Burden of Neurologic Health Care and Incident Neurologic Diagnoses in the Year After COVID-19 or Influenza Hospitalization.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Following the outbreak of viral infections from the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus in 2019 (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]), reports emerged of long-term neurologic sequelae in survivors. To better understand the burden of neurologic health care and incident neurologic diagnoses in the year after COVID-19 vs influenza, we performed an analysis of patient-level data from a large collection of electronic health records (EMR). METHODS: We acquired deidentified data from TriNetX, a global health research network providing access to EMR data. We included individuals aged 18 years or older during index event, defined as hospital-based care for COVID-19 (from April 1, 2020, until November 15, 2021) or influenza (from 2016 to 2019). The study outcomes were subsequent health care encounters over the following year for 6 neurologic diagnoses including migraine, epilepsy, stroke, neuropathy, movement disorders, and dementia. We also created a composite of the 6 diagnoses as an incident event, which we call "incident neurologic diagnoses." We performed a 1:1 complete case nearest-neighbor propensity score match on age, sex, race/ethnicity, marital status, US census region patient residence, preindex years of available data, and Elixhauser comorbidity score. We fit time-to-event models and reported hazard ratios for COVID-19 vs influenza infection. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, we had a balanced cohort of 77,272 individuals with COVID-19 and 77,272 individuals with influenza. The mean age was 51.0 ± 19.7 years, 57.7% were female, and 41.5% were White. Compared with patients with influenza, patients with COVID-19 had a lower risk of subsequent care for migraine (HR 0.645, 95% CI 0.604-0.687), epilepsy (HR 0.783, 95% CI 0.727-0.843), neuropathies (HR 0.567, 95% CI 0.532-0.604), movement disorders (HR 0.644, 95% CI 0.598-0.693), stroke (HR 0.904, 95% CI 0.845-0.967), or dementia (HR 0.931, 95% CI 0.870-0.996). Postinfection incident neurologic diagnoses were observed in 2.79% of the COVID-19 cohort vs 4.91% of the influenza cohort (HR 0.618, 95% CI 0.582-0.657). DISCUSSION: Compared with a matched cohort of adults with a hospitalization or emergency department visit for influenza infection, those with COVID-19 had significantly fewer health care encounters for 6 major neurologic diagnoses over a year of follow-up. Furthermore, we found that COVID-19 infection was associated with a lower risk of an incident neurologic diagnosis in the year after infection.

Streamlining Prior Authorization to Improve Care.

This Viewpoint addresses the challenges of prior authorization: decreased access, delayed care, decreased patient satisfaction and outcomes, and increased clinician burnout.

Cost and utilization of healthcare services for persons with diabetes.

AIMS: Describe and compare healthcare costs and utilization for insured persons with type 1 diabetes (T1D), type 2 diabetes (T2D), and without diabetes in the United States. METHODS: Using a nationally representative healthcare claims database, we identified matched persons with T1D, T2D, and without diabetes using a propensity score quasi-randomization technique. In each year between 2009 and 2018, we report costs (total and out-of-pocket) and utilization for all healthcare services and those specific to medications, diabetes-related supplies, visits to providers, hospitalizations, and emergency department visits. RESULTS: In 2018, we found out-of-pocket costs and total costs were highest for persons with T1D (out-of-pocket: $2,037.2, total: $25,652.0), followed by T2D (out-of-pocket: $1,543.3, total: $22,408.1), and without diabetes (out-of-pocket: $1,122.7, total: $14,220.6). From 2009 to 2018, out-of-pocket costs were increasing for persons with T1D(+6.5 %) but decreasing for T2D (-7.5 %) and without diabetes (-2.3 %). Medication costs made up the largest proportion of out-of-pocket costs regardless of diabetes status (T1D: 51.4 %, T2D: 55.4 %,without diabetes: 51.1 %). CONCLUSIONS: Given the substantial out-of-pocket costs for people with diabetes, especially for those with T1D, providers should screen all persons with diabetes for financial toxicity (i.e., wide-ranging problems stemming from healthcare costs). In addition, policies that aim to lower out-of-pocket costs of cost-effective diabetes related healthcare are needed with a particular focus on medications.

