ABSTRACT
This cross-sectional study evaluates the use of oral anticoagulants and antiplatelets, including aspirin, among nursing home residents with atrial fibrillation.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Medications prescribed to older adults in US skilled nursing facilities (SNF) and administrations of pro re nata (PRN) "as needed" medications are unobservable in Medicare insurance claims. There is an ongoing deficit in our understanding of medication use during post-acute care. Using SNF electronic health record (EHR) datasets, including medication orders and barcode medication administration records, we described patterns of PRN analgesic prescribing and administrations among SNF residents with hip fracture. METHODS: Eligible participants resided in SNFs owned by 11 chains, had a diagnosis of hip fracture between January 1, 2018 to August 2, 2021, and received at least one administration of an analgesic medication in the 100 days after the hip fracture. We described the scheduling of analgesics, the proportion of available PRN doses administered, and the proportion of days with at least one PRN analgesic administration. RESULTS: Among 24 038 residents, 57.3% had orders for PRN acetaminophen, 67.4% PRN opioids, 4.2% PRN non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and 18.6% PRN combination products. The median proportion of available PRN doses administered per drug was 3%-50% and the median proportion of days where one or more doses of an ordered PRN analgesic was administered was 25%-75%. Results differed by analgesic class and the number of administrations ordered per day. CONCLUSIONS: EHRs can be leveraged to ascertain precise analgesic exposures during SNF stays. Future pharmacoepidemiology studies should consider linking SNF EHRs to insurance claims to construct a longitudinal history of medication use and healthcare utilization prior to and during episodes of SNF care.
Subject(s)
Analgesics , Electronic Health Records , Hip Fractures , Medicare , Skilled Nursing Facilities , Humans , Electronic Health Records/statistics & numerical data , Female , Aged , Male , Aged, 80 and over , United States , Analgesics/administration & dosage , Skilled Nursing Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Subacute Care/statistics & numerical data , Acetaminophen/administration & dosageABSTRACT
AIM: Studies examining the safety and effectiveness of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) versus glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) among community-dwelling adults may not generalize to nursing home (NH) residents, who are typically older and more multimorbid. We compared the safety and cardiovascular effectiveness of SGLT2is and GLP-1RAs among US NH residents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible individuals were aged ≥66 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus and initiated an SGLT2i or GLP-1RA in an NH between 2013 and 2018. Safety outcomes included fall-related injuries, hypoglycaemia, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), urinary tract infection or genital infection, and acute kidney injury in the year following treatment initiation. Cardiovascular effectiveness outcomes included death, major adverse cardiovascular events and hospitalization for heart failure. Per-protocol adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using stabilized inverse probability of treatment and censoring weighted cause-specific hazard regression models accounting for 127 covariates. RESULTS: The study population included 7710 residents (31.08% SGLT2i, 68.92% GLP-1RA). Compared with GLP-1RA initiators, SGLT2i initiators had higher rates of DKA (HR 1.95, 95% confidence limits 1.27, 2.99) and death (HR 1.18, 95% confidence limits 1.02, 1.36). Rates of urinary tract infection or genital infection, acute kidney injury, major adverse cardiovascular events, and heart failure were also elevated, while rates of fall-related injuries and hypoglycaemia were reduced, but all estimates were imprecise and highly compatible with no difference. CONCLUSIONS: SGLT2is do not have superior, and may have inferior, effectiveness compared with GLP-1RAs for cardiovascular and mortality outcomes in NH residents. Residents initiating SGLT2is should be monitored closely for DKA.
Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor , Nursing Homes , Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors , Humans , Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors/adverse effects , Nursing Homes/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Female , Male , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor/agonists , Aged, 80 and over , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/chemically induced , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Hypoglycemic Agents/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Hypoglycemia/chemically induced , Hypoglycemia/epidemiology , Acute Kidney Injury/chemically induced , Acute Kidney Injury/epidemiology , Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor AgonistsABSTRACT
We investigated county-level variation in mRNA COVID-19 vaccine use among Medicare beneficiaries throughout the United States. There was greater use of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines than Moderna vaccines in urban areas for first and booster doses.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Medicare , Rural Population , Urban Population , Humans , United States , COVID-19/prevention & control , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Female , Male , BNT162 Vaccine , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To characterize sliding-scale insulin (SSI) use in US nursing homes (NHs) before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 129,829 US NH residents on SSI (01/2018-06/2022) across 12 NH chains with a common electronic health record system. METHODS: Among all residents with at least 1 administration of SSI documented in the electronic medication administration record, we described resident demographics, frequency of SSI monotherapy vs combination therapy with another diabetes medication, number of daily capillary blood glucose readings ("fingersticks"), and hypoglycemia (capillary blood glucose <70 mg/dL) and hyperglycemia after first SSI use. We used interrupted time series analysis (ITS) with segmented linear regression models to examine whether the monthly prevalence of SSI use changed at and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020). RESULTS: There were 129,829 unique NH residents with SSI use [51% women, average age 71.3 (SD 11.7) years]. Of these, 36% of residents received SSI monotherapy and 64% received SSI combination therapy. Residents on SSI received an average of 3.96 (SD 1.41) fingersticks per day. Overall, 26% of SSI users experienced a hypoglycemic event within 30 days of the first SSI dose. The ITS analysis identified a step decrease in the rate of SSI use following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (43 fewer SSI users per 1000 insulin users) but no change in overall trend over time from before the onset of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: SSI use and fingerstick burden are high in NH residents. Hypoglycemia occurred commonly among residents on SSI. Future research should compare the safety and effectiveness of SSI monotherapy vs other diabetes medication regimens to guide person-centered prescribing decisions in NHs.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Hypoglycemia , Humans , Female , Aged , Male , Pandemics , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Blood Glucose , Cross-Sectional Studies , Insulin/therapeutic use , Nursing HomesABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Coadministering COVID-19 and influenza vaccines is recommended by public health authorities and intended to improve uptake and convenience; however, the extent of vaccine coadministration is largely unknown. Investigations into COVID-19 and influenza vaccine coadministration are needed to describe compliance with newer recommendations and to identify potential gaps in the implementation of coadministration. METHODS: A descriptive, repeated cross-sectional study between September 1, 2021 to November 30, 2021 (Period 1) and September 1, 2022 to November 30, 2022 (Period 2) was conducted. This study included community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries ≥ 66 years who received an mRNA COVID-19 booster vaccine in Periods 1 and 2. The outcome was an influenza vaccine administered on the same day as the COVID-19 vaccine. Adjusted ORs and 99% CIs were estimated using logistic regression to describe the association between beneficiaries' characteristics and vaccine coadministration. Statistical analysis was performed in 2023. RESULTS: Among beneficiaries who received a COVID-19 vaccine, 78.8% in Period 1 (N=6,292,777) and 89.1% in Period 2 (N=4,757,501), received an influenza vaccine at some point during the study period (i.e., before, after, or on the same day as their COVID-19 vaccine), though rates were lower in non-White and rural individuals. Vaccine coadministration increased from 11.1% to 36.5% between periods. Beneficiaries with dementia (aORPeriod 2=1.31; 99%CI=1.29-1.32) and in rural counties (aORPeriod 2=1.19; 99%CI=1.17-1.20) were more likely to receive coadministered vaccines, while those with cancer (aORPeriod 2=0.90; 99%CI=0.89-0.91) were less likely. CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare beneficiaries vaccinated against COVID-19, influenza vaccination was high, but coadministration of the 2 vaccines was low. Future work should explore which factors explain variation in the decision to receive coadministered vaccines.