Patterns of Opioid Prescriptions in the Veterans Health Administration for Patients With Chronic Low-Back Pain After the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

The COVID-19 pandemic led to severe disruptions in health care and a relaxation of rules surrounding opioid prescribing-changes which led to concerns about increased reliance on opioids for chronic pain and a resurgence of opioid-related harms. Although some studies found that opioid prescriptions increased in the first 6 months of the pandemic, we know little about the longer-term effects of the pandemic on opioid prescriptions. Further, despite the prevalence of pain in veterans, we know little about patterns of opioid prescriptions in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) associated with the pandemic. Using a retrospective cohort of VA patients with chronic low-back pain, we examined the proportion of patients with an opioid prescription and mean morphine milligram equivalents over a 3-year period-1 year prior to and 2 years after the pandemic's onset. Analyses revealed that both measures fell during the entire observation period. The largest decrease in the odds of filling an opioid prescription occurred in the first quarter of the pandemic, but this downward trend continued throughout the observation period, albeit at a slower pace. Clinically meaningful differences in opioid prescriptions and dose over time did not emerge based on patient race or rurality; however, differences emerged between female and male veterans, with decreases in opioid prescriptions slowing more markedly for women after the pandemic onset. These findings suggest that the pandemic was not associated with short- or long-term increases in opioid prescriptions or doses in the VA. PERSPECTIVE: This article examines opioid prescribing over a 3-year period-1 year prior to and 2 years after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic-for VA patients with chronic low-back pain. Results indicate that, despite disruptions to health care, opioid prescriptions and doses decreased over the entire observation period.

Validating administratively derived frailty scores for use in Veterans Health Administration emergency departments.

OBJECTIVES: Frailty is a clinical syndrome characterized by decreased physiologic reserve that diminishes the ability to respond to stressors such as acute illness. Veterans Health Administration (VA) emergency departments (ED) are the primary venue of care for Veterans with acute illness and represent key sites for frailty recognition. As questionnaire-based frailty instruments can be cumbersome to implement in the ED, we examined two administratively derived frailty scores for use among VA ED patients. METHODS: This national retrospective cohort study included all VA ED visits (2017-2020). We evaluated two administratively derived scores: the Care Assessment Needs (CAN) score and the VA Frailty Index (VA-FI). We categorized all ED visits across four frailty groups and examined associations with outcomes of 30-day and 90-day hospitalization and 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year mortality. We used logistic regression to assess the model performance of the CAN score and the VA-FI. RESULTS: The cohort included 9,213,571 ED visits. With the CAN score, 28.7% of the cohort were classified as severely frail; by VA-FI, 13.2% were severely frail. All outcome rates increased with progressive frailty (p-values for all comparisons < 0.001). For example, for 1-year mortality based on the CAN score frailty was determined as: robust, 1.4%; prefrail, 3.4%; moderately frail, 7.0%; and severely frail, 20.2%. Similarly, for 90-day hospitalization based on VA-FI, frailty was determined as prefrail, 8.3%; mildly frail, 15.3%; moderately frail, 29.5%; and severely frail, 55.4%. The c-statistics for CAN score models were higher than for VA-FI models across all outcomes (e.g., 1-year mortality, 0.721 vs. 0.659). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty was common among VA ED patients. Increased frailty, whether measured by CAN score or VA-FI, was strongly associated with hospitalization and mortality and both can be used in the ED to identify Veterans at high risk for adverse outcomes. Having an effective automatic score in VA EDs to identify frail Veterans may allow for better targeting of scarce resources.

Quality of Care for Veterans With In-Hospital Stroke.

Veterans who develop an in-hospital stroke and those who present to the emergency department with stroke symptoms received similar care, but some differences suggest the need to better standardize stroke care regardless of care setting.

