Role of prices in driving the variation in spending across medical groups.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the relative role of prices versus utilization in the variation in total spending per patient across medical groups. DATA SOURCES: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of medical claims for commercially insured adults from a large national insurer in 2018. STUDY DESIGN: After assigning patients to a medical group based on primary care visits in 2018, we calculated total medical spending for each patient in that year. Total spending included care provided by clinicians within the medical group and care provided by other providers, including hospitals. It did not include drug spending. We estimated the case mix adjusted spending per patient for each medical group. Within each market, we categorized medical groups into quartiles based on the group's spending per patient. To decompose spending variation into price versus utilization, we compared spending differences between highest and lowest quartile medical groups under two scenarios: (1) using actual prices (2) using a standardized price (same price used for a given service across the nation). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In total, 3,921,736 patients were assigned to 7284 medical groups. Per-patient spending in the highest quartile of spending medical groups was $1813 higher than per-patient spending in the lowest spending quartile of medical groups (50% higher relative spending). This overall difference was primarily driven by differences in inpatient care, imaging, and specialty care. In the scenario where we used standardized prices, the difference in spending between medical groups in the top and bottom quartiles decreased to $1425, implying that 79% of the $1813 difference in spending between the top and bottom quartile groups is explained by utilization and the remaining 21% by prices. The likely explanation for the modest impact of prices is that patients cared for by a given medical group receive care across a wide range of providers. CONCLUSIONS: Prices explained a modest fraction of the differences in spending between medical groups.

Treatment modification after initiating second-line medication for type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: To describe changes in antidiabetic medication (ADM) use and characteristics associated with changes in ADM use after initiation of noninsulin second-line therapy. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: This study analyzed private health plan claims for adults with type 2 diabetes who initiated 1 of 5 index ADM classes: sulfonylureas, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4is), sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), or thiazolidinediones. Analyses evaluated 3 treatment modification outcomes-discontinuation, switching, and intensification-over 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Of 82,624 included adults, nearly two-thirds (63.6%) experienced any treatment modification. Discontinuation was the most common modification (38.6%), especially among patients prescribed GLP-1 RAs (50.3%). Switching occurred in 5.2% of patients and intensification in 19.8%. In adjusted analysis, compared with patients prescribed sulfonylureas, discontinuation risk was 7% higher (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.10) among patients prescribed DPP4is and 28% higher (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.23-1.33) among patients prescribed GLP-1 RAs. Compared with sulfonylureas, all other index ADM classes had higher risks of switching and lower risks of intensification. Younger age group and female sex were both associated with higher risks of all modifications. Compared with index ADM prescription by a family medicine or internal medicine physician, index prescription by an endocrinologist was associated with both lower discontinuation risk and higher intensification risk. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients experienced a treatment modification within 1 year. Results highlight the need for new prescribing approaches and patient supports that can maximize medication adherence and reduce health system waste.

Meningococcal Vaccination Rates Among People With a New Diagnosis of HIV Infection in the US.

Importance: In the United States, individuals with HIV infection have been recommended to receive a 2-dose series of the meningococcal A, C, W, Y (MenACWY) vaccine since 2016 owing to their increased risk of meningococcal disease. Objective: To examine uptake and time to receipt of the MenACWY vaccine among people with a new diagnosis of HIV. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used health insurance data from the US Optum Research Database from January 1, 2016, through March 31, 2018, to retrospectively identify 1208 individuals aged 2 years or older with 1 or more inpatient claim or 2 or more outpatient claims evidencing a new diagnosis of HIV infection and with continuous insurance enrollment for 12 or more months before and 6 or more months after diagnosis. Follow-up was 6 to 33 months. Statistical analysis was conducted from March 7, 2019, to January 5, 2022. Exposure: Receipt of the MenACWY vaccine. Main Outcomes and Measures: The coprimary outcomes were uptake and time to receipt of 1 or more doses of the MenACWY vaccine after a new HIV diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included uptake and time to receipt of 2 or more doses of the MenACWY vaccine. Vaccination uptake and receipt were estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis; factors associated with receipt of 1 or more doses of the MenACWY vaccine were identified with multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Results: Of 1208 individuals eligible for vaccination (1024 male patients [84.8%]; mean [SD] age, 38.8 [12.5] years; 35 [2.9%] Asian; 273 [22.6%] Black; 204 [16.9%] Hispanic; 442 [36.6%] White), 16.3% were estimated to have received a first dose of the MenACWY vaccine in the 2 years after a new HIV diagnosis. Among individuals who received a first dose, at 1 year or more of enrollment after the first dose, 66.2% were estimated to have received a second dose within 1 year of the first dose. Factors statistically significantly associated with uptake of the MenACWY vaccine included receipt of a pneumococcal vaccine (hazard ratio [HR], 23.03; 95% CI, 13.93-38.09), attendance at a well-care visit (HR, 3.67; 95% CI, 1.11-12.12), West or Midwest geographic region (West: HR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.44-3.47; Midwest: HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.16-2.71), and male sex (HR, 2.72; 95% CI, 1.18-6.26), whereas age of 56 years or older was significantly associated with reduced uptake of the MenACWY vaccine (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18-0.97). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study suggests that MenACWY vaccine uptake among people with a new diagnosis of HIV was low, highlighting the need to educate patients and clinicians about the recommendations for conditions such as HIV infection that increase the risk of meningococcal disease among high-risk populations.

