Effectiveness, utilisation and cost associated with implantable loop recorders versus external monitors after ischaemic or cryptogenic stroke.

OBJECTIVE: Implantable loop recorders (ILRs) are increasingly used for long-term rhythm monitoring after ischaemic and cryptogenic stroke, with the goal of detecting atrial fibrillation (AF) and subsequent initiation of oral anticoagulation to reduce risk of adverse clinical outcomes. There is a need to determine the effectiveness of different rhythm monitoring strategies in this context. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of individuals with commercial and Medicare Advantage insurance in Optum Labs Data Warehouse who had incident ischaemic or cryptogenic stroke and no prior cardiovascular implantable electronic device from 1 January 2016 to 30 June 2021. Patients were stratified by rhythm monitoring strategy: ILR, long-term continuous external cardiac monitor (>48 hours to 30 days) or Holter monitor (≤48 hours). The primary outcome was risk-adjusted all-cause mortality at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included new diagnosis of AF and oral anticoagulation, bleeding, and costs. RESULTS: Among 48 901 patients with ischaemic or cryptogenic stroke, 9235 received an ILR, 29 103 long-term continuous external monitor and 10 563 Holter monitor only. Mean age was 69.9 (SD 11.9) years and 53.5% were female. During the 12-month follow-up period, patients who received ILRs compared with those who received long-term continuous external monitors had a higher odds of new diagnosis of AF and oral anticoagulant initiation (adjusted OR 2.27, 95% CI 2.09 to 2.48). Compared with patients who received long-term continuous external monitors, those who received ILRs had similar 12-month mortality (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.12), with approximately $13 000 higher costs at baseline (including monitor cost) and $2500 higher costs during 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In this large real-world study of patients with ischaemic or cryptogenic stroke, ILR placement resulted in more diagnosis of AF and initiation of oral anticoagulation, but no difference in mortality compared with long-term continuous external monitors.

Teamwork measure relates to provider experience, burnout, and intent to stay.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a brief teamwork measure and determine how teamwork relates to provider experience, burnout, and work intentions. STUDY DESIGN: Survey of clinicians. METHODS: We analyzed data from Optum's 2019 biannual clinician survey, including a validated burnout measure and measures of provider experience and intent to stay. A 6-item measure of team effectiveness (TEAM) focused on efficiency, communication, continuous improvement, and leadership. Construct validity was assessed with content, reliability, and correlation with burnout. Generalized estimating equations with robust SEs determined relationships among TEAM score, provider experience, and intent to stay, controlling for demographics, clustering, and practice factors. RESULTS: Of 1500 physicians and advanced practice clinicians (1387 with complete data; response rate 56%), there were 58% in primary care; 57% were women, and 38% identified as Asian, Black/Hispanic, or another race/ethnicity other than White non-Hispanic. Burnout was present in 30%. The Cronbach α was excellent (0.86), and TEAM correlated with the validated burnout measure (adjusted odds ratio [OR] of lower burnout with high TEAM score, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19-0.40; P < .0001). Clinicians with TEAM scores of at least 4 were more likely to have positive provider experiences (79% favorable vs 24% with low TEAM score; P < .001), had lower burnout rates (17% vs 44%%; P < .001), and more often intended to stay (93% vs 65%; P < .001). TEAM index score was strongly associated with provider experience (adjusted OR, 11.72; 95% CI, 8.11-16.95; P < .001) and intent to stay (adjusted OR, 7.24; 95% CI, 5.34-9.83; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The TEAM index is related to provider experience, burnout, and intent to stay, and it may help organizations optimize clinical work environments.

In-home Visits and Subsequent Health Outcomes in Medicare Advantage Beneficiaries With Coronary Artery Disease, Diabetes, Hypertension, and Depression.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease, diabetes, hypertension, and depression are common burdensome conditions. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether multidimensional preventive in-home visits were associated with fewer emergency and inpatient care episodes and higher quality of care. RESEARCH DESIGN: An observational, retrospective data analysis. SUBJECTS: A nationwide Medicare Advantage population from the Optum Labs Data Warehouse. MEASURES: We compared beneficiaries with 1 or more of the conditions with an in-home visit in 2018 ("Exposure") with those without a visit in 2018 but with a future visit in 2019 ("Wait List Control") using a difference-in-differences analysis. Primary outcomes were 1-year all-cause inpatient care and emergency visit counts. Secondary outcomes included primary care visits, major adverse cardiovascular events, and select quality-of-care metrics. An exploratory outcome was the time-to-first primary care visit after the index date. RESULTS: Among those eligible to receive an in-home visit, a total of 48,566 patients had an in-home visit in 2018 (the "Exposure" group), and 36,549 beneficiaries constituted the "Wait List" control group. Receiving an in-home visit early was associated with a greater decrease in inpatient stays for all 4 conditions (change score range for any stay: -5.22% to -2.47%) (P<0.001, depression <0.05); decrease in emergency visits (change score range for any stay: -4.39% to -3.67%) (P<0.0.001, depression <0.05); and fewer major adverse cardiovascular events for coronary artery disease and depression (P<0.001 and <0.025, respectively) 1 year later. Minimal differences were noted for change in ambulatory and primary care visits, with no consistent increase in quality-of-care metrics. Time-to-first primary care visit was shorter for the "Exposure" versus the Wait List control group in all conditions (difference between 2.45 and 4.95 d). CONCLUSIONS: The feasibility and impact of a nationwide multidimensional preventive in-home visit were demonstrated, targeting common and high morbidity conditions. Benefits were observed against a Wait List control group, resulting in less resource-intense care.

