Predictors of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection Following High-Risk Exposure.

BACKGROUND: Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are recommended for COVID-19 prevention. However, the effectiveness of NPIs in preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission remains poorly quantified. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative design case-control study enrolling cases (testing positive for SARS-CoV-2) and controls (testing negative) with molecular SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test results reported to California Department of Public Health between 24 February-12 November, 2021. We used conditional logistic regression to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of case status among participants who reported contact with an individual known or suspected to have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 ("high-risk exposure") ≤14 days before testing. RESULTS: 751 of 1448 cases (52%) and 255 of 1443 controls (18%) reported high-risk exposures ≤14 days before testing. Adjusted odds of case status were 3.02-fold (95% confidence interval: 1.75-5.22) higher when high-risk exposures occurred with household members (vs. other contacts), 2.10-fold (1.05-4.21) higher when exposures occurred indoors (vs. outdoors only), and 2.15-fold (1.27-3.67) higher when exposures lasted ≥3 hours (vs. shorter durations) among unvaccinated and partially-vaccinated individuals; excess risk associated with such exposures was mitigated among fully-vaccinated individuals. Cases were less likely than controls to report mask usage during high-risk exposures (aOR = 0.50 [0.29-0.85]). The adjusted odds of case status was lower for fully-vaccinated (aOR = 0.25 [0.15-0.43]) participants compared to unvaccinated participants. Benefits of mask usage were greatest among unvaccinated and partially-vaccinated participants, and in interactions involving non-household contacts or interactions occurring without physical contact. CONCLUSIONS: NPIs reduced the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection following high-risk exposure. Vaccine effectiveness was substantial for partially and fully vaccinated persons.

Health technology assessment on cervical cancer screening, 2000-2014.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to conduct a review of health technology assessments (HTAs) in cervical cancer screening to highlight the most common metrics HTA agencies use to evaluate and recommend cervical cancer screening technologies. METHODS: The Center for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), MedLine, and national HTA agency databases were searched using keywords ("cervical cancer screening" OR "cervical cancer" OR "cervical screening") and "HTA" from January 2000 to October 2014. Non-English language reports without English summaries, non-HTA reports, HTAs unrelated to a screening intervention and HTAs without sufficient summaries available online were excluded. We used various National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) methods to extract key assessment criteria and to determine whether a change in screening practice was recommended. RESULTS: One hundred and ten unique HTA reports were identified; forty-four HTAs from seventeen countries met inclusion criteria. All reports evaluated technologies for use among women. Ten cervical screening technologies were identified either as an intervention or a comparator. The most common outcome metric evaluated was diagnostic accuracy, followed by economic effectiveness. Additional outcome metrics such as the use of adjunct testing, screening intervals, and age-specific testing were commonly evaluated. Nearly one-third (fifteen of forty-four) of HTAs recommended a change in practice. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights popular metrics used in HTAs for cervical cancer screening. Clinical and economic effectiveness metrics have been consistently assessed in HTAs, while the use of adjunct testing, screening intervals, and age-specific screening became increasingly prevalent from after 2007. Moreover, we observed an increase in optimized recommendations after 2007.

Mixed methods approach to examining the implementation experience of a phone-based survey for a SARS-CoV-2 test-negative case-control study in California.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the implementation of a test-negative design case-control study in California during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: Test-negative case-control study. METHODS: Between February 24, 2021 - February 24, 2022, a team of 34 interviewers called 38,470 Californians, enrolling 1,885 that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (cases) and 1,871 testing negative for SARS-CoV-2 (controls) for 20-minute telephone survey. We estimated adjusted odds ratios for answering the phone and consenting to participate using mixed effects logistic regression. We used a web-based anonymous survey to compile interviewer experiences. RESULTS: Cases had 1.29-fold (95% CI: 1.24-1.35) higher adjusted odds of answering the phone and 1.69-fold (1.56-1.83) higher adjusted odds of consenting to participate compared to controls. Calls placed from 4pm to 6pm had the highest adjusted odds of being answered. Some interviewers experienced mental wellness challenges interacting with participants with physical (e.g., food, shelter, etc.) and emotional (e.g., grief counseling) needs, and enduring verbal harassment from individuals called. CONCLUSIONS: Calls placed during afternoon hours may optimize response rate when enrolling controls to a case-control study during a public health emergency response. Proactive check-ins and continual collection of interviewer experience(s) and may help maintain mental wellbeing of investigation workforce. Remaining adaptive to the dynamic needs of the investigation team is critical to a successful study, especially in emergent public health crises, like that represented by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Clinical and economic burden of obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in the United States.

