Elective Joint Replacement Among Medicaid Beneficiaries: Utilization and Postoperative Adverse Events by Racial and Ethnic Groups.

Hip and knee replacement have been marked by racial and ethnic disparities in both utilization and postoperative adverse events among Medicare beneficiaries, but limited knowledge exists regarding racial and ethnic differences in joint replacement care among Medicaid beneficiaries. To close this gap, this study used Medicaid claims in 2018 and described racial and ethnic differences in the utilization and postoperative adverse events of elective joint replacements among Medicaid beneficiaries. Among the 2,260,272 Medicaid beneficiaries, 5987 had an elective joint replacement in 2018. Asian (0.05%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.03%-0.07%) and Hispanic beneficiaries (0.12%, 95% CI: 0.07%-0.18%) received joint replacements less frequently than American Indian and Alaska Native (0.41%, 95% CI: 0.27%-0.55%), Black (0.33%, 95% CI: 0.19%-0.48%), and White (0.37%, 95% CI: 0.25%-0.50%) beneficiaries. Black patients demonstrated the highest probability of 90-day emergency department visits (34.8%, 95% CI: 32.7%-37.0%) among all racial and ethnic groups and a higher probability of 90-day readmission (8.0%, 95% CI: 6.9%-9.0%) than Asian (3.4%, 95% CI: 0.7%-6.0%) and Hispanic patients (4.4%, 95% CI: 3.4%-5.3%). These findings indicate evident disparities in postoperative adverse events across racial and ethnic groups, with Black patients demonstrating the highest probability of 90-day emergency department visits. This study represents an initial exploration of the racial and ethnic differences in joint replacement care among Medicaid beneficiaries and lay the groundwork for further investigation into contributing factors of the observed disparities.

Acceptability and Feasibility of Delivering Decision Aids to Veterans for Management of Knee Osteoarthritis - A Pilot Study.

Introduction: Decision aids are effective tools in facilitating patient-centered care and patient involvement in the decision-making process. Given unique barriers to providing patient-centered care for Veterans, implementation of decision aids may improve overall quality of care. We aimed to assess the acceptability and feasibility of video-based and pamphlet-based decision aid use in Veterans with knee osteoarthritis. Materials and Methods: Veterans considering treatment for knee osteoarthritis received either an online video-based aid, pamphlet-based aid, or both before their surgical consult. At their visit, patients completed written pre-visit and post-visit questionnaires. The pre-visit questionnaire included questions about the patient's demographics, decision-making preferences, experiences using the assigned decision aids, and the Hip-Knee Decision Quality Instrument. The post-visit questionnaire assessed the patient's overall experience with the decision-making process and how use of the decision aid influenced their discussion with the physician. Results: All 16 patients who received the pamphlet-based aid reviewed the decision aid before their visit, compared to only five of the 12 patients who received the video-based aid. Thirteen of 20 patients indicated that they preferred to share treatment decision-making with their physician. Seventeen of 20 patients believed they would feel comfortable questioning the treatment recommendation of their surgeon after decision aid use. Most patients reported a positive experience using their decision aid, regardless of modality, and found it easily comprehensible and useful in visit preparation. A preference for a pamphlet-based aid was expressed by the majority of patients. Conclusion: Veterans considering treatment for knee osteoarthritis are well prepared to engage in a patient-centered care experience. Most patients preferred sharing the decision-making process with their physician and felt comfortable questioning them about treatment recommendations. Decision aids helped Veterans feel more informed about their treatment options and improved engagement and discussion with their physician. Pamphlet-based aids were utilized more reliably than video-based aids.

