Improved Health Outcomes in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Following Early Belimumab Initiation Without Prior Immunosuppressant Use: A Real-World Descriptive Study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have variable treatment pathways, including antimalarials, glucocorticoids, immunosuppressants, and/or biologics. This study describes differences in clinical outcomes when initiating belimumab (BEL) before and after immunosuppressant use. METHODS: This real-world, retrospective cohort study (GSK Study 217536) used de-identified administrative claims data from January 2015 to December 2022 in the Komodo Health Database. Adults with moderate/severe SLE initiating BEL (index date) were identified from January 2017 to May 2022, allowing a ≥ 24-month baseline period. Patients were stratified into those initiating BEL before immunosuppressant use (no immunosuppressant use within 24 months before index) and those initiating BEL after immunosuppressant use (one immunosuppressant used within 24 months before index). Oral glucocorticoid (OGC) use, SLE flares, new organ damage, and all-cause healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) were analyzed descriptively over a 24-month follow-up. RESULTS: Baseline SLE severity was similar for patients initiating BEL before (n = 2295) versus after (n = 4114) immunosuppressant use (moderate, 83.1% vs 79.0%; severe, 16.8% vs 21.0%). Patients initiating BEL before versus after immunosuppressant use had lower SLE flare rates and OGC use. Post-index, patients initiating BEL before versus after immunosuppressant use discontinued their OGC sooner (moderate baseline SLE, 4.5 vs 8.9 months; severe baseline SLE, 6.2 vs 11.6 months). Patients initiating BEL before versus after immunosuppressant use had lower SLE flare rates per person-year at all time points (especially severe flare rates in patients with severe baseline SLE, 0.70 vs 1.48 through 24 months post-index). Median time to new organ damage occurrence was longer in patients initiating BEL before versus after immunosuppressant use (moderate baseline SLE, 32.1 vs 26.7 months; severe baseline SLE, 22.7 vs 21.6 months). All-cause HCRU was similar between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that patients initiating BEL before versus after immunosuppressant use had more favorable outcomes.

Training labor and treatment behavior: Evidence from physician residency programs.

Public and private investments in physician human capital support a healthcare workforce to provide future medical services nationwide. Yet, little is known about how introducing training labor influences hospitals' provision of care. We leverage all-payer data and emergency medicine (EM) and obstetrics (OBGYN) residency program debuts to estimate local access and treatment intensity effects. We find that the introduction of EM programs coincides with less treatment intensity and suggestive increases in throughput. OBGYN programs adopt the pre-existing surgical tendencies of the hospital but may also relax some capacity constraints-allowing the marginal mother to avoid a riskier nearby hospital.

Postacute Care for Medicare Advantage Enrollees Who Switched to Traditional Medicare Compared With Those Who Remained in Medicare Advantage.

Importance: Medicare Advantage (MA) plans receive capitated per enrollee payments that create financial incentives to provide care more efficiently than traditional Medicare (TM); however, incentives could be associated with MA plans reducing use of beneficial services. Postacute care can improve functional status, but it is costly, and thus may be provided differently to Medicare beneficiaries by MA plans compared with TM. Objective: To estimate the association of MA compared with TM enrollment with postacute care use and postdischarge outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a cohort study using Medicare data on 4613 hospitalizations among retired Ohio state employees and 2 comparison groups in 2015 and 2016. The study investigated the association of a policy change with use of postacute care and outcomes. The policy changed state retiree health benefits in Ohio from a mandatory MA plan to subsidies for either supplemental TM coverage or an MA plan. After policy implementation, approximately 75% of retired Ohio state employees switched to TM. Hospitalizations for 3 high-volume conditions that usually require postacute rehabilitation were assessed. Data from the Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files were used to identify all hospitalizations in short-term acute care hospitals. Difference-in-difference regressions were used to estimate changes for retired Ohio state employees compared with other 2015 MA enrollees in Ohio and with Kentucky public retirees who were continuously offered a mandatory MA plan. Data analyses were performed from September 1, 2019, to November 30, 2023. Exposures: Enrollment in Ohio state retiree health benefits in 2015, after which most members shifted to TM. Main Outcomes and Measures: Received care in an inpatient rehabilitation facility, skilled nursing facility, or home health, or any postacute care; the occurrence of any hospital readmission; the number of days in the community during the 30 days after hospital discharge; and mortality. Results: The study sample included 2373 hospitalizations for Ohio public retirees, 1651 hospitalizations for other Humana MA enrollees in Ohio, and 589 hospitalizations for public retirees in Kentucky. After the 2016 policy implementation, the percentage of hospitalizations covered by MA decreased by 70.1 (95% CI, -74.2 to -65.9) percentage points (pp), inpatient rehabilitation facility admissions increased by 9.7 (95% CI, 4.7 to 14.7) pp, use of only home health or skilled nursing facility care fell by 8.6 (95% CI, -14.6 to -2.6) pp, and days in the community fell by 1.6 (95% CI, -2.9 to -0.3) days for Ohio public retirees compared with other Humana MA enrollees in Ohio. There was no change in 30-day mortality or hospital readmissions; similar results were found by comparisons using Kentucky public retirees as a control group. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study indicate that after a change in retiree health benefits, most Ohio public retirees shifted from MA to TM and received more intensive postacute care with no significant change in measured short-term postdischarge outcomes. Future work should consider additional measures of postacute functional status over a longer follow-up period.