Long-term Outcomes in Use of Opioids, Nonpharmacologic Pain Interventions, and Total Costs of Spinal Cord Stimulators Compared With Conventional Medical Therapy for Chronic Pain.

Importance: Spinal cord stimulators (SCSs) are increasingly used for the treatment of chronic pain. There is a need for studies with long-term follow-up. Objective: To determine the comparative effectiveness and costs of SCSs compared with conventional medical management (CMM) in a large cohort of patients with chronic pain. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a 1:5 propensity-matched retrospective comparative effectiveness research analysis of insured individuals from April 1, 2016, to August 31, 2018. This study used administrative claims data, including longitudinal medical and pharmacy claims, from US commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollees 18 years or older in Optum Labs Data Warehouse. Patients with incident diagnosis codes for failed back surgery syndrome, complex regional pain syndrome, chronic pain syndrome, and other chronic postsurgical back and extremity pain were included in this study. Data were analyzed from February 1, 2021, to August 31, 2022. Exposures: SCSs or CMM. Main Outcomes and Measures: Surrogate measures for primary chronic pain treatment modalities, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic pain interventions (epidural and facet corticosteroid injections, radiofrequency ablation, and spine surgery), as well as total costs. Results: In the propensity-matched population of 7560 patients, mean (SD) age was 63.5 (12.5) years, 3080 (40.7%) were male, and 4480 (59.3%) were female. Among matched patients, during the first 12 months, patients treated with SCSs had higher odds of chronic opioid use (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.29) compared with patients treated with CMM but lower odds of epidural and facet corticosteroid injections (aOR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.39-0.51), radiofrequency ablation (aOR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.44-0.72), and spine surgery (aOR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61-0.85). During months 13 to 24, there was no significant difference in chronic opioid use (aOR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.94-1.20), epidural and facet corticosteroid injections (aOR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.87-1.14), radiofrequency ablation (aOR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.66-1.09), or spine surgery (aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.75-1.09) with SCS use compared with CMM. Overall, 226 of 1260 patients (17.9%) treated with SCS experienced SCS-related complications within 2 years, and 279 of 1260 patients (22.1%) had device revisions and/or removals, which were not always for complications. Total costs of care in the first year were $39 000 higher with SCS than CMM and similar between SCS and CMM in the second year. Conclusions and Relevance: In this large, real-world, comparative effectiveness research study comparing SCS and CMM for chronic pain, SCS placement was not associated with a reduction in opioid use or nonpharmacologic pain interventions at 2 years. SCS was associated with higher costs, and SCS-related complications were common.

Comparison of Care Quality Metrics in 2-Sided Risk Medicare Advantage vs Fee-for-Service Medicare Programs.