Low Meningococcal Vaccination Rates Among Patients With Newly Diagnosed Complement Component Deficiencies in the United States.

Meningococcal vaccination is recommended for patients with complement component deficiencies (CDs) in the United States. In this retrospective database study, only 4.6% and 2.2% of patients received MenACWY and MenB vaccination, respectively, within 3 years of CD diagnosis. Thus, meningococcal vaccination rates among patients with CDs need to be improved.

Variation in spending associated with primary care practices.

OBJECTIVES: To measure variation in spending and inpatient prices associated with the primary care physician (PCP) practice to which patients are attributed. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of claims data. METHODS: We used random effect models to estimate case mix-adjusted spending across large PCP practices within 3-digit zip codes. We compare inpatient prices for patients in high-spending practices with those in low-spending practices. RESULTS: The physician practice to which a patient was attributed is associated with significant differences in spending after controlling for patient comorbidities and geography. Patients attributed to practices in the top quartile of total medical expenses have about 30% higher spending than patients attributed to practices in the bottom quartile of adjusted spending in their 3-digit zip code. If patients attributed to practices in the top 2 quartiles had spending equivalent to those in the median practice, total spending would drop by 8%. Price variation accounts for a meaningful amount of the variation, with inpatient prices 17% higher in top-quartile vs bottom-quartile practices. We cannot disaggregate the large variation in utilization into practice patterns and unmeasured case mix (including unmeasured differences in patients' socioeconomic status) vs random health shocks, but correlation in spending patterns across years suggests that some persistent differences in spending patterns exist. CONCLUSIONS: There are meaningful opportunities to reduce spending by changing patient PCP selection, encouraging patients to use lower-priced specialists and hospitals, and eliminating wasteful care. Attention must be paid to the best ways to reap these savings.

Treatment Compliance Communications Between Patients with Severe Mental Illness and Treating Healthcare Providers: A Retrospective Study of Documentation Using Healthcare Reimbursement Claims and Medical Chart Abstraction.

INTRODUCTION: Successful treatment for serious mental illnesses (SMIs) requires a good therapeutic alliance with healthcare providers and compliance with prescribed therapies such as antipsychotic medications. This retrospective study, which utilized administrative claims linked with abstracted medical chart data, addressed a data gap regarding compliance-related discussions between providers and patients. METHODS: Commercially insured patients in ambulatory care post-acute (emergency or inpatient) event were eligible. Criteria included age 18-65 years; schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or major depressive disorder diagnoses; continuous enrollment 6 months before to 12 months after the first acute event claim dated 01/01/2014 to 12/31/2015; and antipsychotic medication prescription. Demographic and clinical data, and patient-provider discussions about treatment compliance were characterized from claims and abstracted medical charts. RESULTS: Ninety patients (62% female, mean age 41 years) were included and 680 visits were abstracted; only 58% had first-visit antipsychotic compliance discussions. Notably, 18% of patients had discussions using the specific terms "compliance," "persistence," or "adherence," whereas half were identified by more general terms. Compliance discussions were observed least often among the patients with schizophrenia, as compared with bipolar or major depressive disorders-a counterintuitive finding. DISCUSSION: Compliance discussions may represent intervention opportunities to optimize treatment, yet their study is a complex endeavor. The results of this study show an opportunity to improve this valuable treatment step.

Impact of treatment-related discussions on healthcare resource use and costs among patients with severe mental illness.