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Medicare , Humans , Aged , Influenza Vaccines/administration & dosage , United States/epidemiology , Male , Female , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Aged, 80 and over , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Little evidence exists about the comparative effects of first-line antihypertensive medications (i.e., renin-angiotensin-aldosterone converting enzyme inhibitors (RAASi), amlodipine, or thiazide diuretics) in older adults with limited life expectancy. We compared the rates of injurious falls and short-term cardiovascular events between different first-line antihypertensive medication classes in adults receiving care in nursing homes (NH). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries receiving care in NHs. Patients newly dispensed first-line antihypertensive medications were identified using Part D claims (2015-2018) and linked with clinical assessments (i.e., Minimum Data Set). Fall-related injuries (FRI), hip fractures, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) outcomes were identified using hospitalization claims. Patients were followed from the date of antihypertensive dispensing until the occurrence of outcomes, death, disenrollment, or 6-month follow-up. Inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighted (IPTW) cause-specific hazards regression models were used to compare outcomes between patients who were new users of RAASi, amlodipine, or thiazides. RESULTS: Our cohort included 16,504 antihypertensive users (RAASi, n = 9574; amlodipine, n = 5049; thiazide, n = 1881). Mean age was 83.5 years (± 8.2), 70.6% were female, and 17.2% were non-white race. During a mean follow-up of 5.3 months, 326 patients (2.0%) experienced an injurious fall, 1590 (9.6%) experienced MACE, and 2123 patients (12.9%) died. The intention-to-treat IPTW hazard ratio (HR) for injurious falls for amlodipine (vs RAASi) use was 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-1.08) and for thiazides (vs RAASi) was 1.22 (95% CI 0.88-1.66). The rates of MACE were similar between those taking anti-hypertensive medications. Thiazides were discontinued more often than other classes; however, inferences were largely unchanged in as-treated analyses. Subgroup analyses were generally consistent. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with limited life expectancy experience similar rates of injurious falls and short-term cardiovascular events after initiating any of the first-line antihypertensive medications.
Subject(s)
Antihypertensive Agents , Hypertension , Humans , Female , Aged , United States/epidemiology , Aged, 80 and over , Male , Antihypertensive Agents/adverse effects , Hypertension/drug therapy , Hypertension/epidemiology , Hypertension/chemically induced , Retrospective Studies , Medicare , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/adverse effects , Amlodipine/adverse effects , Thiazides/therapeutic use , Nursing HomesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) offer cardiovascular benefits, whereas thiazolidinediones (TZDs) and sulfonylureas (SUs) increase cardiovascular risk. The objective of this study was to describe the use of SGLT-2is, GLP-1RAs, TZDs, and SUs before and after a heart failure (HF)-related hospitalization in nursing home (NH) residents with type 2 diabetes (T2D). DESIGN: This was a cohort study using a 20% sample of Medicare claims linked with Minimum Data Set resident assessments. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The study population was long-stay NH residents with T2D and an HF-related hospitalization between January 1, 2013, and August 31, 2018. For individuals with multiple HF hospitalizations, 1 hospitalization was randomly selected. METHODS: We ascertained diabetes medications using Medicare Part D claims during the 120 days before and after hospital discharge (or skilled nursing facility discharge, where applicable). We calculated (1) the proportion of study participants who received a medication class of interest during pre- and posthospitalization periods; (2) the proportion of continuous users; and (3) the proportion of posthospitalization users who were new users. RESULTS: A total of 12,990 NH residents with T2D and an HF-related hospitalization were included (mean age 78 years, 66% female, 19% Black). Before hospitalization, 1.5% received TZDs, 14.1% received SUs, 1.2% received GLP-1RAs, and 0.3% received SGLT-2is. Among prehospitalization users of TZDs, SUs, GLP-1RAs, and SGLT-2is, 49%, 62%, 60%, and 40% continued the medications, respectively. Among posthospitalization users of TZDs, SUs, GLP-1RAs, and SGLT-2is, 37%, 10%, 28%, and 11%, respectively, were new users. CONCLUSIONS: Among NH residents with hospitalized HF, GLP-1RAs and SGLT-2is were seldom used. TZDs and SUs were still used by many residents with T2D after HF hospitalizations. IMPLEMENTATIONS: Barriers may exist in the use of newer diabetes medications to prevent heart failure in NH residents with T2D, which warrants further studies in older adults with multimorbidity.