Kidney Health and Care: Current Status, Challenges, and Developments.

The concept of chronic kidney disease (CKD) originated in the 2000s, and an estimated 850 million patients are currently suffering from health threats from different degrees of CKD. However, it is unclear whether the existing CKD care systems are optimal for improving patient prognosis and outcomes, so this review summarizes the burden, existing care models, effectiveness, challenges, and developments of CKD care. Even under the general care principles, there are still significant gaps in our understanding of the causes of CKD, prevention or care resources, and care burdens between countries worldwide. Receiving care from multidisciplinary teams rather than only a nephrologist shows potential profits in comprehensive and preferable outcomes. In addition, we propose a novel CKD care structure that combines modern technologies, biosensors, longitudinal data visualization, machine learning algorithms, and mobile care. The novel care structure could simultaneously change the care process, significantly reduce human contact, and make the vulnerable population less likely to be exposed to infectious diseases such as COVID-19. The information offered should be beneficial, allowing us to rethink future CKD care models and applications to reach the goals of health equality and sustainability.

Economic Burden Associated with Receiving Inhaled Corticosteroids with Leukotriene Receptor Antagonists or Long-Acting Beta Agonists as Combination Therapy in Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of literature on the health care expenditures associated with different pharmacologic treatments in older adults with asthma that is not well controlled on inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). OBJECTIVE: To compare asthma-related and all-cause health care expenditures associated with leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) versus long-acting beta agonists (LABA) when added to ICS in older adults with asthma. METHODS: A retrospective cohort was constructed using 2009-2010 Medicare fee-for-service medical and pharmacy claims from a 10% random sample of beneficiaries continuously enrolled in Parts A, B, and D in 2009. The sample comprised patients who were aged 65 years and older, diagnosed with asthma, and treated exclusively with ICS + LABA or ICS + LTRA. Outcomes assessed were asthma-related expenditures (medical, pharmacy, and total) and all-cause health care expenditures (medical, pharmacy, and total). Outcomes were measured from the date of the first prescription for the add-on treatment (LABA or LTRA in combination with ICS) after having at least a 4-month "wash-in" period in which patients were receiving no controller, ICS alone, or ICS plus the add-on treatment of the follow-up period. Patients were followed until death, switching to or adding the other add-on treatment, or the end of the study (December 31, 2010). Multivariable regression models with nonparametric bootstrapped standard errors were used to compare all-cause and asthma-related expenditures per patient per month (PPPM) between ICS + LABA and ICS + LTRA users. All models were adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, and county-level health care access variables. RESULTS: The primary analysis included 14,702 patients, of whom 12,940 were treated with ICS + LABA and 1,762 were treated with ICS + LTRA. The mean (SD) follow-up periods were 12.3 (± 5.7) months for the ICS + LABA group and 15.3 (± 5.1) months for the ICS + LTRA group. Adjusted asthma-related expenditures PPPM were $400 for the ICS + LTRA group compared with $286 for the ICS + LABA group (P < 0.001). However, adjusted total all-cause expenditure PPPM was significantly lower for patients treated with ICS + LTRA ($6,087 for ICS + LTRA compared with $6,975 for ICS + LABA, P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with asthma often experience economic burden from asthma and other chronic illnesses. Compared with ICS + LTRA, ICS + LABA was associated with lower asthma-related expenditures but with higher all-cause expenditures in older adults. DISCLOSURES: Support for this study was provided by the University of Pittsburgh School of Pharmacy and the Pittsburgh Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Center (NIA P30 AGAG024827). C. Thorpe reports grants from the National Institute of Aging during the conduct of this study. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

Healthcare utilization and expenditures for United States Medicare beneficiaries with systemic vasculitis.