Diabetic Neuropathies.

OBJECTIVE: This article provides an up-to-date review of the diagnosis and management of the most common neuropathies that occur in patients with diabetes. LATEST DEVELOPMENTS: The prevalence of diabetes continues to grow worldwide and, as a result, the burden of diabetic neuropathies is also increasing. Most diabetic neuropathies are caused by hyperglycemic effects on small and large fiber nerves, and glycemic control in individuals with type 1 diabetes reduces neuropathy prevalence. However, among people with type 2 diabetes, additional factors, particularly metabolic syndrome components, play a role and should be addressed. Although length-dependent distal symmetric polyneuropathy is the most common form of neuropathy, autonomic syndromes, particularly cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy, are associated with increased mortality, whereas lumbosacral radiculoplexus neuropathy and treatment-induced neuropathy cause substantial morbidity. Recent evidence-based guidelines have updated the recommended treatment options to manage pain associated with distal symmetric polyneuropathy of diabetes. ESSENTIAL POINTS: Identifying and appropriately diagnosing the neuropathies of diabetes is key to preventing progression. Until better disease-modifying therapies are identified, management remains focused on diabetes and metabolic risk factor control and pain management.

Patient Travel Distance to Neurologist Visits.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The density of neurologists within a given geographic region varies greatly across the United States. We aimed to measure patient travel distance and travel time to neurologist visits, across neurologic conditions and subspecialties. Our secondary goal was to identify factors associated with long-distance travel for neurologic care. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis using a 2018 Medicare sample of patients with at least 1 outpatient neurologist visit. Long-distance travel was defined as driving distance ≥50 miles 1-way to the visit. Travel time was measured as driving time in minutes. Multilevel generalized linear mixed models with logistic link function, which accounted for clustering of patients within hospital referral region and allowed modeling of region-specific random effects, were used to determine the association of patient and regional characteristics with long-distance travel. RESULTS: We identified 563,216 Medicare beneficiaries with a neurologist visit in 2018. Of them, 96,213 (17%) traveled long distance for care. The median driving distance and time were 81.3 (interquartile range [IQR]: 59.9-144.2) miles and 90 (IQR: 69-149) minutes for patients with long-distance travel compared with 13.2 (IQR: 6.5-23) miles and 22 (IQR: 14-33) minutes for patients without long-distance travel. Comparing across neurologic conditions, long-distance travel was most common for nervous system cancer care (39.6%), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis [ALS] (32.1%), and MS (22.8%). Many factors were associated with long-distance travel, most notably low neurologist density (first quintile: OR 3.04 [95% CI 2.41-3.83] vs fifth quintile), rural setting (4.89 [4.79-4.99]), long-distance travel to primary care physician visit (3.6 [3.51-3.69]), and visits for ALS and nervous system cancer care (3.41 [3.14-3.69] and 5.27 [4.72-5.89], respectively). Nearly one-third of patients bypassed the nearest neurologist by 20+ miles, and 7.3% of patients crossed state lines for neurologist care. DISCUSSION: We found that nearly 1 in 5 Medicare beneficiaries who saw a neurologist traveled ≥50 miles 1-way for care, and travel burden was most common for lower-prevalence neurologic conditions that required coordinated multidisciplinary care. Important potentially addressable predictors of long-distance travel were low neurologist density and rural location, suggesting interventions to improve access to care such as telemedicine or neurologic subspecialist support to local neurologists. Future work should evaluate differences in clinical outcomes between patients with long-distance travel and those without.

Prescription Opioid Initiation for Neuropathy, Headache, and Low Back Pain: A US Population-based Medicare Study.