Effects of employer-offered high-deductible plans on low-value spending in the privately insured population.

Enrollment in plans with high deductibles has increased more than seven-fold in the last decade. Proponents of these plans argue that high deductibles could reduce wasteful spending by providing patients with incentives to limit use of low-value services that offer little or no clinical benefit. Others are concerned that patients may respond to these incentives by reducing their use of medical services indiscriminately and regardless of clinical benefit, which may negatively impact health outcomes. This study uses individual-level insurance claims data (2008-2013) and plausibly exogenous changes in plan offerings within firms over time to estimate the intent-to-treat and local-average treatment effects of high-deductible plan offerings on spending on 24 low-value services received in the outpatient setting. We find that firm offer of a high-deductible plan leads to a 13.7% ($5.23) reduction in average enrollee spending on low-value outpatient services and a 5.2% ($105.77) reduction in overall outpatient spending. We also find reductions in spending on measures of low-value imaging and laboratory services. We find some evidence that offering high-deductible plans disproportionately reduces low-value spending relative to overall spending, indicating that deductibles may be a way to incentivize value-based decision making.

Impact of consumer-directed health plans on low-value healthcare.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of consumer-directed health plan (CDHP) enrollment on low-value healthcare spending. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a quasi-experimental analysis using insurance claims data from 376,091 patients aged 18 to 63 years continuously enrolled in a plan from a large national commercial insurer from 2011 to 2013. We measured spending on 26 low-value healthcare services that offer unclear or no clinical benefit. METHODS: Employing a difference-in-differences approach, we compared the change in spending on low-value services for patients switching from a traditional health plan to a CDHP with the change in spending on low-value services for matched patients remaining in a traditional plan. RESULTS: Switching to a CDHP was associated with a $231.60 reduction in annual outpatient spending (95% CI, -$341.65 to -$121.53); however, no significant reductions were observed in annual spending on the 26 low-value services (--$3.64; 95% CI, -$9.60 to $2.31) or on these low-value services relative to overall outpatient spending (-$7.86 per $10,000 in outpatient spending; 95% CI, -$18.43 to $2.72). Similarly, a small reduction was noted for low-value spending on imaging (-$1.76; 95% CI, -$3.39 to -$0.14), but not relative to overall imaging spending, and no significant reductions were noted in low-value laboratory spending. CONCLUSIONS: CDHPs in their current form may represent too blunt an instrument to specifically curtail low-value healthcare spending.

Less Intense Postacute Care, Better Outcomes For Enrollees In Medicare Advantage Than Those In Fee-For-Service.

Traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare's prospective payment systems for postacute care provide little incentive to coordinate care or control costs. In contrast, Medicare Advantage plans pay for postacute care out of monthly capitated payments and thus have stronger incentives to use it efficiently. We compared the use of postacute care in skilled nursing and inpatient rehabilitation facilities by enrollees in Medicare Advantage and FFS Medicare after hospital discharge for three high-volume conditions: lower extremity joint replacement, stroke, and heart failure. After accounting for differences in patient characteristics at discharge, we found lower intensity of postacute care for Medicare Advantage patients compared to FFS Medicare patients discharged from the same hospital, across all three conditions. Medicare Advantage patients also exhibited better outcomes than their FFS Medicare counterparts, including lower rates of hospital readmission and higher rates of return to the community. These findings suggest that payment reforms such as bundling in FFS Medicare may reduce the intensity of postacute care without adversely affecting patient health.