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Heart Failure , Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors , United States , Humans , Aged , Female , Male , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Cohort Studies , Medicare , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Hospitalization , Skilled Nursing Facilities , Sulfonylurea CompoundsABSTRACT
Observational studies of osteoporosis medications can provide critical real-world evidence (RWE) that fills knowledge gaps left by clinical trials. However, careful consideration of study design is needed to yield reliable estimates of association. In particular, obtaining valid measurements of exposure to osteoporosis medications from real-world data (RWD) sources is complicated due to different medication classes, formulations, and routes of administration, each with different pharmacology. Extended half-lives of bisphosphonates and extended dosing of denosumab and zoledronic acid require particular attention. In addition, prescribing patterns and medication taking behavior often result in gaps in therapy, switching, and concomitant use of osteoporosis therapies. In this review, we present important considerations and provide specialized guidance for measuring osteoporosis drug exposures in RWD. First, we compare different sources of RWD used for osteoporosis drug studies and provide guidance on identifying osteoporosis medication use in these data sources. Next, we provide an overview of osteoporosis pharmacology and how it can influence decisions on exposure measurement within RWD. Finally, we present considerations for the measurement of osteoporosis medication exposure, adherence, switching, long-term exposures, and drug holidays using RWD. Ultimately, a thorough understanding of the differences in RWD sources and the pharmacology of osteoporosis medications is essential to obtain valid estimates of the relationship between osteoporosis medications and outcomes, such as fractures, but also to improve the critical appraisal of published studies.
ABSTRACT
Background Dose reduction of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) medications is inconsistently applied to older adults with multiple morbidities, potentially due to perceived harms and unknown benefits of standard dosing. Methods and Results Using 2013 to 2017 US Medicare claims linked to Minimum Data Set records, we conducted a retrospective cohort study. We identified DOAC initiators (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban) aged ≥65 years with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation residing in a nursing home. We estimated inverse-probability of treatment weights for DOAC dose using propensity scores. We examined safety (hospitalization for major bleeding) and effectiveness outcomes (all-cause mortality, thrombosis [myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, venous thromboembolism]). We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs using cause-specific hazard-regression models. Of 21 878 DOAC initiators, 48% received reduced dosing. The mean age of residents was 82.0 years, 66% were female, and 31% had moderate/severe cognitive impairment. After estimating inverse-probability of treatment weights, standard dosing was associated with a higher rate of bleeding (HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.03-1.37]; 9.4 versus 8.0 events per 100 person-years). Standard-dose therapy was associated with the highest rates of bleeding among those aged >80 years (9.1 versus 6.7 events per 100 person-years) and with a body mass index <30 kg/m2 (9.4 versus 7.4 events per 100 person-years). There was no association of dosing with mortality (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.96-1.06]) or thrombotic events (HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.96-1.41]). Conclusions In this nationwide study of nursing home residents with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, we found a higher rate of bleeding and little difference in effectiveness of standard versus reduced-dose DOAC treatment. Our results support the use of reduced-dose DOACs for many older adults with multiple morbidities.
Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Stroke , Aged , Female , Humans , United States , Aged, 80 and over , Male , Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , Retrospective Studies , Factor Xa Inhibitors , Medicare , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Stroke/etiology , Rivaroxaban , Dabigatran , Hemorrhage , Morbidity , Administration, OralABSTRACT
CONTEXTE: Au Canada, plus de 2 millions de personnes vivent avec l'ostéoporose, une maladie qui accroît le risque de fracture, ce qui fait augmenter la morbidité et la mortalité, et entraîne une perte de qualité de vie et d'autonomie. La présente actualisation des lignes directrices vise à accompagner les professionnelles et professionnels de la santé au Canada dans la prestation de soins visant à optimiser la santé osseuse et à prévenir les fractures chez les femmes ménopausées et les hommes de 50 ans et plus. MÉTHODES: Le présent document fournit une actualisation des lignes directrices de pratique clinique de 2010 d'Ostéoporose Canada sur le diagnostic et la prise en charge de l'ostéoporose au pays. Nous avons utilisé l'approche GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) et effectué l'assurance de la qualité conformément aux normes de qualité et de présentation des rapports de la grille AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation). Les médecins de premier recours et les patientes et patients partenaires ont été représentés à tous les niveaux des comités et des groupes ayant participé à l'élaboration des lignes directrices, et ont participé à toutes les étapes du processus pour garantir la pertinence des informations pour les futurs utilisateurs et utilisatrices. Le processus de gestion des intérêts concurrents a été entamé avant l'élaboration des lignes directrices et s'est poursuivi sur toute sa durée, selon les principes du Réseau international en matière de lignes directrices. Dans la formulation des recommandations, nous avons tenu compte des avantages et des risques, des valeurs et préférences de la patientèle, des ressources, de l'équité, de l'acceptabilité et de la faisabilité; la force de chacune des recommandations a été déterminée en fonction du cadre GRADE. RECOMMANDATIONS: Les 25 recommandations et les 10 énoncés de bonne pratique sont répartis en sections : activité physique, alimentation, évaluation du risque de fracture, instauration du traitement, interventions pharmacologiques, durée et séquence du traitement, et monitorage. La prise en charge de l'ostéoporose devrait se fonder sur le risque de fracture, établi au moyen d'une évaluation clinique réalisée avec un outil d'évaluation du risque de fracture validé. L'activité physique, l'alimentation et la pharmacothérapie sont des éléments essentiels à la stratégie de prévention des fractures, qui devraient être personnalisés. INTERPRÉTATION: Les présentes lignes directrices ont pour but d'outiller les professionnelles et professionnels de la santé et la patientèle afin qu'ensemble ils puissent parler de l'importance de la santé osseuse et du risque de fracture tout au long de la vie adulte avancée. La détection et la prise en charge efficace de la fragilité osseuse peuvent contribuer à réduire les fractures et à préserver la mobilité, l'autonomie et la qualité de vie.
Subject(s)
Fractures, Bone , Osteoporosis , Humans , CanadaABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In Canada, more than 2 million people live with osteoporosis, a disease that increases the risk for fractures, which result in excess mortality and morbidity, decreased quality of life and loss of autonomy. This guideline update is intended to assist Canadian health care professionals in the delivery of care to optimize skeletal health and prevent fractures in postmenopausal females and in males aged 50 years and older. METHODS: This guideline is an update of the 2010 Osteoporosis Canada clinical practice guideline on the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada. We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework and quality assurance as per Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) quality and reporting standards. Primary care physicians and patient partners were represented at all levels of the guideline committees and groups, and participated throughout the entire process to ensure relevance to target users. The process for managing competing interests was developed before and continued throughout the guideline development, informed by the Guideline International Network principles. We considered benefits and harms, patient values and preferences, resources, equity, acceptability and feasibility when developing recommendations; the strength of each recommendation was assigned according to the GRADE framework. RECOMMENDATIONS: The 25 recommendations and 10 good practice statements are grouped under the sections of exercise, nutrition, fracture risk assessment and treatment initiation, pharmacologic interventions, duration and sequence of therapy, and monitoring. The management of osteoporosis should be guided by the patient's risk of fracture, based on clinical assessment and using a validated fracture risk assessment tool. Exercise, nutrition and pharmacotherapy are key elements of the management strategy for fracture prevention and should be individualized. INTERPRETATION: The aim of this guideline is to empower health care professionals and patients to have meaningful discussions on the importance of skeletal health and fracture risk throughout older adulthood. Identification and appropriate management of skeletal fragility can reduce fractures, and preserve mobility, autonomy and quality of life.