Neuropathy, headache, and low back pain (LBP) are common conditions requiring pain management. Yet little is known regarding whether access to specialists impacts opioid prescribing. We aimed to identify factors associated with opioid initiation among opioid-naïve older adults and evaluate how access to particular specialists impacts prescribing. This retrospective cohort study used a 20% Medicare sample from 2010 to 2017. Opioid initiation was defined as a first opioid prescription filled within 12 months after a diagnosis encounter. Disease-related opioid initiation was defined as a first opioid prescription filled within 7 days following a disease-specific claim. Logistic regression using generalized estimating equations was used to determine the association of patient demographics, provider types, and regional physician specialty density with disease-related opioid initiation, accounting for within-region correlation. We found opioid initiation steadily declined from 2010 to 2017 (neuropathy: 26-19%, headache: 31-20%, LBP: 45-32%), as did disease-related opioid initiation (4-3%, 12-7%, 29-19%) and 5 to 10% of initial disease-related prescriptions resulted in chronic opioid use within 12 months of initiation. Certain specialist visits were associated with a lower likelihood of disease-related opioid initiation compared with primary care. Residence in high neurologist density regions had a lower likelihood of disease-related opioid initiation (headache odds ratio [OR] .76 [95% CI: .63-.92]) and LBP (OR .7 [95% CI: .61-.81]) and high podiatrist density regions for neuropathy (OR .56 [95% CI: .41-.78]). We found that specialist visits and greater access to specialists were associated with a lower likelihood of disease-related opioid initiation. These data could inform strategies to perpetuate reductions in opioid use for these common pain conditions. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents how opioid initiation for opioid-naïve patients with newly diagnosed neuropathy, headache, and LBP varies across providers. Greater access to certain specialists decreased the likelihood of opioid initiation. Future work may consider interventions to support alternative treatments and better access to specialists in low-density regions.

Association between brain health outcomes and metabolic risk factors in persons with diabetes.

We performed a cross-sectional study to determine associations between cognition and MRI-derived brain outcomes, with obesity, diabetes duration, and metabolic risk factors in 51 Pima American Indians with longstanding type 2 diabetes (T2d) (mean [SD] age: 48.4 [11.3] years, T2d duration: 20.1 [9.1] years). Participants had similar cognition (NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery composite: 45.3 [9.8], p = 0.64, n = 51) compared to normative data. T2d duration, but not other metabolic risk factors, associated with decreased cortical thickness (Point Estimate (PE): -0.0061, 95%CI: -0.0113, -0.0009, n = 45), gray matter volume (PE: -830.39, 95%CI: -1503.14, -157.64, n = 45), and increased white matter hyperintensity volume (PE: 0.0389, 95%CI: 0.0049, 0.0729, n = 45).

The effect of surgical weight loss on diabetes complications in individuals with class II/III obesity.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of bariatric surgery on diabetes complications in individuals with class II/III obesity (BMI > 35 kg/m2). METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of participants with obesity who underwent bariatric surgery. At baseline and 2 years following surgery, participants underwent metabolic phenotyping and diabetes complication assessments. The primary outcomes for peripheral neuropathy (PN) were a change in intra-epidermal nerve fibre density (IENFD, units = fibres/mm) at the distal leg and proximal thigh, the primary outcome for cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) was a change in the expiration/inspiration (E/I) ratio, and the primary outcome for retinopathy was a change in the mean deviation on frequency doubling technology testing. RESULTS: Among 127 baseline participants, 79 completed in-person follow-up (age 46.0 ± 11.3 years [mean ± SD], 73.4% female). Participants lost a mean of 31.0 kg (SD 18.4), and all metabolic risk factors improved except for BP and total cholesterol. Following bariatric surgery, one of the primary PN outcomes improved (IENFD proximal thigh, +3.4 ± 7.8, p<0.01), and CAN (E/I ratio -0.01 ± 0.1, p=0.89) and retinopathy (deviation -0.2 ± 3.0, p=0.52) were stable. Linear regression revealed that a greater reduction in fasting glucose was associated with improvements in retinopathy (mean deviation point estimate -0.7, 95% CI -1.3, -0.1). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Bariatric surgery may be an effective approach to reverse PN in individuals with obesity. The observed stability of CAN and retinopathy may be an improvement compared with the natural progression of these conditions; however, controlled trials are needed.