Importance: Medicare Advantage is associated with improved health outcomes, increased care efficiency, and lower out-of-pocket costs compared with fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare. When engaged in 2-sided risk arrangements, physicians are incented to offer high value for patients; however, no studies have explored the quality and efficiency outcomes in 2-sided risk Medicare Advantage models compared with FFS Medicare. Objective: To compare quality and efficiency of care between physicians using a Medicare Advantage 2-sided risk model and FFS Medicare. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort analysis with exact and propensity score-matched design used claims data from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019. Participants included beneficiaries enrolled in a Medicare Advantage 2-sided risk model (ie, physicians assumed the financial risk of total costs of care) and those in an FFS Medicare program in a 5% limited data set with part A and B coverage residing in 6 states (Arizona, California, Florida, Nevada, Texas, and Utah). Data were analyzed from February 1 to June 15, 2022. Exposures: Medicare Advantage 2-sided risk model seen in practices that are part of a nationwide health care delivery organization compared with traditional FFS Medicare. Main Outcomes and Measures: Comparative analysis of 8 quality and efficiency metrics in populations enrolled in a 2-sided risk-model Medicare Advantage program and 5% FFS Medicare. Results: In this analytic cohort of 316 312 individuals (158 156 in each group), 46.11% were men and 53.89% were women; 32.72% were aged 65-69 years, 29.44% were aged 70-74 years, 19.05% were aged 75-79 years, 10.84% were aged 80-85 years, and 7.95% were 85 years or older. The Medicare Advantage model was associated with care of higher quality and efficiency in all 8 metrics compared with the FFS model. This included lower odds of inpatient admission (-18%; odds ratio [OR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.79-0.84]), inpatient admission through the emergency department (ED) (-6%; OR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.91-0.97]), ED visits (-11%; OR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.86-0.91]), avoidable ED visits (-14%; OR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.82-0.89]), 30-day inpatient readmission (-9%; rate ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.86-0.98]), admission for stroke or myocardial infarction (-10%; OR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.83-0.98]), and hospitalization for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma exacerbation (-44%; OR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.50-0.62]). Conclusions and Relevance: The improvements observed in this study may be partly or fully attributed to the Medicare Advantage model. The Medicare Advantage risk adjustment system appears to be meeting its intended goal by aligning the capitation payments to the health care burden of the individual beneficiary and aggregate population served, thus providing revenue to develop infrastructure that supports improvements in quality and efficiency for the patients enrolled in Medicare Advantage models with 2-sided risk.

Peripheral Artery Disease Screening in the Community and 1-Year Mortality, Cardiovascular Events, and Adverse Limb Events.

Introduction: This study aimed to examine all-cause mortality, 1- and 2-year major cardiovascular events, and major adverse limb events in individuals aged ≥65 years who received an in-home health visit with peripheral artery disease screening. In addition, we compared 1-year healthcare utilization before and after peripheral artery disease screening for those who screened positive. Setting/Participants: Medicare Advantage beneficiaries aged ≥65 years participating in the Optum HouseCalls program in the U.S. between April 1, 2017 and February 1, 2019 were included. Intervention: The intervention consisted of a peripheral artery disease screening program using a plethysmography system. Main outcome measures: One-year all-cause mortality as a landmark analysis, 1- and 2-year major cardiovascular events, and major adverse limb events after screening were compared by peripheral artery disease screen status using claims data. We compared cardiovascular medications and revascularization procedures between the year before and after the peripheral artery disease screening event for those with peripheral artery disease. Results: Of 192,500 beneficiaries, 27.7% screened positive. One-year all-cause mortality rates for those who screened positive for peripheral artery disease versus those who screened negative were higher (1.51% vs 0.89%; p<0.001; adjusted hazard ratio=1.21; 95% CI=1.08, 1.36) as well as 1-year major cardiovascular events (5.54% vs 3.60%; adjusted hazard ratio= 1.22; 95% CI=1.15, 1.30) and major adverse limb events (0.23% vs 0.04%; adjusted hazard ratio=3.15; 95% CI=2.10, 4.73). Similar risks were observed for 2-year results. Before and after peripheral artery disease screening, medications remained stable for those who screened positive (e.g., statin therapy=54.2% vs 56.6%); rates of peripheral vascular interventions remained stable (0.0% vs 0.1%). Conclusions: A national peripheral artery disease screening effort is feasible. Detecting previously undiagnosed peripheral artery disease is a way to risk stratify a population that would benefit from further cardiovascular risk management.

Using a Claims-Based Framework to Identify Severe Maternal Morbidities in a Commercially Insured US Population.

Many severe maternal morbidities (SMMs) are preventable, and understanding circumstances in which complications occur is crucial. The objective was to evaluate a framework for SMM benchmarking and quality improvement opportunities. Building upon metrics defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on the basis of an inpatient sample, analysis included indicators across 5 domains (Hemorrhage/Transfusion, Preeclampsia/Eclampsia, Cardiovascular, Sepsis, and Thromboembolism/Cerebrovascular). Morbidity rates per 10 000 deliveries were calculated using de-identified administrative claims in commercially insured women in the United States. Longitudinal data linked inpatient delivery episodes and 6-week postpartum period, and SMMs were assessed for present on admission and geographic variation. This retrospective analysis of 356 838 deliveries identified geographic variation in SMMs. For example, hemorrhage rates per 10 000 varied 3-fold across states from 279.7 in Alabama to 964.69 in Oregon. Administrative claims can be used to calculate SMM rates, identify geographic variations, and assess problems locally, nationally, and across payers. Identifying conditions present on admission and a postpartum window is valuable in differentiating events occurring during preadmission, inpatient stay, and postpartum periods. Targeting preventable SMMs through local and hospital-level interventions and limiting SMM progression through postdischarge monitoring may reduce the prevalence of SMM and postpartum complications.