Subject(s)
Fractures, Bone , Osteoporosis , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Canada , Nutritional Status , Osteoporosis/complications , Osteoporosis/diagnosis , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Quality of LifeABSTRACT
Importance: Head-to-head safety comparisons of the mRNA vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 are needed for decision making; however, current evidence generalizes poorly to older adults, lacks sufficient adjustment, and inadequately captures events shortly after vaccination. Additionally, no studies to date have explored potential variation in comparative vaccine safety across subgroups with frailty or an increased risk of adverse events, information that would be useful for tailoring clinical decisions. Objective: To compare the risk of adverse events between mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 (mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2) overall, by frailty level, and by prior history of the adverse events of interest. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted between December 11, 2020, and July 11, 2021, with 28 days of follow-up following the week of vaccination. A novel linked database of community pharmacy and Medicare claims data was used, representing more than 50% of the US Medicare population. Community-dwelling, fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 66 years or older who received mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 as their first COVID-19 vaccine were identified. Data analysis began on October 18, 2022. Exposure: Dose 1 of mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 vaccine. Main Outcomes and Measures: Twelve potential adverse events (eg, pulmonary embolism, thrombocytopenia purpura, and myocarditis) were assessed individually. Frailty was measured using a claims-based frailty index, with beneficiaries being categorized as nonfrail, prefrail, and frail. The risk of diagnosed COVID-19 was assessed as a secondary outcome. Generalized linear models estimated covariate-adjusted risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) with 95% CIs. Results: This study included 6â¯388â¯196 eligible individuals who received the mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 vaccine. Their mean (SD) age was 76.3 (7.5) years, 59.4% were women, and 86.5% were White. A total of 38.1% of individuals were categorized as prefrail and 6.0% as frail. The risk of all outcomes was low in both vaccine groups. In adjusted models, the mRNA-1273 vaccine was associated with a lower risk of pulmonary embolism (RR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.93-1.00]; RD, 9 [95% CI, 1-16] events per 100â¯000 persons) and other adverse events in subgroup analyses (eg, 11.0% lower risk of thrombocytopenia purpura among individuals categorized as nonfrail). The mRNA-1273 vaccine was also associated with a lower risk of diagnosed COVID-19 (RR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.83-0.87]), a benefit that was attenuated by frailty level (frail: RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.89-0.99]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of older US adults, the mRNA-1273 vaccine was associated with a slightly lower risk of several adverse events compared with BNT162b2, possibly due to greater protection against COVID-19. Future research should seek to formally disentangle differences in vaccine safety and effectiveness and consider the role of frailty in assessments of COVID-19 vaccine performance.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Frailty , Purpura , Thrombocytopenia , United States/epidemiology , Humans , Aged , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Male , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273 , BNT162 Vaccine , Cohort Studies , Frailty/epidemiology , Frailty/etiology , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Medicare , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination/adverse effects , mRNA Vaccines , RNA, MessengerABSTRACT
Introduction: COVID-19 booster vaccines are highly effective at reducing severe illness and death from COVID-19. Research is needed to identify whether racial and ethnic disparities observed for the primary series of the COVID-19 vaccines persist for booster vaccinations and how those disparities may vary by other characteristics. We aimed to measure racial and ethnic differences in booster vaccine receipt among U.S. Medicare beneficiaries and characterize potential variation by demographic characteristics. Methods: We conducted a cohort study using CVS Health and Walgreens pharmacy data linked to Medicare claims. We included community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥66 years who received two mRNA vaccine doses (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) as of 8/1/2021. We followed beneficiaries from 8/1/2021 until booster vaccine receipt, death, Medicare disenrollment, or end of follow-up (12/31/2021). Adjusted Poisson regression was used to estimate rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing vaccine uptake between groups. Results: We identified 11,339,103 eligible beneficiaries (mean age 76 years, 60% female, 78% White). Overall, 67% received a booster vaccine (White = 68.5%; Asian = 67.0%; Black = 57.0%; Hispanic = 53.3%). Compared to White individuals, Black (RR = 0.78 [95%CI = 0.78-0.78]) and Hispanic individuals (RR = 0.72 [95% = CI 0.72-0.72]) had lower rates of booster vaccination. Disparities varied by geographic region, urbanicity, and Medicare plan/Medicaid eligibility. The relative magnitude of disparities was lesser in areas where vaccine uptake was lower in White individuals. Discussion: Racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 vaccination have persisted for booster vaccines. These findings highlight that interventions to improve vaccine uptake should be designed at the intersection of race and ethnicity and geographic location.