Differences in Prosthetic Prescription Between Men and Women Veterans After Transtibial or Transfemoral Lower-Extremity Amputation: A Longitudinal Cohort Study (2005-2018).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether prosthetic prescription differed by gender and the extent to which differences were mediated by measured factors. DESIGN: Retrospective longitudinal cohort study using data from Veterans Health Administration (VHA) administrative databases. SETTING: VHA patients throughout the United States. PARTICIPANTS: The sample included 20,889 men and 324 women who had an incident transtibial or transfemoral amputation between 2005 and 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time to prosthetic prescription (up to 1 year). We used parametric survival analysis (an accelerated failure time model) to assess gender differences. We estimated mediation effects of amputation level, pain comorbidity burden, medical comorbidities, depression, and marital status on time to prescription. RESULTS: In the 1 year after amputation, the proportion of women (54.3%) and men (55.7%) prescribed a prosthesis was similar. However, after we controlled for age, race, ethnicity, enrollment priority, VHA region, and service-connected disability, the time to prosthetic prescription was significantly faster among men compared with women (acceleration factor=0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.87). The difference in time to prosthetic prescription between men and women was significantly mediated by amputation level (23%), pain comorbidity burden (-14%), and marital status (5%) but not medical comorbidities or depression. CONCLUSIONS: Although the proportion of patients with prosthetic prescription at 1-year postamputation was similar between men and women, women received prosthetic prescriptions more slowly than men, suggesting that more work is needed to understand barriers to timely prosthetic prescriptions among women, and how to intervene to reduce those barriers.

Early Convalescent Plasma Therapy and Mortality Among US Veterans Hospitalized With Nonsevere COVID-19: An Observational Analysis Emulating a Target Trial.

BACKGROUND: Early convalescent plasma transfusion may reduce mortality in patients with nonsevere coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This study emulates a (hypothetical) target trial using observational data from a cohort of US veterans admitted to a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facility between 1 May and 17 November 2020 with nonsevere COVID-19. The intervention was convalescent plasma initiated within 2 days of eligibility. Thirty-day mortality was compared using cumulative incidence curves, risk differences, and hazard ratios estimated from pooled logistic models with inverse probability weighting to adjust for confounding. RESULTS: Of 11 269 eligible person-trials contributed by 4755 patients, 402 trials were assigned to the convalescent plasma group. Forty and 671 deaths occurred within the plasma and nonplasma groups, respectively. The estimated 30-day mortality risk was 6.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.0%-9.7%) in the plasma group and 6.2% (95% CI, 5.6%-7.0%) in the nonplasma group. The associated risk difference was 0.30% (95% CI, -2.30% to 3.60%) and the hazard ratio was 1.04 (95% CI, .64-1.62). CONCLUSIONS: Our target trial emulation estimated no meaningful differences in 30-day mortality between nonsevere COVID-19 patients treated and untreated with convalescent plasma. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04545047.

Evaluating the 8-item overactive bladder questionnaire (OAB-v8) using item response theory.

AIMS: The OAB-v8 is a patient-reported outcome questionnaire used to screen for overactive bladder and measure symptom bother. This study uses modern validation methods to assess the item and test characteristics of the OAB-v8, and determine whether it should be scored differently for men and women. METHODS: A secondary analysis of data from patients with lower urinary tract symptoms prospectively recruited from a urology clinic in Calgary, Canada. Item-response theory (IRT) was used to evaluate the dimensionality, reliability, and validity of the OAB-v8, and differential functioning analysis (DIF) was used to determine whether the OAB-v8 should be scored differently for men and women. RESULTS: A total of 1128 patients were included for analysis, of which 28% were female. Mean OAB-v8 scores indicated meaningful levels of symptom bother, and women scored 2 points higher, on average, than men (P = 0.005). Reliability was high (Cronbach's alpha = 0.901) for a wide range of patients (between -2 and 2.5 standard deviations of the mean). Samejima's graded response model best fit the data, and the scale demonstrated essential unidimensionality. Items #5 and #6 were excessively correlated. There was no evidence of differential functioning. CONCLUSIONS: OAB-v8 demonstrated high reliability and would be appropriate for a wide range of patients. Items #5 and #6 may need to be re-worded. The OAB-v8 should not be scored differently for men and women, although women do appear to experience higher average levels of symptom bother from OAB than men.

Evaluation of the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale (FIQL) using item response theory reveals limitations and suggests revisions.