AIMS: Obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) is a disease of the cardiomyocyte in which dynamic left ventricular outflow track obstruction may lead to heart failure, valvular disease, and sudden death. Little is known about healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs associated with oHCM. This study investigated the clinical and economic burden of oHCM in patients with or without symptoms associated with oHCM. METHODS: We used the US IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental database to identify patients with oHCM (January 2009-March 2019). Control patients without cardiomyopathy were matched to each patient with oHCM based on age, sex, region, and index year (3:1 ratio). One-year HRU and cost data were compared between all oHCM, symptomatic oHCM, and asymptomatic oHCM subgroups, and their respective controls. RESULTS: Among 11,401 eligible patients with oHCM (mean age 57 years, 42% female), 5,667 (50%) were symptomatic (23% chest pain, 57% dyspnea, 29% fatigue, 17% syncope). oHCM was associated with significant increases in all-cause hospitalizations, hospital days, outpatient visits, and total healthcare costs (mean ± standard deviation: $26,929 ± 77,720 vs. $6,808 ± 25,712, p<.001) compared with matched controls. These differences were driven mainly by the clinical and economic burden of symptomatic oHCM, which was associated with significant increases in 1-year hospitalization rates (38.0 vs. 6.9%), hospital days (3.7 ± 9.9 vs. 0.4 ± 3.0), and total healthcare costs ($43,586 ± 103,756 vs. $6,768 ± 27,618; all p<.001). Adjustment for comorbidities had minimal impact on these differences. LIMITATIONS: The use of claims data relies on International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9 and ICD-10) diagnosis codes, which might be inaccurate. Only commercially insured patients were included. CONCLUSION: In a real-world population, oHCM was associated with substantial increases in HRU and incremental costs of ∼$20,000/year when compared with matched controls-a difference that increased to ∼$35,000/year among symptomatic patients. Further studies are warranted to understand the potential impact of specific therapies on HRU and the economic burden of oHCM.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARYObstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) is a medical condition in which the heart muscle becomes abnormally thick and can cause partial blockage of blood flow out of the heart. Some patients experience symptoms (such as shortness of breath, chest pain, and fatigue) from this condition while others do not. Little is known about the healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs associated with oHCM, and if there are any differences between patients with oHCM who experience symptoms versus those who are asymptomatic. Therefore, we performed a study to investigate the clinical and economic burden of oHCM in patients with or without symptoms associated with oHCM. Based on insurance claims data, ∼50% of all patients with diagnosed oHCM are symptomatic. Symptomatic patients experience nearly 8 times as many hospitalizations and cost the healthcare system >$35,000 per year more than matched controls. In contrast, asymptomatic patients with oHCM have a much smaller difference in HRU and costs (∼$3,600/year) compared with matched controls. The results of this study suggest that effective therapies for oHCM may provide economic value, even if the impact of therapy is limited solely to the relief of symptoms.

Total cost of care for castration-resistant prostate cancer in a commercially insured population and a medicare supplemental insured population.

Background: The total cost of healthcare for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is an important component for assessing value of treatment options. The need for real-world evidence has increased with the introduction of oral targeted therapies for metastatic and nonmetastatic disease. In this study, we examined patient healthcare costs during periods of nonmetastatic CRPC (nmCRPC) and metastatic CRPC (mCRPC).Methods: This retrospective cohort study captured data from claims in the Truven Health MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental (Medigap) databases (1/1/2012-12/31/2016). Male patients (≥18 years) with ≥1 prostate cancer diagnosis, a subsequent metastatic diagnosis, and prescription claim for an mCRPC-indicated therapy (index date) were included. Patients were considered to have nmCRPC during the 12-month period prior to mCRPC if they had ≥1 claim for androgen deprivation therapy. Unadjusted all-cause healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and associated costs in 2016 USD per patient per year (PPPY) were determined for nmCRPC and mCRPC periods.Results: Patients included from the Commercial database (N = 449) had an average age of 59.4 ± 4.5 (standard deviation) years and a mean Quan Charlson Comorbidity Index (QCI) score of 2.8 ± 1.6. Among patients included from the Medigap database (N = 1,173), the mean age was 78.6 ± 7.2 years and mean QCI score was 3.3 ± 2.0. Across all healthcare resource types, HRU was approximately 1.5-2.5 times greater after a diagnosis of metastasis for both study populations. For commercially insured patients, total all-cause healthcare costs increased 6.2-fold from the nmCRPC to mCRPC periods ($29,192 to $182,156 PPPY). Likewise, among Medigap patients, total all-cause healthcare costs increased 5.1-fold from the nmCRPC to mCRPC periods ($27,549 to $139,847).Conclusions: In this study, the cost of care during 2012-2016 was substantially higher for mCRPC than nmCRPC, underscoring the value of interventions that may delay progression to metastases in high-risk individuals.