The Effects of Osteoarthritis on Depressive Symptomatology Among Older U.S. Military Veterans.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of disability among older adults. By 2050, approximately 60 million will suffer from arthritis adding up to a total societal cost of $65 billion. Chronic illnesses resulting in pain, and functional decline have been associated with depression in previous studies.A causal model was developed and tested using structural equation modeling that examined depression scores of 503 older (age 50-85), male Veterans with moderate to severe symptomatic OA of the knee\hip.The results of the structural equation modeling produced a final model of depressive symptomatology that fit the data well (Chi square = 12.23, DF = 11, p = .346; TLI = .99; CFI = 1.00; RMSEA = .02).The findings indicate the central role that OA severity (pain, stiffness, and functional difficulties) plays in the mental health of older Veterans in terms of the level of reported depressive symptoms.

The Proportion of Marginalized Individuals in US Communities and Hospital Participation in Bundled Payments.

Hospitals have demonstrated the benefits of both voluntary and mandatory bundled payments for joint replacement surgery. However, given generalizability and disparities concerns, it is critical to understand the availability of care through bundled payments to historically marginalized groups, such as racial and ethnic minorities and individuals with lower socioeconomic status (SES). This cross-sectional analysis of 3880 US communities evaluated the relationship between the proportion of Black and Hispanic individuals (minority share) or Medicare/Medicaid dual-eligible individuals (low SES share) and community-level participation in Bundled Payments for Care Improvement initiative (BPCI) (being a BPCI community) and Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model (being a CJR community). An increase from the lowest to highest quartile of minority share was not associated with differences in the probability of being a BPCI community (3.5 percentage point [pp] difference, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.2% to 8.3%, P = 0.15), but was associated with a 16.1 pp higher probability of being a CJR community (95% CI 10.3% to 22.0%, P < 0.0001). An increase from the lowest to highest quartile of low SES share was associated with a 6.0 pp lower probability of being a BPCI community (95% CI -10.9% to -1.2%, P = 0.02) and 19.0 pp lower probability of being a CJR community (95% CI -24.9% to -13.0%, P < 0.0001). These findings highlight that the greater the proportion of lower SES individuals in a community, the lower the likelihood that its hospitals participated in either voluntary or mandatory bundled payments. Policymakers should consider community socioeconomic characteristics when designing participation mechanisms for future bundled payment programs.

Impact of Race and Insurance Status on Primary Treatment for HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of sociodemographic factors on primary treatment choice (surgery vs radiotherapy) in patients with human papillomavirus-associated (HPV+) oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Database. SETTING: Data from >1500 Commission on Cancer institutions (academic and community) via the National Cancer Database. METHODS: Our sample consists of patients diagnosed with HPV+ OPSCC from 2010 to 2015. The primary outcome of interest was initial treatment modality: surgery vs radiation. We performed multivariable logistic models to assess the relationship between treatment choice and sociodemographic factors, including sex, race, treatment facility, and insurance status. RESULTS: Of the 16,043 patients identified, 5894 (36.7%) underwent primary surgery while 10,149 (63.3%) received primary radiotherapy. Black patients were less likely than White patients to receive primary surgery (odds ratio [OR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66-0.96). When compared with privately insured patients, those who were uninsured or on Medicaid or Medicare were also less likely to receive primary surgery (OR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.56-0.86]; OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.65-0.91]; OR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.75-0.96], respectively). Patients receiving treatment at an academic/research cancer program were more likely to undergo primary surgery than those treated at comprehensive community cancer programs (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.14-1.56). CONCLUSION: In this large sample of patients with HPV+ OPSCC, race and insurance status affect primary treatment choice. Specifically, Black and nonprivately insured patients are less likely to receive primary surgery as compared with White or privately insured patients. Our findings illuminate potential disparities in HPV+ OPSCC treatment.

What Factors Lead to Racial Disparities in Outcomes After Total Knee Arthroplasty?

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most commonly performed, major elective surgeries in the USA. African American TKA patients on average experience worse clinical outcomes than whites, including lower improvements in patient-reported outcomes and higher rates of complications, hospital readmissions, and reoperations. The mechanisms leading to these racial health disparities are unclear, but likely involve patient, provider, healthcare system, and societal factors. Lower physical and mental health at baseline, lower social support, provider bias, lower rates of health insurance coverage, higher utilization of lower quality hospitals, and systemic racism may contribute to the inferior outcomes that African Americans experience. Limited evidence suggests that improving the quality of surgical care can offset these factors and lead to a reduction in outcome disparities.