PURPOSE: The Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale (FIQL) is a commonly used patient-reported outcome measure for fecal incontinence, often used in clinical trials, yet has not been validated in English since its initial development. This study uses modern methods to thoroughly evaluate the psychometric characteristics of the FIQL and its potential for differential functioning by gender. METHODS: This study analyzed prospectively collected patient-reported outcome data from a sample of patients prior to colorectal surgery. Patients were recruited from 14 general and colorectal surgeons in Vancouver Coastal Health hospitals in Vancouver, Canada. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess construct validity. Item response theory was used to evaluate test reliability, describe item-level characteristics, identify local item dependence, and test for differential functioning by gender. RESULTS: 236 patients were included for analysis, with mean age 58 and approximately half female. Factor analysis failed to identify the lifestyle, coping, depression, and embarrassment domains, suggesting lack of construct validity. Items demonstrated low difficulty, indicating that the test has the highest reliability among individuals who have low quality of life. Five items are suggested for removal or replacement. Differential test functioning was minimal. CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified specific improvements that can be made to each domain of the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale and to the instrument overall. Formatting, scoring, and instructions may be simplified, and items with higher difficulty developed. The lifestyle domain can be used as is. The embarrassment domain should be significantly revised before use.

Gender differences in prosthesis-related outcomes among veterans: Results of a national survey of U.S. veterans.

BACKGROUND: Women with lower extremity amputations (LEAs) tend to have poorer prosthesis-related outcomes than men, although the literature is sparse. To our knowledge, there are no prior studies examining prosthesis-related outcomes of women veterans with LEAs. OBJECTIVE: To examine gender differences (overall and by type of amputation) among veterans who underwent LEAs between 2005 and 2018, received care at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) prior to undergoing amputation, and were prescribed a prosthesis. It was hypothesized that compared to men, women would report lower satisfaction with prosthetic services, poorer prosthesis fit, lower prosthesis satisfaction, less prosthesis use, and worse self-reported mobility. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that gender differences in outcomes would be more pronounced among individuals with transfemoral than among those with transtibial amputations. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. Linear regressions were used to assess overall gender differences in outcomes and gender differences based on type of amputation in a national sample of veterans. SETTING: VHA medical centers. PARTICIPANTS: The sample consisted of 449 veterans who self-identified their gender (women = 165, men = 284) with transtibial (n = 236), transfemoral (n = 135), and bilateral LEAs (n = 68) including all amputation etiologies. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Orthotics and Prosthetics User's Survey, Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experiences Scale, and Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility-Short Form were used to assess satisfaction with prosthetic services, prosthesis fit, prosthesis satisfaction, prosthesis use, and self-reported mobility. RESULTS: Women had poorer self-reported mobility than men (d = -0.26, 95% confidence interval -0.49 to -0.02, p < .05); this difference was small. There were no statistically significant gender differences in satisfaction with prosthetic services, prosthesis fit, prosthesis satisfaction, daily hours of prosthesis use, or by amputation type. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to the hypothesis, prosthesis-related outcomes were similar between men and women with LEAs. Minimal differences may in part be due to receiving care from the VHA's integrated Amputation System of Care.

JAK inhibitors and black box warnings: what is the future for JAK inhibitors?

INTRODUCTION: Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have dramatically improved the treatment of various autoimmune and myeloproliferative disorders. Recently, concern has arisen regarding their safety in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. AREAS COVERED: Here, we provide a comprehensive summary of the major current and emerging JAKi and their indications, address recent studies on comparative safety, and provide insight into their future and use. We emphasize that the application of the research findings on a case-by-case basis should consider a patient's age, comorbidities, disease for which JAKi is being considered, disease activity, the JAKi target(s), alternate treatment options available for the patient, and the planned duration of JAKi. EXPERT OPINION: Rheumatologists are used to prescribing therapies in which a risk-to-benefit assessment is required as well as to screening and monitoring the safety of medications. Thus, rheumatologists are already practiced in applying specific criteria to effectively screen and monitor patients who are candidates for JAKi therapy. Ongoing research will help to clarify any mechanisms underlying differential safety signals between JAK and other therapies, what the balance between risk and efficacy is, who the susceptible subpopulations are, and whether safety signals are shared between different JAKis and across indications.