Costs and Utilization of New-to-Market Neurologic Medications.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the utilization and costs (total and out-of-pocket) of new-to-market neurologic medications with existing guideline-supported neurologic medications over time. METHODS: We used a healthcare pharmaceutical claims database (from 2001 to 2019) to identify patients with both a diagnosis of 1 of 11 separate neurologic conditions and either a new-to-market medication or an existing guideline-supported medication for that condition. Neurologic conditions included orthostatic hypotension, spinal muscular atrophy, Duchenne disease, Parkinson disease, multiple sclerosis, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, myasthenia gravis, Huntington disease, tardive dyskinesia, transthyretin amyloidosis, and migraine. New-to-market medications were defined as all neurologic medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2014 and 2018. In each year, we determined the median out-of-pocket and standardized total costs for a 30-day supply of each medication. We also measured the proportion of patients receiving new-to-market medications compared with all medications specific for the relevant condition. RESULTS: We found that the utilization of most new-to-market medications was small (<20% in all but 1 condition), compared with existing, guideline-supported medications. The out-of-pocket and standardized total costs were substantially larger for new-to-market medications. The median (25th percentile, 75th percentile) out-of-pocket costs for a 30-day supply in 2019 were largest for edaravone ($712.8 [$59.8-$802.0]) and eculizumab ($91.1 [$3.0-$3,216.4]). For new-to-market medications, the distribution of out-of-pocket costs was highly variable and the trends over time were unpredictable compared with existing guideline-supported medications. DISCUSSION: Despite the increasing number of FDA-approved neurologic medications, utilization of newly approved medications in the privately insured population remains small. Given the high costs and similar efficacy for most of the new medications, limited utilization may be appropriate. However, for new medications with greater efficacy, future studies are needed to determine whether high costs are a barrier to utilization.

Diagnostic characteristics of nerve conduction study parameters for vasculitic neuropathy.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: In vasculitic neuropathy (VN), a 50% side-to-side difference in the amplitude of compound muscle action potentials and sensory nerve action potentials is considered meaningful, but unequivocal evidence is lacking. The aim of this study is to characterize electrodiagnostic features that best distinguish VN from other axonal polyneuropathies. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study between January 2000 and April 2021. We reviewed the records of patients with VN who had bilateral nerve conduction studies (NCS) and evaluated different electrodiagnostic models to help distinguish VN from non-inflammatory axonal polyneuropathies. RESULTS: We identified 82 cases, and 174 controls with non-inflammatory axonal neuropathies. The amplitude percent difference Z-score model showed the best discriminatory capability between cases and controls (area under the curve [AUC] 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82, 0.93), and the number of nerves tested did not significantly influence the model. Individually, the ulnar motor nerve (AUC 0.86; 95% CI 0.77, 0.94) and median motor nerve (AUC 0.85; 95% CI 0.77, 0.94) showed the best discriminatory capability. A 50% amplitude difference between at least two bilateral nerves, either in the upper (AUC 0.85; 95% CI 0.77, 0.93) or lower (AUC 0.79; 95% CI 0.71, 0.87) extremity showed good discriminatory threshold for detecting VN. DISCUSSION: The best electrodiagnostic criteria for VN utilizes z-scores of percent differences in nerve amplitudes, but this approach may be difficult to implement at the bedside. Alternately, a 50% amplitude difference in at least two nerves is a reasonable approximation.

Patient and health care provider knowledge of diabetes and diabetic microvascular complications: a comprehensive literature review.