Nephrologist Performance in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: The Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is the largest quality payment program administered by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Little is known about predictors of nephrologist performance in MIPS. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Nephrologists participating in MIPS in performance year 2018. PREDICTORS: Nephrologist characteristics: (1) participation type (individual, group, or MIPS alternative payment model [APM]), (2) practice size, (3) practice setting (rural, Health Professional Shortage Area [HPSA], or hospital based), and (4) geography (Census Division). OUTCOMES: MIPS Final, Quality, Promoting Interoperability, Improvement Activities, and Cost scores. Using published consensus ratings, we also examined the validity of MIPS Quality measures selected by nephrologists. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Unadjusted and multivariable-adjusted linear regression models assessing the associations between nephrologist characteristics and MIPS Final scores. RESULTS: Among 6,117 nephrologists participating in MIPS in 2018, the median MIPS Final score was 100 (interquartile range, 94-100). In multivariable-adjusted analyses, MIPS APM participation was associated with a 12.5-point (95% CI, 10.6-14.4) higher score compared with individual participation. Nephrologists in large (355-4,294 members) and medium (15-354 members) practices scored higher than those in small practices (1-14 members). In analyses adjusted for practice size, practice setting, and geography, among individual and group participants, HPSA nephrologists scored 1.9 (95% CI, -3.6 to -0.1) points lower than non-HPSA nephrologists, and hospital-based nephrologists scored 6.0 (95% CI, -8.3 to -3.7) points lower than non-hospital-based nephrologists. The most frequently reported quality measures by individual and group participants had medium to high validity and were relevant to nephrology care, whereas MIPS APM measures had little relevance to nephrology. LIMITATIONS: Lack of adjustment for patient characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: MIPS APM participation, larger practice size, non-HPSA setting, and non-hospital-based setting were associated with higher MIPS scores among nephrologists. Our results inform strategies to improve MIPS program design and generate meaningful distinctions between practices that will drive improvements in care.

Use of Complementary and Alternative Therapy for Knee Osteoarthritis: Race and Gender Variations.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate race and gender variations in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use for knee osteoarthritis (OA) (unadjusted and adjusted for demographic and clinical factors). METHODS: A secondary analysis of cross-sectional data was conducted. The sample included Veterans Affairs patients 50 years of age or older with symptomatic knee OA. Current use of various CAM therapies was assessed at baseline. Logistic regression models were used to compare race and gender differences in the use of specific CAMs. RESULTS: The sample included 517 participants (52.2% identified as African American [AA]; 27.1% identified as female). After adjusting for demographic and clinical factors, AA participants, compared with white participants, were less likely to use joint supplements (odds ratio [OR]: 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31-0.90]); yoga, tai chi, or pilates (OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.19-0.77); and chiropractic care (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.26-1.00). However, they were more likely to participate in spiritual activities (OR: 2.02; 95% CI: 1.39-2.94). Women, compared with men, were more likely to use herbs (OR: 2.42; 95% CI: 1.41-4.14); yoga, tai chi, or pilates (OR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.04-4.19); acupuncture, acupressure, or massage (OR: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.28-4.67); and spiritual activities (OR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.09-2.60). The interactive effects of race and gender were significant in the use of herbs (P = 0.008); yoga, tai chi, or pilates (P = 0.011); acupuncture, acupressure or massage (P = 0.038); and spiritual activities (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There are race and gender differences in the use of various CAMs for OA. As benefits and limitations of CAM therapies vary, clinicians must be aware of these differences.