Lessons and Outcomes of Mobile Acute Care for Elders Consultation in a Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

OBJECTIVE: Describe the implementation and effects of Mobile Acute Care for Elders (MACE) consultation at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis. INTERVENTION: Veterans aged 65 or older who were admitted to the medicine service between October 1, 2012, and September 30, 2014, were screened for geriatric syndromes via review of medical records within 48 hours of admission. If the screen was positive, the MACE team offered the admitting team a same-day consultation involving comprehensive geriatric assessment and ongoing collaboration with the admitting team and supportive services to implement patient-centric recommendations for geriatric syndromes. RESULTS: Veterans seen by MACE (n = 421) were compared with those with positive screens but without consultation (n = 372). The two groups did not significantly differ in age, comorbidity, sex, or race. All outcomes (30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, readmission costs) were in the expected direction for patients receiving MACE but did not reach statistical significance. Patients receiving MACE had lower odds of 30-day readmission (11.9% vs 14.8%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.54-1.25; p = .360) and 30-day mortality (5.5% vs 8.6%; OR = 0.64; CI = 0.36-1.12; p = .115), and they had lower 30-day readmission costs (MACE $15,502; CI = $12,242-$19,631; comparison = $18,335; CI = $14,641-$22,962; p = .316) than those who did not receive MACE after adjusting for age and Charlson Comorbidity Index. CONCLUSION: Our MACE consultation model for older veterans with geriatric syndromes leverages the limited supply of clinicians with expertise in geriatrics. Although not statistically significant in this study of 793 subjects, MACE patients had lower odds of 30-day readmission and mortality, and lower readmission costs. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:818-824, 2019.

Association Between Antithrombotic Medication Use After Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement and Outcomes in the Veterans Health Administration System.

Importance: The recommendations about antithrombotic medication use after bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (bAVR) vary. Objectives: To describe the post-bAVR antithrombotic medication practice across the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and to assess the association between antithrombotic strategies and post-bAVR outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study. Multivariable modeling with propensity scores was conducted to adjust for differences in patient characteristics across the 3 most common antithrombotic medication strategies (aspirin plus warfarin sodium, aspirin only, and dual antiplatelets). Text mining of notes was used to identify the patients with bAVR (fiscal years 2005-2015). Main Outcomes and Measures: This study used VHA and non-VHA outpatient pharmacy data and text notes to classify the following antithrombotic medications prescribed within 1 week after discharge from the bAVR hospitalization: aspirin plus warfarin, aspirin only, dual antiplatelets, no antithrombotics, other only, and warfarin only. The 90-day outcomes included all-cause mortality, thromboembolism risk, and bleeding events. Outcomes were identified using primary diagnosis codes from emergency department visits or hospital admissions. Results: The cohort included 9060 veterans with bAVR at 47 facilities (mean [SD] age, 69.3 [8.8] years; 98.6% male). The number of bAVR procedures per year increased from 610 in fiscal year 2005 to 1072 in fiscal year 2015. The most commonly prescribed antithrombotic strategy was aspirin only (4240 [46.8%]), followed by aspirin plus warfarin (1638 [18.1%]), no antithrombotics (1451 [16.0%]), dual antiplatelets (1010 [11.1%]), warfarin only (439 [4.8%]), and other only (282 [3.1%]). Facility variation in antithrombotic prescription patterns was observed. During the 90-day post-bAVR period, adverse events were uncommon, including all-cause mortality in 127 (1.4%), thromboembolism risk in 142 (1.6%), and bleeding events in 149 (1.6%). No differences in 90-day mortality or thromboembolism were identified across the 3 antithrombotic medication groups in either the unadjusted or adjusted models. Patients receiving the combination of aspirin plus warfarin had higher odds of bleeding than patients receiving aspirin only in the unadjusted analysis (odds ratio, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.71-3.89) and after full risk adjustment (adjusted odds ratio, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.17-3.14). Conclusions and Relevance: These data demonstrate that bAVR procedures are increasingly being performed in VHA facilities and that aspirin only was the most commonly used antithrombotic medication strategy after bAVR. The risk-adjusted results suggest that the combination of aspirin plus warfarin does not improve either all-cause mortality or thromboembolism risk but increases the risk of bleeding events compared with aspirin only.

Post-stroke hypertension control and receipt of health care services among veterans.