Diabetic retinopathy, neuropathy, and nephropathy occur in more than 50% of people with diabetes, contributing substantially to morbidity and mortality. Patient understanding of these microvascular complications is essential to ensure early recognition and treatment of these sequalae as well as associated symptoms, yet little is known about patient knowledge of microvascular sequalae. In this comprehensive literature review, we provide an overview of existing knowledge regarding patient knowledge of diabetes, retinopathy, neuropathy, and nephropathy. We also discuss health care provider's knowledge of these sequalae given that patients and providers must work together to achieve optimal care. We evaluated 281 articles on patient and provider knowledge of diabetic retinopathy, neuropathy, and nephropathy as well as predictors of improved knowledge and screening practices. Results demonstrated that patient and provider knowledge of microvascular sequalae varied widely between studies, which may reflect sociocultural or methodologic differences. Knowledge assessment instruments varied between studies with limited validation data and few studies controlled for confounding. Generally, improved patient knowledge was associated with greater formal education, longer diabetes duration, and higher socioeconomic status. Fewer studies examined provider knowledge of sequalae, yet these studies identified multiple misconceptions regarding appropriate screening practices for microvascular complications and the need to screen patients who are asymptomatic. Further investigations are needed that use well validated measures, control for confounding, and include diverse populations. Such studies will allow identification of patients and providers who would benefit from interventions to improve knowledge of microvascular complications and, ultimately, improve patient outcomes.

Towards prevention of diabetic peripheral neuropathy: clinical presentation, pathogenesis, and new treatments.

Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) occurs in up to half of individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. DPN results from the distal-to-proximal loss of peripheral nerve function, leading to physical disability and sometimes pain, with the consequent lowering of quality of life. Early diagnosis improves clinical outcomes, but many patients still develop neuropathy. Hyperglycaemia is a risk factor and glycaemic control prevents DPN development in type 1 diabetes. However, glycaemic control has modest or no benefit in individuals with type 2 diabetes, probably because they usually have comorbidities. Among them, the metabolic syndrome is a major risk factor for DPN. The pathophysiology of DPN is complex, but mechanisms converge on a unifying theme of bioenergetic failure in the peripheral nerves due to their unique anatomy. Current clinical management focuses on controlling diabetes, the metabolic syndrome, and pain, but remains suboptimal for most patients. Thus, research is ongoing to improve early diagnosis and prognosis, to identify molecular mechanisms that could lead to therapeutic targets, and to investigate lifestyle interventions to improve clinical outcomes.

Serum lipidomic determinants of human diabetic neuropathy in type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The serum lipidomic profile associated with neuropathy in type 2 diabetes is not well understood. Obesity and dyslipidemia are known neuropathy risk factors, suggesting lipid profiles early during type 2 diabetes may identify individuals who develop neuropathy later in the disease course. This retrospective cohort study examined lipidomic profiles 10 years prior to type 2 diabetic neuropathy assessment. METHODS: Participants comprised members of the Gila River Indian community with type 2 diabetes (n = 69) with available stored serum samples and neuropathy assessment 10 years later using the combined Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument (MNSI) examination and questionnaire scores. A combined MNSI index was calculated from examination and questionnaire scores. Serum lipids (435 species from 18 classes) were quantified by mass spectrometry. RESULTS: The cohort included 17 males and 52 females with a mean age of 45 years (SD = 9 years). Participants were stratified as with (high MNSI index score > 2.5407) versus without neuropathy (low MNSI index score ≤ 2.5407). Significantly decreased medium-chain acylcarnitines and increased total free fatty acids, independent of chain length and saturation, in serum at baseline associated with incident peripheral neuropathy at follow-up, that is, participants had high MNSI index scores, independent of covariates. Participants with neuropathy also had decreased phosphatidylcholines and increased lysophosphatidylcholines at baseline, independent of chain length and saturation. The abundance of other lipid classes did not differ significantly by neuropathy status. INTERPRETATION: Abundance differences in circulating acylcarnitines, free fatty acids, phosphatidylcholines, and lysophosphatidylcholines 10 years prior to neuropathy assessment are associated with neuropathy status in type 2 diabetes.