The Incidence of Diabetes Among 2,777,768 Veterans With and Without Recent SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

OBJECTIVE: To examine associations of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection/coronavirus disease 2019 with incident diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using Veterans Health Administration data. We defined all patients without preexisting diabetes with one or more nasal swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 (1 March 2020-10 March 2021; n = 126,710) as exposed and those with no positive swab and one or more laboratory tests (1 March 2020-31 March 2021; n = 2,651,058) as unexposed. The index date for patients exposed was the date of first positive swab and for patients unexposed a random date during the month of the qualifying laboratory test. We fit sex-stratified logistic regression models examining associations of SARS-CoV-2 with incident diabetes within 120 days and all follow-up time through 1 June 2021. A subgroup analysis was performed among hospitalized subjects only to help equalize laboratory surveillance. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 was associated with higher risk of incident diabetes, compared with no positive tests, among men (120 days, odds ratio [OR] 2.56 [95% CI 2.32-2.83]; all time, 1.95 [1.80-2.12]) but not women (120 days, 1.21 [0.88-1.68]; all time, 1.04 [0.82-1.31]). Among hospitalized participants, SARS-CoV-2 was associated with higher risk of diabetes at 120 days and at the end of follow-up in men (OR 1.42 [95% CI 1.22-1.65] and 1.32 [1.16-1.50], respectively) but not women (0.72 [0.34-1.52] and 0.80 [0.44-1.45]). Sex ∗ SARS-CoV-2 interaction P values were all <0.1. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 is associated with higher risk of incident diabetes in men but not in women even after greater surveillance related to hospitalization is accounted for.

Associations of statin use with 30-day adverse outcomes among 4 801 406 US Veterans with and without SARS-CoV-2: an observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate associations of statin use with hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality at 30 days among individuals with and without a positive test for SARS-CoV-2. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: US Veterans Health Administration (VHA). PARTICIPANTS: All veterans receiving VHA healthcare with ≥1 positive nasal swab for SARS-CoV-2 between 1 March 2020 and 10 March 2021 (cases; n=231 154) and a comparator group of controls comprising all veterans who did not have a positive nasal swab for SARS-CoV-2 but who did have ≥1 clinical lab test performed during the same time period (n=4 570 252). MAIN OUTCOMES: Associations of: (1) any statin use, (2) use of specific statins or (3) low-intensity/moderate-intensity versus high-intensity statin use at the time of positive nasal swab for SARS-CoV-2 (cases) or result of clinical lab test (controls) assessed from pharmacy records with hospitalisation, ICU admission and death at 30 days. We also examined whether associations differed between individuals with and without a positive test for SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Among individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, statin use was associated with lower odds of death at 30 days (OR 0.81 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.85)) but not with hospitalisation or ICU admission. Associations were similar comparing use of each specific statin to no statin. Compared with low-/moderate intensity statin use, high-intensity statin use was not associated with lower odds of ICU admission or death. Over the same period, associations of statin use with 30-day outcomes were significantly stronger among individuals without a positive test for SARS-CoV-2: hospitalisation OR 0.79 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.80), ICU admission OR 0.86 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.90) and death 0.60 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.62; p for interaction all <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Associations of statin use with lower adverse 30-day outcomes are weaker among individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 compared with individuals without a positive test, indicating that statins do not exert SARS-CoV-2 specific effects.

Risk factors for adverse outcomes among 35 879 veterans with and without diabetes after diagnosis with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Risk factors and mediators of associations of diabetes with COVID-19 outcomes are unclear. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We identified all veterans receiving Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare with ≥1 positive nasal swab for SARS-CoV-2 (28 February-31 July 2020; n=35 879). We assessed associations of diabetes (with and without insulin use) with hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or death at 30 days, and with hazard of death until the censoring date. Among participants with diabetes (n=13 863), we examined associations of hemoglobin A1c and antihyperglycemic medication use with COVID-19 outcomes. We estimated mediation between diabetes and outcomes by comorbidities (cardiovascular disease, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease), statin or ACE inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) use, and cardiac biomarkers (brain natriuretic peptide and troponin). RESULTS: Diabetes with and without insulin use was associated with greater odds of hospitalization, ICU admission, and death at 30 days, and with greater hazard of death compared with no diabetes (OR 1.73, 1.76 and 1.63, and HR 1.61; and OR 1.39, 1.49 and 1.33, and HR 1.37, respectively, all p<0.0001). Prior sulfonylurea use was associated with greater odds of hospitalization and prior insulin use with hospitalization and death among patients with diabetes; among all participants, statin use was associated with lower mortality and ARB use with lower odds of hospitalization. Cardiovascular disease-related factors mediated <20% of associations between diabetes and outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes is independently associated with adverse outcomes from COVID-19. Associations are only partially mediated by common comorbidities.