Beyond Gender Identity Disorder Diagnoses Codes: An Examination of Additional Methods to Identify Transgender Individuals in Administrative Databases.

BACKGROUND: Large administrative databases often do not capture gender identity data, limiting researchers' ability to identify transgender people and complicating the study of this population. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop methods for identifying transgender people in a large, national dataset for insured adults. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was a retrospective analysis of administrative claims data. After using gender identity disorder (GID) diagnoses codes, the current method for identifying transgender people in administrative data, we used the following 2 strategies to improve the accuracy of identifying transgender people that involved: (1) Endocrine Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (Endo NOS) codes and a transgender-related procedure code; or (2) Receipt of sex hormones not associated with the sex recorded in the patient's chart (sex-discordant hormone therapy) and an Endo NOS code or transgender-related procedure code. SUBJECTS: Seventy-four million adults 18 years and above enrolled at some point in commercial or Medicare Advantage plans from 2006 through 2017. RESULTS: We identified 27,227 unique transgender people overall; 18,785 (69%) were identified using GID codes alone. Using Endo NOS with a transgender-related procedure code, and sex-discordant hormone therapy with either Endo NOS or transgender-related procedure code, we added 4391 (16%) and 4051 (15%) transgender people, respectively. Of the 27,227 transgender people in our cohort, 8694 (32%) were transmasculine, 3959 (15%) were transfeminine, and 14,574 (54%) could not be classified. CONCLUSION: In the absence of gender identity data, additional data elements beyond GID codes improves the identification of transgender people in large, administrative claims databases.

Relative Cost Differences of Initial Treatment Strategies for Newly Diagnosed Opioid Use Disorder: A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Relative costs of care among treatment options for opioid use disorder (OUD) are unknown. METHODS: We identified a cohort of 40,885 individuals with a new diagnosis of OUD in a large national de-identified claims database covering commercially insured and Medicare Advantage enrollees. We assigned individuals to 1 of 6 mutually exclusive initial treatment pathways: (1) Inpatient Detox/Rehabilitation Treatment Center; (2) Behavioral Health Intensive, intensive outpatient or Partial Hospitalization Services; (3) Methadone or Buprenorphine; (4) Naltrexone; (5) Behavioral Health Outpatient Services, or; (6) No Treatment. We assessed total costs of care in the initial 90 day treatment period for each strategy using a differences in differences approach controlling for baseline costs. RESULTS: Within 90 days of diagnosis, 94.8% of individuals received treatment, with the initial treatments being: 15.8% for Inpatient Detox/Rehabilitation Treatment Center, 4.8% for Behavioral Health Intensive, Intensive Outpatient or Partial Hospitalization Services, 12.5% for buprenorphine/methadone, 2.4% for naltrexone, and 59.3% for Behavioral Health Outpatient Services. Average unadjusted costs increased from $3250 per member per month (SD $7846) at baseline to $5047 per member per month (SD $11,856) in the 90 day follow-up period. Compared with no treatment, initial 90 day costs were lower for buprenorphine/methadone [Adjusted Difference in Differences Cost Ratio (ADIDCR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.52-0.80], naltrexone (ADIDCR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.42-0.67), and behavioral health outpatient (ADIDCR 0.54; 95% CI, 0.44-0.66). Costs were higher for inpatient detox (ADIDCR 2.30; 95% CI, 1.88-2.83). CONCLUSION: Improving health system capacity and insurance coverage and incentives for outpatient management of OUD may reduce health care costs.

Comparative Effectiveness of Different Treatment Pathways for Opioid Use Disorder.