OBJECTIVE: The Medicare federal insurance program is the most common United States insurer of patients with systemic vasculitis (SV). We compared healthcare utilization and expenditures for Medicare beneficiaries with versus without SV. METHODS: This national, retrospective study used 2010 claims and enrollment data for a 100% cohort of Medicare Part A and B beneficiaries with ≥1 claim including a diagnosis for a form of SV (n = 176,498), and a randomly selected group of non-SV beneficiaries (n = 46,561). Outcomes included annual counts of events in 16 categories of medical services (e.g., inpatient stays, physician visits, tests, and imaging events), and total annual Medicare and patient medical expenditures. We used linear regression with bootstrapped standard errors to compare utilization and expenditures by SV status, before and after matching on age and sex. Prescription drug fills and expenditures for SV (n = 95,157) and non-SV (n = 24,992) beneficiaries with Part D drug benefits were also compared. RESULTS: After matching, Medicare spent $11,004 more per patient in 2010 for medical services, and $773 more on prescription drugs, for SV versus non-SV beneficiaries. SV beneficiaries spent $1547 more for medical services and $211 more for prescription drugs. Except for hospice, SV beneficiaries had greater utilization of all services, including two-to-three times more dialysis events, hospital readmissions, inpatient stays, skilled nursing facility stays, and medical tests. CONCLUSIONS: The average Medicare beneficiary with SV incurs about double the annual healthcare expenditures compared to their non-SV counterparts, attributable to increased utilization of almost all categories of care.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Initiation and Discontinuation of Antidementia Drugs by Medicare Beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVES: To examine racial and ethnic differences in initiation and time to discontinuation of antidementia medication in Medicare beneficiaries. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Secondary analysis of 2009-10 enrollment, claims, and Part D prescription data for a 10% national sample of U.S. Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. PARTICIPANTS: Beneficiaries aged 65 and older with Alzheimer's disease or related dementia (ADRD) before 2009 and no fills for antidementia medications in the first half of 2009 (N = 84,043). MEASUREMENTS: Initiation was defined as having one or more fills for antidementia medication in the second half of 2009 and discontinuation as a gap in coverage of 30 days or more during the year after initiation. The Andersen Behavioral Model was used to guide covariate selection. RESULTS: Overall, 3,481 (4.1%) of previous nonusers initiated antidementia medication in the second half of 2009. Of those initiating one drug class (acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs) or memantine), 9% later added the other class, and 2% switched classes. Of initiators, 23% discontinued within 1 month, and 62% discontinued within 1 year. Hispanic beneficiaries were more likely than white beneficiaries to initiate (adjusted odds ratio = 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.10-1.41). Black and white beneficiaries did not differ in likelihood of initiation. Hispanic (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.34-1.82) and black (aHR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.08-1.44) beneficiaries discontinued at a faster rate than white beneficiaries. CONCLUSION: Initiation of antidementia medications was no different in black and white beneficiaries and more likely in Hispanic beneficiaries; black and Hispanic beneficiaries discontinued at a faster rate. More research into reasons explaining these differences is needed.

Antileukotriene Agents Versus Long-Acting Beta-Agonists in Older Adults with Persistent Asthma: A Comparison of Add-On Therapies.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and cardiovascular safety of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) with those of leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) as add-on treatments in older adults with asthma already taking inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) claims (2009-10) for a 10% random sample of beneficiaries continuously enrolled in Parts A, B, and D in 2009. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries aged 66 and older continuously enrolled in FFS Medicare with Part D coverage with a diagnosis of asthma before 2009 treated exclusively with ICSs plus LABAs or ICSs plus LTRAs (N = 14,702). MEASUREMENTS: The augmented inverse propensity-weighted estimator was used to compare the effect of LABA add-on therapy with that of LTRA add-on therapy on asthma exacerbations requiring inpatient, emergency, or outpatient care and on cardiovascular (CV) events, adjusting for demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and county-level healthcare-access variables. RESULTS: The primary analysis showed that LTRA add-on treatment was associated with greater odds of asthma-related hospitalizations or emergency department visits (odds ratio (OR) = 1.4, P < .001), as well as outpatient exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids or antibiotics (OR = 1.41, P < .001) than LABA treatment. LTRA add-on therapy was also less effective in controlling acute symptoms, as indicated by greater use of short-acting beta agonists (rate ratio = 1.58, P < .001). LTRA add-on treatment was associated with lower odds of experiencing a CV event than LABA treatment (OR = 0.86, P = .006). CONCLUSION: This study provides new evidence specific to older adults to help healthcare providers weigh the risks and benefits of these add-on treatments. Further subgroup analysis is needed to personalize asthma treatments in this high-risk population.