Prior Glucose-Lowering Medication Use and 30-Day Outcomes Among 64,892 Veterans With Diabetes and COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To identify preinfection risk factors for adverse outcomes among veterans with diabetes and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We identified all Veterans Health Administration patients with diabetes and one or more positive nasal swab(s) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (1 March 2020-10 March 2021) (n = 64,892). We examined associations of HbA1c and glucose-lowering medication use with hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mortality at 30 days using logistic regression models and during 4.4 months of follow-up (range <1-13.1) using proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Compared with HbA1c <7.0%, HbA1c ≥9.0% was associated with higher odds of hospitalization, ICU admission, and death at 30 days (odds ratio [OR] 1.27 [95% CI 1.19-1.35], 1.28 [95% CI 1.15-1.42], 1.30 [95% CI 1.17-1.44], respectively) as well as higher risk of death over 4.4 months (hazard ratio [HR] 1.22 [95% CI 1.12-1.32]). Insulin use was associated with higher odds of hospitalization, ICU admission, and death (OR 1.12 [95% CI 1.07-1.18], 1.12 [95% CI 1.04-1.22], and 1.18 [95% CI 1.09-1.27], respectively) and higher risk of death (HR 1.12 [95% CI 1.07-1.18]). Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1-RA), or angiotensin receptor blocker use were associated with lower odds of hospitalization (OR 0.92 [95% CI 0.85-0.99], 0.88 [95% CI 0.81-0.96], and 0.94 [95% CI 0.89-0.99], respectively). Metformin and SGLT2i use were associated with lower odds (OR 0.84 [95% CI 0.78-0.91], 0.82 [95% CI 0.72-0.94], respectively) and risk of death (HR 0.84 [95% CI 0.79-0.89], 0.82 [95% CI 0.74-0.92], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among veterans with diabetes and COVID-19, higher HbA1c and insulin use were directly associated with adverse outcomes, while use of a GLP1-RA, metformin, and SGLT2i was inversely associated.

Minimally Important Difference in the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score Among Patients Undergoing Hallux Valgus Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes are increasingly used as measures of effectiveness of interventions. To make the tools more useful, therapeutic thresholds known as minimally important differences have been developed. The objective of this study was to calculate minimally important differences for the domains of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score for hallux valgus surgery. METHODS: The study was based on a retrospective analysis of patients newly scheduled for bunion correction surgery and completing patient-reported outcomes between October 2013 and January 2018. This study used anchor- and distribution-based approaches to calculate the minimally important difference for the instrument's 5 domains. Confidence intervals were calculated for each approach. There were 91 participants included in the study. RESULTS: Using anchor- and distribution-based approaches, the minimally important difference for the pain domain ranged from 5.8 to 10.2, from 0.3 to 6.9 for the symptoms domain, 8.3 to 10.3 for the activities of daily living domain, 7.4 to 11.1 for the quality of life domain, and from 7.0 to 15.7 for the sports and recreation domain. Small differences in the activities of daily living domain may be more clinically important for patients with better function. DISCUSSION: The range of minimally important difference values for each domain indicate how the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score corresponded to bunion correction surgery. The sports and recreation domain showed considerable variability in the range of values and may be associated with the domain's lack of responsiveness. Overall, most minimally important difference values for the domains of FAOS ranged from above 4 to below 16. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative series.

Validation of the Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale Instrument for Preoperative Evaluation of End-Stage Ankle Arthritis Patients Using Item Response Theory.

BACKGROUND:: Significant ankle arthritis results in functional limitations and patient morbidity. There is a need to measure symptoms and the impact of interventions on patient's quality of life using valid and reliable patient-reported measurement instruments. The objective of this research was to validate the Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale instrument in the preoperative setting using factor analysis, item response theory, and differential item function methods. METHODS:: This research is based on secondary analysis of patients scheduled for ankle arthrodesis or total ankle replacement in Vancouver, Canada. Participants completed the instrument between September 2014 and August 2017. Item response theory was used to estimate item difficulty and discrimination parameters, controlling for study participants' underlying level of ankle function. Differential item function was examined for sex, age group, and surgery. There were 88 participants. RESULTS:: Modification indices suggested that item 10, "walking around the house," would better fit the pain domain rather than the disability domain. Items in the pain domain displayed a range of discrimination and difficulty. Items in the disability domain exhibited a range of discrimination, though the disability domain had low difficulty. Differential item functioning for sex, age group, and ankle arthrodesis or total ankle replacement appeared to be ignorable. CONCLUSION:: This evaluation of the Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale found the instrument to be a strong measure of the effect of pain and dysfunction among patients with end-stage ankle arthritis, even when removing items 7 and 8, supporting its prior use in numerous clinical studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:: Level II, prospective comparative study.