Importance: Although clinical trials demonstrate the superior effectiveness of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) compared with nonpharmacologic treatment, national data on the comparative effectiveness of real-world treatment pathways are lacking. Objective: To examine associations between opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment pathways and overdose and opioid-related acute care use as proxies for OUD recurrence. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective comparative effectiveness research study assessed deidentified claims from the OptumLabs Data Warehouse from individuals aged 16 years or older with OUD and commercial or Medicare Advantage coverage. Opioid use disorder was identified based on 1 or more inpatient or 2 or more outpatient claims for OUD diagnosis codes within 3 months of each other; 1 or more claims for OUD plus diagnosis codes for opioid-related overdose, injection-related infection, or inpatient detoxification or residential services; or MOUD claims between January 1, 2015, and September 30, 2017. Data analysis was performed from April 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019. Exposures: One of 6 mutually exclusive treatment pathways, including (1) no treatment, (2) inpatient detoxification or residential services, (3) intensive behavioral health, (4) buprenorphine or methadone, (5) naltrexone, and (6) nonintensive behavioral health. Main Outcomes and Measures: Opioid-related overdose or serious acute care use during 3 and 12 months after initial treatment. Results: A total of 40 885 individuals with OUD (mean [SD] age, 47.73 [17.25] years; 22 172 [54.2%] male; 30 332 [74.2%] white) were identified. For OUD treatment, 24 258 (59.3%) received nonintensive behavioral health, 6455 (15.8%) received inpatient detoxification or residential services, 5123 (12.5%) received MOUD treatment with buprenorphine or methadone, 1970 (4.8%) received intensive behavioral health, and 963 (2.4%) received MOUD treatment with naltrexone. During 3-month follow-up, 707 participants (1.7%) experienced an overdose, and 773 (1.9%) had serious opioid-related acute care use. Only treatment with buprenorphine or methadone was associated with a reduced risk of overdose during 3-month (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.24; 95% CI, 0.14-0.41) and 12-month (AHR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.31-0.55) follow-up. Treatment with buprenorphine or methadone was also associated with reduction in serious opioid-related acute care use during 3-month (AHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-0.99) and 12-month (AHR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58-0.95) follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment with buprenorphine or methadone was associated with reductions in overdose and serious opioid-related acute care use compared with other treatments. Strategies to address the underuse of MOUD are needed.

Unrestricted Direct Access to Physical Therapist Services Is Associated With Lower Health Care Utilization and Costs in Patients With New-Onset Low Back Pain.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most prevalent conditions for which patients seek physical therapy in the United States. The American Physical Therapy Association categorizes direct access to physical therapist services into 3 levels: limited, provisional, and unrestricted. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the association of level of access to physical therapist services with LBP-related health care utilization and costs. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with new-onset LBP between 2008 and 2013; data were from OptumLabs Data Warehouse. METHODS: We identified 59,670 individuals who were 18 years old or older, who had new-onset LBP, and who had commercial or Medicare Advantage insurance through a private health plan. We examined 2 samples. The first was health care utilization among individuals who saw a physical therapist first in states with either unrestricted access or provisional access. The second was LBP-related costs among individuals who saw either a physical therapist or a primary care physician first. RESULTS: Individuals who saw a physical therapist first in states with provisional access had significantly higher measures of health care utilization within 30 days, including plain imaging and frequency of physician visits, than individuals who saw a physical therapist first in states with unrestricted access. Compared with individuals who saw a primary care physician first, pooled across provisional-access and unrestricted-access states, those who saw a physical therapist first in provisional-access states had 25% higher relative costs at 30 days and 32% higher relative costs at 90 days, whereas those who saw a physical therapist first in unrestricted-access states had 13% lower costs at 30 days and 32% lower costs at 90 days. LIMITATIONS: This was a claims-based study with limited information on patient characteristics, including severity and duration of pain. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term LBP-related health care utilization and costs were lower for individuals in unrestricted-access states than in provisional-access states.

Health Outcomes Among Long-term Opioid Users With Testosterone Prescription in the Veterans Health Administration.

Importance: Androgen deficiency is common among male opioid users, and opioid use has emerged as a common antecedent of testosterone treatment. The long-term health outcomes associated with testosterone therapy remain unknown, however. Objective: To compare health outcomes between long-term opioid users with testosterone deficiency who filled testosterone prescriptions and those with the same condition but who did not receive testosterone treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study focused on men in the care of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities throughout the United States from October 1, 2008, to September 30, 2014. It included male veterans who were long-term opioid users, had low testosterone levels (<300 ng/dL), and received either a testosterone prescription or any other prescription. It excluded male patients with HIV infection, gender dysphoria, or prostate cancer and those who received testosterone in fiscal year 2008. Data were analyzed from April 1, 2017, to April 30, 2019. Exposure: Prescription for testosterone. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause mortality and incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), vertebral or femoral fractures, and anemia during the 6-year follow-up through September 30, 2015. Results: After exclusions, 21 272 long-term opioid users (mean [SD] age, 53 [10] years; n = 16 689 [78.5%] white) with low total or free testosterone levels were included for analysis, of whom 14 121 (66.4%) received testosterone and 7151 (33.6%) did not. At baseline, compared with opioid users who did not receive testosterone, long-term opioid users who received testosterone treatment were more likely to have obesity (43.7% vs 49.0%; P < .001), hyperlipidemia (43.0% vs 48.8%; P < .001), and hypertension (53.9% vs 55.2%; P = .07) but had lower prevalence of coronary artery disease (15.9% vs 12.9%; P < .001) and stroke (2.4% vs 1.3%; P < .001). After adjusting for covariates, opioid users who received testosterone had significantly lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.42-0.61) and lower incidence of MACE (HR = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.51-0.67), femoral or hip fractures (HR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.96), and anemia (HR = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.68-0.79) during the follow-up period of up to 6 years, compared with their counterparts without a testosterone prescription. In covariate-adjusted models, men who received opioids plus testosterone were more likely to have resolved anemia compared with those who received opioids only during the 6-year follow-up (HR = 1.16; 95% CI, 1.02-1.31). Similar results were obtained in propensity score-matched models and when analyses were restricted to opioid users with noncancer pain or those who did not receive glucocorticoids. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that, in the VHA system, male long-term opioid users with testosterone deficiency who were treated with opioid and testosterone medications had significantly lower all-cause mortality and significantly lower incidence of MACE, femoral or hip fractures, and anemia after a multiyear follow-up. These results warrant confirmation through a randomized clinical trial to ascertain the efficacy of testosterone in improving health outcomes for opioid users with androgen deficiency.