Many ischemic stroke patients do not achieve goal blood pressure (BP < 140/90 mm Hg). To identify barriers to post-stroke hypertension management, we examined healthcare utilization and BP control in the year after index ischemic stroke admission. This retrospective cohort study included patients admitted for acute ischemic stroke to a VA hospital in fiscal year 2011 and who were discharged with a BP ≥ 140/90 mm Hg. One-year post-discharge, BP trajectories, utilization of primary care, specialty and ancillary services were studied. Among 265 patients, 246 (92.8%) were seen by primary care (PC) during the 1-year post-discharge; a median time to the first PC visit was 32 days (interquartile range: 53). Among N = 245 patients with post-discharge BP data, 103 (42.0%) achieved a mean BP < 140/90 mm Hg in the year post-discharge. Provider follow-ups were: neurology (51.7%), cardiology (14.0%), nephrology (7.2%), endocrinology (3.8%), and geriatrics (2.6%) and ancillary services (BP monitor [30.6%], pharmacy [20.0%], nutrition [8.3%], and telehealth [8%]). Non-adherence to medications was documented in 21.9% of patients and was observed more commonly among patients with uncontrolled compared with controlled BP (28.7% vs 15.5%; P = .02). The recurrent stroke rate did not differ among patients with uncontrolled (4.2%) compared with controlled BP (3.8%; P = .89). Few patients achieved goal BP in the year post-stroke. Visits to primary care were not timely. Underuse of specialty as well as ancillary services and provider perception of medication non-adherence were common. Future intervention studies seeking to improve post-stroke hypertension management should address these observed gaps in care.

Adherence to Surveillance Guidelines in Nondysplastic Barrett's Esophagus.

INTRODUCTION: Surveillance patterns in Barrett's esophagus (BE) are not well characterized. Guidelines published between 2002 and 2008 recommended surveillance esophagogastroduodenoscopy (sEGD) at 3-year intervals for nondysplastic BE (NDBE). We assessed guideline adherence in incident NDBE in a Veterans Affairs (VA)-based study. METHODS: At a single VA center, we identified incident cases of biopsy-confirmed NDBE between January, 2006 and December, 2008. We excluded patients aged 76 years and above and those who developed BE-associated dysplasia or cancer during follow-up. All sEGDs through October, 2014 were documented. Our primary criteria classified cases as guideline adherent if a sEGD was performed within 6 months of each expected 3-year surveillance interval; in cases with ≥2 sEGDs, 1 sEGD >6 months, and ≤1 year outside an interval was allowed if the average interval was between 2.5 and 3.5 years. Comorbidity, primary care encounters, presence of long-segment BE (LSBE), endoscopist recommendations, and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) were assessed. RESULTS: We identified 110 patients (96.4% male, 93.6% white) with mean age 58.9±8.5 years at index EGD. Median follow-up was 6.7 years (range, 3.7 to 8.6). Thirty-three (30.0%) cases were guideline adherent; 77 (70.0%) cases were nonadherent, including 52 (47.3%) with irregular surveillance and 25 (22.7%) with no surveillance. Forty cases (14 adherent) had 1 sEGD, 36 (18 adherent) had 2, 8 (1 adherent) had 3, and 1 nonadherent case had 4. Adherent cases were significantly older (61.5 vs. 57.9 y, P=0.04), and tended to have more LSBE (33.3% vs. 20.8%, P=0.16). There were no differences between adherent and nonadherent cases in annual primary care encounters (72.7% vs. 66.2%, P=0.66), CCI≥4 (15.2% vs. 15.6%, P=0.95), biopsy-positive sEGDs (75.8% vs. 76.6%, P=0.92), and any recommendation for subsequent surveillance (81.8% vs. 77.9%, P=0.65). A logistic regression model using age, CCI, and LSBE showed an independent association between adherence and older age (P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In a single-center VA cohort, sEGD of NDBE was mostly nonadherent to guidelines. Adherent cases were older at baseline with a trend toward more LSBE. A larger study is needed to identify medical and social factors associated with adherence or nonadherence to surveillance.