OBJECTIVE: Serious mental illnesses (SMIs), including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and major depressive disorder (MDD), are often treated with antipsychotic medications. Unfortunately, medication non-adherence is widespread and is associated with serious adverse outcomes. However, little real-world data are available describing adherence, compliance, or other medication-taking-related discussions between providers and patients. This study described these communications in ambulatory care. METHODS: Commercially insured patients having acute (emergency or inpatient) behavioral health (BH) events were included by specific criteria: age 18-65 years; diagnoses of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or MDD; continuous health insurance coverage 6 months before to 12 months after the first claim (index) date during 01/01/2014‒12/31/2015; and prescribed antipsychotic medication. Medical charts were abstracted for ambulatory visits with a BH diagnosis through 12 months after the acute event, describing any treatment compliance discussions that occurred. BH-related healthcare utilization and costs were measured via insurance claims. Results were analyzed by observation of an antipsychotic medication taking-related (i.e. compliance or adherence) discussion at the initial abstracted visit. RESULTS: Ninety patients were included: 62% female, mean age 41 years. Only 58% had antipsychotic compliance discussions during the first abstracted ambulatory visit. A total of 680 BH-related visits were abstracted for the 90 patients. Providers frequently discussed any psychotropic medication use (97% of all visits abstracted); however, discussion of compliance with BH talk therapies was less common (49% of visits among patients with a first visit antipsychotic discussion and 23% without, p < .001). Follow-up BH-related healthcare utilization and costs were not significantly different by cohort. Patients with ≥2 compliance discussions had a significantly lower risk of follow-up acute events, which are the costliest components of healthcare for SMI (p = .023). CONCLUSION: Increasing the frequency of antipsychotic treatment-related adherence/compliance discussions may represent an opportunity to improve the quality of care for these vulnerable patients and reduce the overall economic burden associated with the treatment of SMI diagnosis.

Meningococcal vaccination in patients with newly diagnosed asplenia in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Patients with asplenia are recommended to receive meningococcal ACWY (MenACWY) and B (MenB) vaccines in the United States (US). OBJECTIVES: To examine uptake and time to receipt of meningococcal vaccines in newly diagnosed asplenia patients, and identify factors associated with vaccination. METHODS: For this retrospective database analysis, patients were identified from 1/1/2010 (MenACWY) or 1/1/2015 (MenB) through 3/31/2018 from an administrative claims database including commercially insured US patients with ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient claims with evidence of a new asplenia diagnosis (sickle cell disease was excluded); continuous enrollment for ≥12 months before and ≥6 months after the index date; and age ≥2 (MenACWY) or ≥10 (MenB) years. Co-primary outcomes were uptake and time to receipt of ≥1 dose, separately for MenACWY and MenB, by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to identify characteristics associated with vaccination. RESULTS: Among 2,273 and 741 patients eligible for the MenACWY and MenB analyses, respectively, 28.1% and 9.7% received MenACWY and MenB in the first 3 years after a new asplenia diagnosis. Patients were more likely to receive meningococcal vaccines if they had received pneumococcal vaccines (MenACWY: hazard ratio [HR] 26.02; 95% confidence interval [CI] 21.01-32.22; MenB: HR 3.89; 95% CI 2.07-7.29) or attended ≥1 well-care visit (MenACWY: HR 6.63; 95% CI 4.84-9.09; MenB: HR 11.17; 95% CI 3.02-41.26). CONCLUSIONS: Meningococcal vaccination rates among newly diagnosed asplenia patients were low, highlighting the need to educate providers about the recommendations for high-risk conditions and ensure healthcare access for vulnerable patients.

Evaluation of rescue medication use and medication adherence receiving umeclidinium/vilanterol versus tiotropium bromide/olodaterol.