Interrupting the Pathway from Gestational Diabetes Mellitus to Type 2 Diabetes: The Role of Primary Care.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to describe patient-, provider-, and health systems-level factors associated with likelihood of obtaining guideline-recommended follow-up to prevent or mitigate early-onset type 2 diabetes after a birth complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). METHODS: This study presents a retrospective cohort analysis of de-identified demographic and health care system characteristics, and clinical claims data for 12,622 women with GDM who were continuously enrolled in a large, national U.S. health plan from January 31, 2006, to September 30, 2012. Data were obtained from the OptumLabs Data Warehouse. We extracted 1) known predictors of follow-up (age, race, education, comorbidities, GDM severity); 2) novel factors that had potential as predictors (prepregnancy use of preventive measures and primary care, delivery hospital size); and 3) outcome variables (glucose testing within 1 and 3 years and primary care visit within 3 years after delivery). RESULTS: Asian ethnicity, higher education, GDM severity, and delivery in a larger hospital predicted greater likelihood of post-GDM follow-up. Women with a prepregnancy primary care visit of any type were two to three times more likely to receive postpartum glucose testing and primary care at 1 year, and 3.5 times more likely to have obtained testing and primary care at 3 years after delivery. CONCLUSIONS: A history of use of primary care services before a pregnancy complicated by GDM seems to enhance the likelihood of postdelivery surveillance and preventive care, and thus reduce the risk of undetected early-onset type 2 diabetes. An emphasis on promoting early primary care connections for women in their early reproductive years, in addition to its overall value, is a promising strategy for ensuring follow-up testing and care for women after complicated pregnancies that forewarn risk for later chronic illness. Health systems should focus on models of care that connect primary and reproductive/maternity care before, during, and long after pregnancies occur.

Observational retrospective study of the association of initial healthcare provider for new-onset low back pain with early and long-term opioid use.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the association of initial provider treatment with early and long-term opioid use in a national sample of patients with new-onset low back pain (LBP). DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of patients with new-onset LBP from 2008 to 2013. SETTING: The study evaluated outpatient and inpatient claims from patient visits, pharmacy claims and inpatient and outpatient procedures with initial providers seen for new-onset LBP. PARTICIPANTS: 216 504 individuals aged 18 years or older across the USA who were diagnosed with new-onset LBP and were opioid-naïve were included. Participants had commercial or Medicare Advantage insurance. EXPOSURES: The primary independent variable is type of initial healthcare provider including physicians and conservative therapists (physical therapists, chiropractors, acupuncturists). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Short-term opioid use (within 30 days of the index visit) following new LBP visit and long-term opioid use (starting within 60 days of the index date and either 120 or more days' supply of opioids over 12 months, or 90 days or more supply of opioids and 10 or more opioid prescriptions over 12 months). RESULTS: Short-term use of opioids was 22%. Patients who received initial treatment from chiropractors or physical therapists had decreased odds of short-term and long-term opioid use compared with those who received initial treatment from primary care physicians (PCPs) (adjusted OR (AOR) (95% CI) 0.10 (0.09 to 0.10) and 0.15 (0.13 to 0.17), respectively). Compared with PCP visits, initial chiropractic and physical therapy also were associated with decreased odds of long-term opioid use in a propensity score matched sample (AOR (95% CI) 0.21 (0.16 to 0.27) and 0.29 (0.12 to 0.69), respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Initial visits to chiropractors or physical therapists is associated with substantially decreased early and long-term use of opioids. Incentivising use of conservative therapists may be a strategy to reduce risks of early and long-term opioid use.