The Relationship Between Race, Patient Activation, and Working Alliance: Implications for Patient Engagement in Mental Health Care.

This study explored the relationship between race and two key aspects of patient engagement-patient activation and working alliance-among a sample of African-American and White veterans (N = 152) seeking medication management for mental health conditions. After adjusting for demographics, race was significantly associated with patient activation, working alliance, and medication adherence scores. Patient activation was also associated with working alliance. These results provide support for the consideration of race and ethnicity in facilitating patient engagement and patient activation in mental healthcare. Minority patients may benefit from targeted efforts to improve their active engagement in mental healthcare.

Comparison of Risk Factor Control in the Year After Discharge for Ischemic Stroke Versus Acute Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Veterans Health Administration has engaged in quality improvement to improve vascular risk factor control. We sought to examine blood pressure (<140/90 mm Hg), lipid (LDL [low-density lipoprotein] cholesterol <100 mg/dL), and glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c <9%), in the year post-hospitalization for acute ischemic stroke or acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: We identified patients who were hospitalized (fiscal year 2011) with ischemic stroke, AMI, congestive heart failure, transient ischemic attack, or pneumonia/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The primary analysis compared risk factor control after incident ischemic stroke versus AMI. Facilities were included if they cared for ≥25 ischemic stroke and ≥25 AMI patients. A generalized linear mixed model including patient- and facility-level covariates compared risk factor control across diagnoses. RESULTS: Forty thousand two hundred thirty patients were hospitalized (n=75 facilities): 2127 with incident ischemic stroke and 4169 with incident AMI. Fewer stroke patients achieved blood pressure control than AMI patients (64%; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.67 versus 77%; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.78; P<0.0001). After adjusting for patient and facility covariates, the odds of blood pressure control were still higher for AMI than ischemic stroke patients (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-1.51). There were no statistical differences for AMI versus stroke patients in hyperlipidemia (P=0.534). Among patients with diabetes mellitus, the odds of glycemic control were lower for AMI than ischemic stroke patients (odds ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Given that hypertension control is a cornerstone of stroke prevention, interventions to improve poststroke hypertension management are needed.

Validation of Stroke Meaningful Use Measures in a National Electronic Health Record System.

BACKGROUND: The Meaningful Use (MU) program has increased the national emphasis on electronic measurement of hospital quality. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate stroke MU and one VHA stroke electronic clinical quality measure (eCQM) in national VHA data and determine sources of error in using centralized electronic health record (EHR) data. DESIGN: Our study is a retrospective cross-sectional study of stroke quality measure eCQMs vs. chart review in a national EHR. We developed local SQL algorithms to generate the eCQMs, then modified them to run on VHA Central Data Warehouse (CDW) data. eCQM results were generated from CDW data in 2130 ischemic stroke admissions in 11 VHA hospitals. Local and CDW results were compared to chart review. MAIN MEASURES: We calculated the raw proportion of matching cases, sensitivity/specificity, and positive/negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) for the numerators and denominators of each eCQM. To assess overall agreement for each eCQM, we calculated a weighted kappa and prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa statistic for a three-level outcome: ineligible, eligible-passed, or eligible-failed. KEY RESULTS: In five eCQMs, the proportion of matched cases between CDW and chart ranged from 95.4 %-99.7 % (denominators) and 87.7 %-97.9 % (numerators). PPVs tended to be higher (range 96.8 %-100 % in CDW) with NPVs less stable and lower. Prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappas for overall agreement ranged from 0.73-0.95. Common errors included difficulty in identifying: (1) mechanical VTE prophylaxis devices, (2) hospice and other specific discharge disposition, and (3) contraindications to receiving care processes. CONCLUSIONS: Stroke MU indicators can be relatively accurately generated from existing EHR systems (nearly 90 % match to chart review), but accuracy decreases slightly in central compared to local data sources. To improve stroke MU measure accuracy, EHRs should include standardized data elements for devices, discharge disposition (including hospice and comfort care status), and recording contraindications.

