 months only. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating primary care and enhancing care coordination in two dialysis facilities was associated with improvements in HRQOL among patients with ESKD who required chronic hemodialysis.