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , United States , Humans , Aged , Female , Male , BNT162 Vaccine , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/prevention & control , Medicare , VaccinationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Post-acute care (PAC) services after hospitalization for hip fracture are typically provided in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), or at home via home health care (HHC). Little is known about the clinical course following PAC for hip fracture. We examined the nationwide burden of adverse outcomes by PAC setting in the year following discharge from PAC for hip fracture. METHODS: This retrospective cohort included Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries > 65 years who received PAC services in U.S. SNFs, IRFs, or HHC following hip fracture hospitalization between 2012 and 2018. Individuals who had a fall-related injury (FRI) during PAC or received PAC services in multiple settings were excluded. Primary outcomes included FRIs, all-cause hospital readmissions, and death in the year following discharge from PAC. Cumulative incidences and incidence rates for adverse outcomes were reported by PAC setting. Exploratory analyses examined risk ratios and hazard ratios between settings before and after inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighting, which accounted for 43 covariates. RESULTS: Among 624,631 participants (SNF, 67.78%; IRF, 16.08%; HHC, 16.15%), the mean (standard deviation) age was 82.70 (8.26) years, 74.96% were female, and 91.30% were non-Hispanic White. Crude incidence rates (95%CLs) per 1000 person-years were highest among individuals receiving SNF care for FRIs (SNF, 123 [121, 123]; IRF, 105 [102, 107]; HHC, 89 [87, 91]), hospital readmission (SNF, 623 [619, 626]; IRF, 538 [532, 544]; HHC, 418 [414, 423]), and death (SNF, 167 [165, 169]; IRF, 47 [46, 49]; HHC, 55 [53, 56]). Overall, rates of adverse outcomes generally remained higher among SNF care recipients after covariate adjustment. However, inferences about the group with greater adverse outcomes differed for FRIs and hospital readmissions based on risk ratio or hazard ratio estimates. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective cohort study of individuals hospitalized for hip fracture, rates of adverse outcomes in the year following PAC were common, especially among SNF care recipients. Understanding risks and rates of adverse events can inform future efforts to improve outcomes for older adults receiving PAC for hip fracture. Future work should consider calculating risk and rate measures to assess the influence of differential time under observation across PAC groups.
Subject(s)
Hip Fractures , Medicare , Humans , Female , Aged , United States/epidemiology , Aged, 80 and over , Male , Retrospective Studies , Subacute Care , Hospitalization , Patient Discharge , Patient Readmission , Hip Fractures/therapy , Hip Fractures/rehabilitationABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Little is known about how COVID-19 treatment patterns have evolved over time in nursing homes (NHs) despite the devastating effects of COVID-19 in this setting. The aim was to describe changes in COVID-19-related medication use over time among NH residents in the United States. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study used electronic health records (EHR) from 11 different US NH corporations between January 1, 2018, and March 31, 2022. METHODS: The use of medications approved for COVID-19-related conditions or known to be used off-label for COVID-19 during the study period is identified. We described trends in the use of each drug and combined use per 1000 NH residents over calendar time [quarters (Q)]. RESULTS: A total of 59,022 unique residents with the use of an eligible medication were identified. Hydroxychloroquine use sharply increased from 9.8 in 2020Q1 to 30.2 orders per 1000 individuals in 2020Q2. Dexamethasone use increased sharply from 14.8 in 2020Q2 to a peak of 121.9 orders per 1000 individuals in 2020Q4. Azithromycin use increased from 44.1 in 2019Q3 to a peak of 99.9 orders per 1000 individuals in 2020Q4, with a drop in 2020Q3 of 51.3 per 1000 individuals in 2020Q3. Concurrent use of azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine increased sharply from 0.3 in 2020Q1 to 10.6 orders per 1000 residents in 2020Q2 and then drastically decreased to 0.6 per 1000 residents in 2020Q3. Concurrent use of dexamethasone and azithromycin rose considerably from 0.7 in 2020Q2 to 28.2 orders per 1000 residents in 2020Q4. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: As in other settings, COVID-19-related medication use in NHs appears to have changed in response to the shifting evidence base and availability of medications during the pandemic. Providers should continue to diligently modify their prescribing as new evidence accrues.