Barriers to guideline-concordant opioid management in primary care--a qualitative study.

UNLABELLED: Prior studies have demonstrated poor physician adherence to opioid management guidelines in primary care. The objectives of this qualitative study were to understand physicians' and patients' perspectives on recommended opioid management practices and to identify potential barriers to and facilitators of guideline-concordant opioid management in primary care. Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with 14 primary care physicians and 26 of their patients receiving long-term opioid therapy. Data were analyzed using a qualitative immersion/crystallization approach. We identified 3 major barriers to and 1 facilitator of use of recommended opioid management practices. Major barriers were inadequate time and resources available; relying on general impressions of risk for opioid misuse; and viewing opioid monitoring as a "law enforcement" activity. The third barrier was most apparent for physicians in the context of drug testing and for patients in the context of opioid agreements. Beliefs about the need to protect patients from opioid-related harm emerged as a major facilitator, especially among patients. We hypothesize that future interventions to improve opioid management in primary care will be more effective if they address identified barriers and use a patient-centered framework, in which prevention of opioid-related harm to patients is emphasized as the primary goal. PERSPECTIVE: This article describes primary care perspectives on guideline-recommended opioid management practices. Barriers identified in this study may contribute to underuse of recommended opioid management practices. Consideration of barriers and facilitators to guideline-concordant care could improve effectiveness of future interventions aimed at improving opioid management in primary care.

"I'm not abusing or anything": patient-physician communication about opioid treatment in chronic pain.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize clinical communication about opioids through direct analysis of clinic visits and in-depth interviews with patients. METHODS: This was a pilot study of 30 patients with chronic pain, who were audio-recorded in their primary care visits and interviewed after the visit about their pain care and relationship with their physicians. Emergent thematic analysis guided data interpretation. RESULTS: Uncertainties about opioid treatment for chronic pain, particularly addiction and misuse, play an important role in communicating about pain treatment. Three patterns of responding to uncertainty emerged in conversations between patients and physicians: reassurance, avoiding opioids, and gathering additional information. Results are interpreted within the framework of Problematic Integration theory. CONCLUSION: Although it is well-established that opioid treatment for chronic pain poses numerous uncertainties, little is known about how patients and their physicians navigate these uncertainties. This study illuminates ways in which patients and physicians face uncertainty communicatively and collaboratively. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Acknowledging and confronting the uncertainties inherent in chronic opioid treatment are critical communication skills for patients taking opioids and their physicians. Many of the communication behaviors documented in this study may serve as a model for training patients and physicians to communicate effectively about opioids.

Contrasting tensions between patients and PCPs in chronic pain management: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: With greater scrutiny on primary care providers' (PCPs) approaches to chronic pain management, more research is needed to clarify how concerns and uncertainties about opioid therapy affect the ways both patients with chronic pain and PCPs experience primary care interactions. The goal of this qualitative study was to develop a better understanding of the respective experiences, perceptions, and challenges that patients with chronic pain and PCPs face communicating with each other about pain management. DESIGN: Purposive and snowball sampling techniques were used to identify 14 PCPs. Patients who received ≥6 opioid prescriptions during the prior year were selected at random from the panels of participating physicians. Face-to-face in-depth interviews were conducted individually with patients and PCPs. SETTING: VISN 11 Roudebush VA Medical Center (RVAMC) in Indianapolis, Indiana. SUBJECTS: Fourteen PCPs and 26 patients with chronic pain participated. METHODS: An inductive thematic analysis was conducted separately with patient and PCP interview data, after which the emergent themes for both groups were compared and contrasted. RESULTS: Three notable tensions between patients and PCPs were discovered: 1) the role of discussing pain versus other primary care concerns, 2) acknowledgment of pain and the search for objective evidence, and 3) recognition of patient individuality and consideration of relationship history. CONCLUSIONS: Competing demands of primary care practice, differing beliefs about pain, and uncertainties about the appropriate place of opioid therapy in chronic pain management likely contributed to the identified tensions. Several clinical communication strategies to help PCPs mitigate and manage pain-related tensions are discussed.