Health insurance design and conservative therapy for low back pain.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the association of health insurance benefit design features with choice of early conservative therapy for patients with new-onset low back pain (LBP). STUDY DESIGN: Observational study of 117,448 commercially insured adults 18 years or older presenting with an outpatient diagnosis of new-onset LBP between 2008 and 2013 as recorded in the OptumLabs Data Warehouse. METHODS: We identified patients who chose a primary care physician (PCP), physical therapist, or chiropractor as their entry-point provider. The main analyses were logistic regression models that estimated the likelihood of choosing a physical therapist versus a PCP and choosing a chiropractor versus a PCP. Key independent variables were health plan type, co-payment, deductible, and participation in a health reimbursement account (HRA) or health savings account (HSA). Models controlled for patient demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Selection of entry-point provider was moderately responsive to the incentives that patients faced. Those covered under plan types with greater restrictions on provider choice were less likely to choose conservative therapy compared with those covered under the least restrictive plan type. Results also indicated a general pattern of higher likelihood of treatment with physical therapy at lower levels of patient cost sharing. We did not observe consistent associations between participation in HRAs or HSAs and choice of conservative therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Modification of health insurance benefit designs offers an opportunity for creating greater value in treatment of new-onset LBP by encouraging patients to choose noninvasive conservative management that will result in long-term economic and social benefits.

Patient Characteristics Associated with Receipt of Prescription Weight-Management Medications Among Veterans Participating in MOVE!

OBJECTIVE: Weight-management medications (WMM) are recommended for the treatment of obesity. This study examined characteristics associated with initial receipt of WMM among eligible veterans in the first year following enrollment in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) MOVE! behavioral weight-management program. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of VHA patients with obesity or overweight and obesity-related comorbidities who enrolled in MOVE! from October 2013 to September 2016 (N = 153,939). Multivariable logistic regression models estimated predictors of having a filled prescription for WMM and for orlistat. RESULTS: A total of 1.1% of these veterans received WMM. The most common WMM included orlistat (70.4%), phentermine/topiramate (11.2%), and bupropion/naltrexone (9.7%). Female sex, higher BMI, obstructive sleep apnea, osteoarthritis, depression, lower back pain, and alcohol abuse were associated with greater odds of use of WMM, whereas age over 65 years, Hispanic ethnicity, and required co-payments were associated with lower odds. Among patients receiving WMM, older age, black race, female sex, higher BMI, cardiovascular disease, lower back pain, and congestive heart failure were associated with use of orlistat versus any other WMM. CONCLUSIONS: Of patients engaged in MOVE! in the VHA, 1.1% received WMM. WMM are underutilized among veterans. Additional research is needed to understand barriers to incorporating WMM into comprehensive obesity treatment plans.

After Gestational Diabetes: Impact of Pregnancy Interval on Recurrence and Type 2 Diabetes.

The contribution of pregnancy interval after gestational diabetes (GDM) to type 2 diabetes (T2DM) onset is a poorly understood but potentially modifiable factor for T2DM prevention. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of GDM recurrence and/or delivery interval on follow-up care and T2DM onset in a sample of continuously insured women with a term livebirth within 3 years of a GDM-affected delivery. This is a secondary analysis of a cohort of 12,622 women with GDM, 2006-2012, drawn from a national administrative data system (OptumLabs Data Warehouse). We followed 1091 women with GDM who had a subsequent delivery within 3 years of their index delivery. GDM recurred in 49.3% of subsequent pregnancies regardless of the interval to the next conception. Recurrence tripled the odds of early T2DM onset within 3 years of the second delivery. Women with GDM recurrence had greater likelihood of glucose testing in that 3-year interval, but not transition to primary care for continued monitoring, as required by both American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines. In multivariable analysis, we found a trend toward increased likelihood of T2DM onset for short interpregnancy intervals (≤1 year vs. 3 year, 0.08). Pregnancy interval may play a previously unrecognized role in progression to T2DM. T2DM onset after GDM can be prevented or mitigated, but many women in even this insured sample did not receive recommended follow-up monitoring and preventive care, even after a GDM recurrence. The postpartum visit may be an ideal time to inform patients about T2DM prevention opportunities, and discuss potential benefits of optimal spacing of future pregnancies.

Retrospective analysis of long-term gastrointestinal symptoms after Clostridium difficile infection in a nonelderly cohort.