Changes in the Use of Brand Name and Generic Medications and Total Prescription Cost Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize trends in antiseizure medication (ASM) fills and total prescription costs in people with epilepsy. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of beneficiaries with epilepsy (ASM, plus International Classification of Diseases codes) in a 20% random Medicare sample, with continuous Fee-For-Service coverage (Parts A, B, and D) in 2008-2018. We summed the number of pill days and costs (adjusted to 2018 dollars) per person-year for each ASM. ASMs were categorized into brand versus generic, first- versus newer-generation, and enzyme-inducers versus non-inducers. RESULTS: There were 77,000-133,000 beneficiaries with epilepsy per year. The most common ASM was phenytoin in 2008, which shifted to levetiracetam in 2018 (2008: phenytoin 25%, levetiracetam 14%; 2018: phenytoin 9%, levetiracetam 27%). Brand name (2008: 56%; 2018: 14%), first-generation (2008: 55%; 2018: 32%), and enzyme-inducing ASMs (2008: 44%; 2018: 24%) each decreased over time as a proportion of pill days. The number of brand pill days per person-year initially decreased (e.g. 2008: 250; 2009: 121; 2010: 96), but then plateaued (2013-2018: between 66-69) given a notable increase in lacosamide pill days per person (2008: 0; 2018: 20). Total brand name costs per year initially decreased 2008-2010 (2008: $150 million; 2010: $72 million) but then increased after 2010 (2018: $256 million). In 2018 brand name ASMs represented 79% of costs despite representing only 14% of pill days, a one-year pill supply became 277% more expensive for brand name but 42% less expensive for generic medications over time (2008: brand ∼$2,800 versus generic ∼$800; 2018: brand ∼$10,700 versus generic ∼$460), and many common brand name ASMs cost approximately ten-fold more per pill day than their generic equivalents. CONCLUSIONS: First-generation and enzyme-inducing ASMs waned from 2008 to 2018. While brand name ASMs initially waned translating into lower costs and potentially higher value care, after 2010 brand name costs markedly increased due to increasing use of lacosamide plus a 277% increase in per-pill cost of brand name ASMs. Brand name ASMs represented a small minority of prescriptions, but the large majority of costs.

Classification of painful or painless diabetic peripheral neuropathy and identification of the most powerful predictors using machine learning models in large cross-sectional cohorts.

BACKGROUND: To improve the treatment of painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy (DPN) and associated co-morbidities, a better understanding of the pathophysiology and risk factors for painful DPN is required. Using harmonised cohorts (N = 1230) we have built models that classify painful versus painless DPN using quality of life (EQ5D), lifestyle (smoking, alcohol consumption), demographics (age, gender), personality and psychology traits (anxiety, depression, personality traits), biochemical (HbA1c) and clinical variables (BMI, hospital stay and trauma at young age) as predictors. METHODS: The Random Forest, Adaptive Regression Splines and Naive Bayes machine learning models were trained for classifying painful/painless DPN. Their performance was estimated using cross-validation in large cross-sectional cohorts (N = 935) and externally validated in a large population-based cohort (N = 295). Variables were ranked for importance using model specific metrics and marginal effects of predictors were aggregated and assessed at the global level. Model selection was carried out using the Mathews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) and model performance was quantified in the validation set using MCC, the area under the precision/recall curve (AUPRC) and accuracy. RESULTS: Random Forest (MCC = 0.28, AUPRC = 0.76) and Adaptive Regression Splines (MCC = 0.29, AUPRC = 0.77) were the best performing models and showed the smallest reduction in performance between the training and validation dataset. EQ5D index, the 10-item personality dimensions, HbA1c, Depression and Anxiety t-scores, age and Body Mass Index were consistently amongst the most powerful predictors in classifying painful vs painless DPN. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning models trained on large cross-sectional cohorts were able to accurately classify painful or painless DPN on an independent population-based dataset. Painful DPN is associated with more depression, anxiety and certain personality traits. It is also associated with poorer self-reported quality of life, younger age, poor glucose control and high Body Mass Index (BMI). The models showed good performance in realistic conditions in the presence of missing values and noisy datasets. These models can be used either in the clinical context to assist patient stratification based on the risk of painful DPN or return broad risk categories based on user input. Model's performance and calibration suggest that in both cases they could potentially improve diagnosis and outcomes by changing modifiable factors like BMI and HbA1c control and institute earlier preventive or supportive measures like psychological interventions.