Racial and Neighborhood-Level Disparities in COVID-19 Incidence among Patients on Hemodialysis in New York City.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately affected socially disadvantaged populations. Whether disparities in COVID-19 incidence related to race/ethnicity and socioeconomic factors exist in the hemodialysis population is unknown. METHODS: Our study involved patients receiving in-center hemodialysis in New York City. We used a validated index of neighborhood social vulnerability, the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), which comprises 15 census tract-level indicators organized into four themes: socioeconomic status, household composition and disability, minority status and language, and housing type and transportation. We examined the association of race/ethnicity and the SVI with symptomatic COVID-19 between March 1, 2020 and August 3, 2020. COVID-19 cases were ascertained using PCR testing. We performed multivariable logistic regression to adjust for demographics, individual-level social factors, dialysis-related medical history, and dialysis facility factors. RESULTS: Of the 1378 patients on hemodialysis in the study, 247 (17.9%) developed symptomatic COVID-19. In adjusted analyses, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients had significantly increased odds of COVID-19 compared with non-Hispanic White patients. Census tract-level overall SVI, modeled continuously or in quintiles, was not associated with COVID-19 in unadjusted or adjusted analyses. Among non-Hispanic White patients, the socioeconomic status SVI theme, the minority status and language SVI theme, and housing crowding were significantly associated with COVID-19 in unadjusted analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients on hemodialysis in New York City, there were substantial racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 incidence not explained by neighborhood-level social vulnerability. Neighborhood-level socioeconomic status, minority status and language, and housing crowding were positively associated with acquiring COVID-19 among non-Hispanic Whites. Our findings suggest that socially vulnerable patients on dialysis face disparate COVID-19-related exposures, requiring targeted risk-mitigation strategies.

Palliative care in metastatic head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Due to inherent impact on quality of life, metastatic head and neck cancer patients are well-suited to benefit from palliative care (PC). Our objective was to examine factors that shape PC utilization and implications for overall survival in stage IVc head and neck cancer patients. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients with stage IVc head and neck cancer in the National Cancer Database from 2004 and 2015 was conducted. RESULTS: 7794 cases met inclusion criteria, of which 19.3% received PC. PC use was associated with more recent years of diagnosis, Northeast facility geography, and non-private insurances (p < 0.05). Compared to no PC, "interventional" PC, defined as palliative surgery, radiation, and/or chemotherapy, and "pain management only" PC were associated with lower overall survival (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: PC use increased over time and was associated with demographic and clinical factors. There remains opportunity for improvement in optimal implementation of palliative care.

Association of Medicare Mandatory Bundled Payment Program With the Receipt of Elective Hip and Knee Replacement in White, Black, and Hispanic Beneficiaries.

Importance: The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model was designed to reduce the cost and improve the quality of hip or knee replacement among Medicare beneficiaries. Yet whether this model may exacerbate existing racial/ethnic disparities in access to the surgery is unclear. Objective: To examine the association of the CJR model with the receipt of elective hip or knee replacement across White, Black, and Hispanic Medicare beneficiaries. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of Medicare claims from 2013 through 2017 among White, Black, and Hispanic Medicare beneficiaries undergoing elective joint replacement in 65 treatment (selected for CJR participation) and 101 control metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). Exposures: Starting in April 2016, hospitals in the treatment MSAs were required to participate in the CJR model and were accountable for expenditures occurring during patients' hospitalization for hip or knee replacement and 90 days after the hospital discharge. Main Outcomes and Measures: Beneficiary-level elective hip or knee replacement receipt in a given year. Results: Among 17 243 304 patients, 9 839 996 (57%) were women; 2 107 425 (12%) were age 85 years or older. Of the final sample, 14 632 434 (85%) were White beneficiaries, 1 518 629 (9%) were Black beneficiaries, and 1 092 241 (6%) were Hispanic beneficiaries. The CJR model was associated with an increase of 1.6 elective hip or knee replacements per 1000 beneficiary-years for Hispanic beneficiaries (95% CI, 0.06-2.05) and a decrease of 0.64 replacements for Black beneficiaries (95% CI, -1.25 to -0.02). No evidence was found for any changes for White beneficiaries per 1000 beneficiary-years (0.04 replacements, 95% CI, -0.35 to 0.42 replacements). The Black-White difference in the rate of elective hip or knee replacement per 1000 beneficiary-years further widened by 0.68 replacements (-0.68, 95% CI, -1.20 to -0.15). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the CJR model was associated with increased receipt of elective hip or knee replacement among Hispanic beneficiaries, decreased receipt among Black beneficiaries, and no change in receipt among White beneficiaries. The decreased receipt of elective hip or knee replacement among Black beneficiaries may suggest that value-based payment models, including the CJR model, could be monitored for unintended consequences. However, the lack of similar findings among Hispanic beneficiaries suggests that payment models may have differential impacts across racial/ethnic groups.