Elderly patients and those with comorbid conditions are at high risk for poor outcomes after Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) but outcomes in a healthier, nonelderly population are not well described. We sought to investigate gastrointestinal diagnoses and CDI during hospitalizations in the 24 to 36 months after an initial episode of CDI in nonelderly patients in a cohort with an overall low prevalence of comorbid conditions. We performed a retrospective analysis of hospital admissions from 2010-2013 using the Truven MarketScan database of employment-based private insurance claims. Subjects <65 years of age and their adult dependents (> = 18 years old); a CDI diagnosis in 2011 (index date); at least 12 months of pre-index continuous enrollment; and 24-36 months of continuous post-index enrollment were included. The 12 months of each subject's enrollment prior to the index date for a CDI served as the reference period for the analyses of that subject's post-CDI time periods. Hospital claims during the follow-up period were evaluated for gastrointestinal diagnoses and/or CDI ICD-9 codes. The risk of gastrointestinal diagnoses was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for a pre-specified set of baseline demographic and clinical factors. During 2011, 5,632 subjects with CDI met the inclusion criteria for our study. The risk of gastrointestinal diagnoses in patients with a CDI diagnostic code for the same admission was almost 8-fold higher 3 months post-CDI (hazard ratio (HR) = 7.56; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.97-19.19) than for subjects without CDI and remained statistically significant until month 24 (HR = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.04-2.08). After CDI, patients remained at risk for gastrointestinal symptoms with CDI for up to two years. There is an important, long-term healthcare burden after CDI in this population.

Overdose risk for veterans receiving opioids from multiple sources.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether veterans in Massachusetts receiving opioids and/or benzodiazepines from both Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and non-VHA pharmacies are at higher risk of adverse events compared with those receiving opioids at VHA pharmacies only. STUDY DESIGN: A cohort study of veterans who filled a prescription for any Schedule II through V substance at a Massachusetts VHA pharmacy. Prescriptions were recorded in the Massachusetts Department of Public Health Chapter 55 data set. METHODS: The study sample included 16,866 veterans residing in Massachusetts, of whom 9238 (54.8%) received controlled substances from VHA pharmacies only and 7628 (45.2%) had filled prescriptions at both VHA and non-VHA pharmacies ("dual care users") between October 1, 2013, and December 31, 2015. Our primary outcomes were nonfatal opioid overdose, fatal opioid overdose, and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Compared with VHA-only users, more dual care users resided in rural areas (12.6% vs 10.6%), received high-dose opioid therapy (26.3% vs 7.3%), had concurrent prescriptions of opioids and benzodiazepines (34.8% vs 8.2%), and had opioid use disorder (6.8% vs 1.6%) (P <.0001 for all). In adjusted models, dual care users had higher odds of nonfatal opioid overdose (odds ratio [OR], 1.29; 95% CI, 0.98-1.71) and all-cause mortality (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.43-1.93) compared with VHA-only users. Dual care use was not associated with fatal opioid overdoses. CONCLUSIONS: Among veterans in Massachusetts, receipt of opioids from multiple sources was associated with worse outcomes, specifically nonfatal opioid overdose and mortality. Better information sharing between VHA and non-VHA pharmacies and prescribers has the potential to improve patient safety.

Onset of T2DM after gestational diabetes: What the prevention paradox tells us about risk.

This study investigates the effect of severity of gestational diabetes (GDM) on likelihood of post-delivery glucose testing and early onset Type 2 diabetes (T2DM). We asked if clinical focus on relative risk (RR), i.e. greater probability of T2DM onset in a higher-severity group, contributes to missed opportunities for prevention among women with lower-severity GDM. A sample of 12,622 continuously-insured women with GDM (2006-2015) was drawn from a large national dataset (OptumLabs® Data Warehouse) and followed for 3-years post-delivery. Higher-severity GDM was defined as addition of hypoglycemic therapy to standard of care for GDM. We found that women with higher-severity (n = 2627) were twice as likely as lower-severity women (n = 9995) to obtain glucose testing post-delivery. Moreover, 357 (13.6%) of the higher-severity women developed T2DM by year-3 vs. 600 (6.0%) lower-severity women. In an analysis of the population attributable fraction (PAF), defined as the contribution of excess risk to population prevalence, lower-severity women contributed more cases to diabetes rates than higher-risk women (PAF 79% vs. 21%), despite an increased RR in the higher-severity group (13.6% vs. 6.0%, RR 2.26, 95%CI 2.00, 2.56). Projecting out to the 327,950 U.S. deliveries in 2014, we estimate that 9277 higher-severity women (13.6%) and 15,584 lower-severity women (6.0%), will have developed T2DM by 2018. These data demonstrate that lower-severity GDM contributes substantially to the diabetes epidemic. Greater awareness of clinical and cost implications of gaps in follow-up for lower-severity GDM may strengthen the likelihood of post-delivery testing and primary care referral, and thus reinforce the path to prevention.