Subject(s)
Azithromycin , COVID-19 , Humans , United States , Retrospective Studies , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Nursing Homes , DexamethasoneABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2I) use has increased among community-dwelling populations, but little is known about how clinicians have prescribed them for US nursing home (NH) residents. We described the adoption of SGLT2Is by prescribers caring for long-stay NH residents by clinician specialty and over time, compared with sulfonylureas, an older diabetes medication class. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of prescribers of SGLT2Is and sulfonylureas for all long-stay US NH residents aged 65 years or older (2017-2019). Using 100% of Medicare Part D claims linked to prescriber characteristics data, we identified all dispensings of SGLT2Is and sulfonylureas for long-stay NH residents and their associated prescribers. We described the distribution of prescriber specialties for each drug class over time as well as the number of NH residents prescribed SGLT2s versus sulfonylureas. We estimated the proportions of prescribers who prescribed both drug classes versus only sulfonylureas or only SGLT2Is. RESULTS: We identified 36,427 unique prescribers (SGLT2I: N = 5811; sulfonylureas: N = 35,443) for 117,667 NH residents between 2017 and 2019. For both classes, family medicine and internal medicine physicians accounted for most prescriptions (75%-81%). Most clinicians (87%) prescribed only sulfonylureas, 2% prescribed SGLT2Is only, and 11% prescribed both. Geriatricians were least likely to prescribe only SGLT2Is. We observed an increase in the number of residents with SGLT2I use from n = 2344 in 2017 to n = 5748 in 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Among NH residents, most clinicians have not incorporated SGLT2Is into their prescribing for diabetes, but the extent of use is increasing. Family medicine and internal medicine physicians prescribed the majority of diabetes medications for NH residents, and geriatricians were the least likely to prescribe only SGLT2Is. Future research should explore provider concerns regarding SGLT2I prescribing, particularly adverse events.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Medicare Part D , Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors , Aged , Humans , United States , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Nursing Homes , Retrospective Studies , Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Sulfonylurea Compounds/therapeutic use , Glucose/therapeutic use , Sodium , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic useABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Pain management in post-acute care (PAC) requires careful balance, with both opioid use and inadequate pain treatment linked to poor outcomes. We describe opioid use among older adults following discharge from PAC for hip fracture in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries with Medicare Provider Analysis (MedPAR) claims, aged 66 years and older with a hip fracture hospitalization between 2012 and 2018 followed by PAC in SNFs or IRFs and then discharge to the community. METHODS: Individuals were followed from PAC discharge for up to 1 year to assess opioid use. Covariate-standardized risk ratios (RR) and risk differences (RD) for opioid use within 7 days of PAC discharge were estimated via parametric g-formula with modified Poisson regression, and hazard ratios (HRs) for any post-PAC opioid use and long-term opioid use via Fine-Gray sub-distribution hazards regression. RESULTS: Of 101,021 individuals, 80% (n = 80,495) were discharged from SNFs and 20% (n = 20,526) from IRFs. Opioids were dispensed to 50,433 patients (50%) overall and the 1-year cumulative incidence was notably higher in IRF (68%) than SNF (46%) patients. The adjusted risk of discharge from PAC with an opioid was 41% lower after SNFs versus IRFs [RR: 0.59; 95% confidence limits (CLs): 0.57-0.61; and RD: -0.16; 95% CLs: -0.17 to -0.15]. The adjusted rate of any opioid use in the year after PAC discharge was 44% lower (HR: 0.56; 95% CLs: 0.54-0.57) and of long-term opioid use was 17% lower (HR: 0.83; 95% CLs: 0.80-0.87) after SNFs versus IRFs. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Opioid use is highly prevalent upon discharge from PAC after hip fracture, with lower use after SNF versus IRF care. Future research should assess the benefits and harms of post-PAC opioid prescribing and whether care practices during PAC can be improved to optimize long-term opioid use.