Background: This was the first real-world head-to-head study comparing inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ß2-agonist fixed-dose combination treatments as maintenance therapy. Methods: Retrospective observational study including commercial, Medicare Advantage with Part D or Part D-only enrollees aged ≥40 years from the Optum Research Database. Patients initiated umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) or tiotropium bromide/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) between June 1, 2015 and November 30, 2016 (index date) with 12 months of pre- and post-index continuous enrollment. Outcomes were modeled following the inverse probability of treatment weighting. The primary endpoint, rescue medication use, was modeled using weighted ordinary least squares regression with bootstrapped variance estimation. Intent-to-treat analysis evaluated non-inferiority and superiority of UMEC/VI to TIO/OLO with thresholds of 0.30 and 0 units, respectively. On-treatment sensitivity analysis evaluated the superiority of UMEC/VI to TIO/OLO for rescue medication use. The secondary endpoint, medication adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC]≥80%), was evaluated using weighted logistic regression. Post hoc weighted Cox proportional hazards regression analysis evaluated escalation to multiple inhaler triple therapy (MITT). Results: The study population included 14,324 patients; 9549 initiated UMEC/VI and 4775 initiated TIO/OLO. During the 12-month post-index period, UMEC/VI initiators used 0.16 fewer adjusted mean units of rescue medication than TIO/OLO initiators (95% CI: -0.28, -0.04), meeting pre-specified non-inferiority (P<0.001) and superiority (P=0.005) criteria; the on-treatment sensitivity analysis for superiority was not statistically significant. Significantly more UMEC/VI than TIO/OLO initiators (28.6% vs 22.7%; P<0.001) achieved a clinically meaningful level (PDC≥80%) of medication adherence. The adjusted risk of escalation to MITT was similar between treatment groups (HR=0.93; 95% CI: 0.81, 1.06; P=0.268). Conclusion: UMEC/VI was superior to TIO/OLO for rescue medication use and UMEC/VI initiators had better medication adherence than TIO/OLO initiators. This study supports findings from a head-to-head trial that demonstrated significant, clinically meaningful improvements in lung function with UMEC/VI versus TIO/OLO.

Real-world effectiveness of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol as initial maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a retrospective cohort study.

Background and objective: Retrospective claims data in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) initiating maintenance therapy with inhaled fixed-dose combinations of long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ß2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) versus inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA have not been reported. Methods: Retrospective observational study in a COPD-diagnosed population of commercial and Medicare Advantage with Part D (MAPD) enrollees aged ≥40 years from a US health insurer database. Patients initiated umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI [62.5/25 µg]) or fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL [250/50 µg]) between April 1, 2014 and August 31, 2016 (index date) and had 12 months continuous enrollment pre- and post-index. Exclusion criteria included an asthma diagnosis in the pre-index period/index date; ICS-, LABA-, or LAMA-containing therapy during the pre-index period; or pharmacy fills for both UMEC/VI and FP/SAL, multiple-inhaler triple therapy, a non-index therapy, or COPD exacerbation on the index date. Adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC] ≥80%) was modeled using weighted logistic regression following inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Weighted Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression following IPTW were performed for incidence of COPD exacerbation and escalation to multiple-inhaler triple therapy. Results: The study population included 5306 patients (1386 initiating UMEC/VI and 3920 initiating FP/SAL). Adjusted odds of adherence were 2.00 times greater among UMEC/VI than FP/SAL initiators (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.62─2.46; P<0.001). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for first exacerbation was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.74-1.01; P=0.067) among UMEC/VI versus FP/SAL initiators. UMEC/VI initiators had 35% lower adjusted risk of escalation to multiple-inhaler triple therapy (HR 0.65; 95% CI: 0.47-0.89; P=0.008) versus FP/SAL. On-treatment, UMEC/VI initiators had an adjusted 30% reduced risk of a first moderate/severe COPD exacerbation (HR 0.70; 95% CI: 0.54-0.90; P=0.006). Conclusion: Patients with COPD initiating UMEC/VI had higher adherence and longer time before escalation to multiple-inhaler triple therapy than FP/SAL initiators.

Cost of subcutaneous immunotherapy in a large insured population in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Allergic rhinitis (AR) affects up to 40% of the United States population, with approximately $11 billion annual medical costs. Allergy immunotherapy is the best option for long-term symptomatic relief, but treatment compliance can be low. The objective was to describe subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT)-related costs for patients overall and those with inconsistent treatment. METHODS: This study observed commercial and Medicare Advantage with Part D health plan enrollees. Included subjects had claims with AR diagnostic codes during 1 January 2011-31 December 2015 and ≥1 SCIT claim during 1 January 2013-31 December 2015 (index date = first SCIT claim date). A control sample was chosen randomly at a 1:3 ratio of SCIT to controls. Inconsistent use was defined as a ≥90 day gap after ≥1 SCIT. Patient characteristics were compared between SCIT patients and controls. Costs were calculated for all SCIT patients and the inconsistent subgroup. RESULTS: Compared with controls (n = 394,479), SCIT (n = 131,493) patients were younger (39.3 vs. 41.4 years), more likely female (56.4% vs. 50.7%) and more likely in a commercial plan (91.6% vs. 83.6%); all p < .001. Among SCIT patients, 15.1% had inconsistent use. Among all SCIT patients, the 3 year total plan-paid SCIT-related costs were $205,741,125 (18% was for inconsistent subgroup) and patient-paid costs were $47,560,450 (15% for inconsistent). Per-member-per-month costs were $0.48 plan-paid and $0.11 patient-paid, with $0.09 plan-paid and $0.02 patient-paid for inconsistent use. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed 15% of patients may have costly inconsistent SCIT treatment. Greater understanding is needed regarding the reasons for inconsistent use of subcutaneous allergy immunotherapy.

Treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization, and healthcare costs among patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension in a real-world US database.

Several new medications for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) have recently been introduced; however, current real-world data regarding US patients with PAH are limited. We conducted a retrospective administrative claims study to examine PAH treatment patterns and summarize healthcare utilization and costs among patients with newly diagnosed PAH treated in US clinical practice. Patients newly treated for PAH from 1 January 2010 to 31 March 2015 were followed for ≥12 months. Patient characteristics, treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization, and costs were described. Adherence (proportion of days covered), persistence (months until therapy discontinuation/modification), and the probability of continuing the index regimen were analyzed by index regimen cohort (monotherapy versus combination therapy). Of 1637 eligible patients, 93.8% initiated treatment with monotherapy and 6.2% with combination therapy. The most common index regimen was phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE-5I) monotherapy (70.0% of patients). A total of 581 patients (35.5%) modified their index regimen during the study. Most patients (55.4%) who began combination therapy did so on or within six months of the index date. Endothelin receptor agonists (ERAs) and combination therapies were associated with higher adherence than PDE-5Is and monotherapies, respectively. Healthcare utilization was substantial across the study population, with costs in the combination therapy cohort more than doubling from baseline to follow-up. The majority of patients were treated with monotherapies (most often, PDE-5Is), despite combination therapies and ERAs being associated with higher medication adherence. Index regimen adjustments occurred early and in a substantial proportion of patients, suggesting that inadequate clinical response to monotherapies may not be uncommon.

The effect of delaying initiation with umeclidinium/vilanterol in patients with COPD: an observational administrative claims database analysis using marginal structural models.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with high clinical and economic burden. Optimal pharmacological therapy for COPD aims to reduce symptoms and the frequency and severity of exacerbations. Umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) is an approved combination therapy for once-daily maintenance treatment of patients with COPD. This study evaluated the impact of delaying UMEC/VI initiation on medical costs and exacerbation risk. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients with COPD who initiated UMEC/VI between 4/28/2014 and 7/31/2016 was conducted using the Optum Research Database. The index date was the first COPD visit after UMEC/VI available on US formulary (Commercial 4/28/2014; Medicare Advantage 1/1/2015). Patients were followed for 12 months post-index, and categorized into 12 cohorts corresponding to month (30-day period) of UMEC/VI initiation (i.e. Months 1-12) post-index. The outcomes studied during the follow up period included COPD-related and all-cause medical costs, and risk of COPD exacerbations. Marginal structural models (MSM) were used to control for time-varying confounding due to changes in treatment and severity during follow up. RESULTS: 2,200 patients initiating UMEC/VI were included in the study sample. Patients' average age was 69.3 years, 49.9% were female and 69.7% were Medicare insured. Following MSM analysis, 12-month adjusted COPD-related medical costs increased by 2.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.1-5.9%; p = 0.044) for each monthly delay in UMEC/VI initiation, with a 37.4% higher adjusted cost for patients initiating UMEC/VI in Month 12 versus Month 1 ($13,087 vs. $9524). The 12-month adjusted all-cause medical costs increased by 2.8% (95% CI: 0.6-5.2%; p = 0.013) for each monthly delay, with a 36.1% higher adjusted cost for patients initiating UMEC/VI at Month 12 versus Month 1 ($22,766 vs. $16,727). The monthly risk of severe exacerbation was significantly higher in patients who had not yet initiated UMEC/VI than those who had (hazard ratio: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.35-2.23; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Prompt use of UMEC/VI following a physician visit for COPD appears to result in economic and clinical benefits, with reductions in medical costs and exacerbation risk. Additional research is warranted to assess the benefits of initiating UMEC/VI as a first-line therapy compared with escalation to UMEC/VI from monotherapies.