Antidepressant Use and Recurrent Falls in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Findings From the Health ABC Study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have compared the risk of recurrent falls across various antidepressant agents-using detailed dosage and duration data-among community-dwelling older adults, including those who have a history of a fall/fracture. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of antidepressant use with recurrent falls, including among those with a history of falls/fractures, in community-dwelling elders. METHODS: This was a longitudinal analysis of 2948 participants with data collected via interview at year 1 from the Health, Aging and Body Composition study and followed through year 7 (1997-2004). Any antidepressant medication use was self-reported at years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 and further categorized as (1) selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), (2) tricyclic antidepressants, and (3) others. Dosage and duration were examined. The outcome was recurrent falls (≥2) in the ensuing 12-month period following each medication data collection. RESULTS: Using multivariable generalized estimating equations models, we observed a 48% greater likelihood of recurrent falls in antidepressant users compared with nonusers (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.12-1.96). Increased likelihood was also found among those taking SSRIs (AOR = 1.62; 95% CI = 1.15-2.28), with short duration of use (AOR = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.04-2.00), and taking moderate dosages (AOR = 1.59; 95% CI = 1.15-2.18), all compared with no antidepressant use. Stratified analysis revealed an increased likelihood among users with a baseline history of falls/fractures compared with nonusers (AOR = 1.83; 95% CI = 1.28-2.63). CONCLUSION: Antidepressant use overall, SSRI use, short duration of use, and moderate dosage were associated with recurrent falls. Those with a history of falls/fractures also had an increased likelihood of recurrent falls.

Variations Among Medicare Beneficiaries Living in Different Settings: Demographics, Health Status, and Service Use.

Older people with complex health issues and needs for functional support are increasingly living in different types of residential care environments as alternatives to nursing homes. This study aims to compare the demographics and health-care expenditures of Medicare beneficiaries by the setting in which they live: nursing homes, residential care settings, and at home using data from the 2002 to 2010 Medicare Current Beneficiary Study (MCBS), a nationally representative survey of the Medicare population. All Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who participated in the fall MCBS interview (years 2002-2010) and were alive for the full year (N = 83,507) were included in the sample. We found that there is a gradient in health status, physical and cognitive functioning, and health-care use and spending across settings. Minority elderly are overrepresented in facilities and underrepresented in alternative living settings.

Ability to walk 1/4 mile predicts subsequent disability, mortality, and health care costs.

BACKGROUND: Mobility, such as walking 1/4 mile, is a valuable but underutilized health indicator among older adults. For mobility to be successfully integrated into clinical practice and health policy, an easily assessed marker that predicts subsequent health outcomes is required. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between mobility, defined as self-reported ability to walk 1/4 mile, and mortality, functional decline, and health care utilization and costs during the subsequent year. DESIGN: Analysis of longitudinal data from the 2003-2004 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, a nationally representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries. PARTICIPANTS: Participants comprised 5895 community-dwelling adults aged 65 years or older enrolled in Medicare. MAIN MEASURES: Mobility (self-reported ability to walk 1/4 mile), mortality, incident difficulty with activities of daily living (ADLs), total annual health care costs, and hospitalization rates. KEY RESULTS: Among older adults, 28% reported difficulty and 17% inability to walk 1/4 mile at baseline. Compared to those without difficulty and adjusting for demographics, socioeconomic status, chronic conditions, and health behaviors, mortality was greater in those with difficulty [AOR (95% CI): 1.57 (1.10-2.24)] and inability [AOR (CI): 2.73 (1.79-4.15)]. New functional disability also occurred more frequently as self-reported ability to walk 1/4 mile declined (subsequent incident disability among those with no difficulty, difficulty, or inability to walk 1/4 mile at baseline was 11%, 29%, and 47% for instrumental ADLs, and 4%, 14%, and 23% for basic ADLs). Total annual health care costs were $2773 higher (95% CI $1443-4102) in persons with difficulty and $3919 higher (CI $1948-5890) in those who were unable. For each 100 persons, older adults reporting difficulty walking 1/4 mile at baseline experienced an additional 14 hospitalizations (95% CI 8-20), and those who were unable experienced an additional 22 hospitalizations (CI 14-30) during the follow-up period, compared to persons without walking difficulty. CONCLUSIONS: Mobility disability, a simple self-report measure, is a powerful predictor of future health, function, and utilization independent of usual health and demographic indicators. Mobility disability may be used to target high-risk patients for care management and preventive interventions.