Association of Patients' Familiarity and Perceptions of Efficacy and Risks With the Use of Opioid Medications in the Management of Osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: While opioids are known to cause unintended adverse effects, they are being utilized by a number of patients with osteoarthritis (OA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of patient familiarity and perceptions regarding efficacy and risks with opioid medication use for OA. METHODS: A total of 362 adults with knee and/or hip OA were surveyed in this cross-sectional study. Patients' familiarity with and perceptions of benefits/risks of opioid medications were measured to evaluate potential associations with the utilization of opioid medications for OA within the last 6 months. Logistic regression models were adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical variables. RESULTS: In this sample, 28.7% (100/349) reported use of an opioid medication for OA-related symptoms in the last 6 months. Those who were on an opioid medication, compared to those who were not, were younger (mean age 62.5 vs 64.8 yrs), were more likely to have a high school education or lower (48.0% vs 35.3%), and had higher mean depression (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ]-8 7.2 vs 4.9) and OA-related pain (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index [WOMAC] 54.8 vs 46.8) scores. After adjustment for sociodemographic and clinical variables, the following were associated with opioid medication use: higher perception of medication benefit (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.18-2.41), lower perception of medication risk (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51-0.88), and having family or friends who received the medication for OA (OR 3.88, 95% CI 1.88-8.02). CONCLUSION: Among adults with knee/hip OA, opioid use was associated with being familiar with the treatment, as well as believing that the medication was beneficial and low-risk.

Cumulative Disadvantage and Disparities in Depression and Pain Among Veterans With Osteoarthritis: The Role of Perceived Discrimination.

OBJECTIVE: Perceived discrimination is associated with chronic pain and depression and contributes to racial health disparities. In a cohort of older adult veterans with osteoarthritis (OA), our objective was to examine how membership in multiple socially disadvantaged groups (cumulative disadvantage) was associated with perceived discrimination, pain, and depression. We also tested whether perceived discrimination mediated the association of cumulative disadvantage with depression and pain. METHODS: We analyzed baseline data from 270 African American veterans and 247 White veterans enrolled in a randomized controlled trial testing a psychological intervention for chronic pain at 2 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers. Participants were age ≥50 years and self-reported symptomatic knee OA. Measures included the Everyday Discrimination Scale, the Patient Health Questionnaire Depression Scale, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index pain subscale, and demographic variables. Cumulative disadvantage was defined as the number of socially disadvantaged groups to which each participant belonged (i.e., self-reported female sex, African American race, annual income of <$20,000, and/or unemployed due to disability). We used linear regression models and Sobel's test of mediation to examine hypotheses. RESULTS: The mean ± SD number of social disadvantages was 1.3 ± 1.0. Cumulative disadvantage was significantly associated with higher perceived discrimination, pain, and depression (P < 0.001 for all). Perceived discrimination significantly mediated the association between cumulative disadvantage and depression symptoms (Z = 3.75, P < 0.001) as well as pain severity (Z = 2.24, P = 0.025). CONCLUSION: Perceived discrimination is an important psychosocial stressor that contributes to worsening OA-related mental and physical health outcomes, with greater effects among those from multiple socially disadvantaged groups.