Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Performance of Claims-Based Algorithms for Adherence to Positive Airway Pressure Therapy in Commercially Insured Patients With OSA.
Alpert, Naomi; Cole, Kate V; Dexter, R Benjamin; Sterling, Kimberly L; Wickwire, Emerson M.
Afiliación
  • Alpert N; ResMed Science Center, San Diego, CA.
  • Cole KV; ResMed Science Center, San Diego, CA.
  • Dexter RB; ResMed Science Center, Halifax, NS, Canada.
  • Sterling KL; ResMed Science Center, San Diego, CA. Electronic address: kimberly.sterling@resmed.com.
  • Wickwire EM; Sleep Disorders Center, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine; and Department of Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Chest ; 165(5): 1228-1238, 2024 May.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38215934
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy is first-line therapy for OSA, but consistent use is required for it to be effective. Previous studies have used Medicare fee-for-service claims data (eg, device, equipment charges) as a proxy for PAP adherence to assess its effects. However, this approach has not been validated in a US commercially insured population, where coverage rules are not standardized. RESEARCH QUESTION In a commercially insured population in the United States, how well do claims-based algorithms for defining PAP adherence correspond with objective PAP device usage? STUDY DESIGN AND

METHODS:

Deidentified administrative claims data of commercially insured patients (aged 18-64 years) with OSA were linked to objective PAP therapy usage data from cloud-connected devices. Adherence was defined based on device use (using an extension of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 90-day compliance criteria) and from claims-based algorithms to compare usage metrics and identify potential misclassifications.

RESULTS:

The final sample included 213,341 patients. Based on device usage, 48% were adherent in the first year. Based on claims, between 10% and 84% of patients were identified as adherent (accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity ranges 53%-68%, 12%-95%, and 26%-92%, respectively). Relative to patients who were claims-adherent, patients who were device-adherent had consistently higher usage across all metrics (mean, 339.9 vs 260.0-290.0 days of use; 6.6 vs 5.1-5.6 d/wk; 6.4 vs 4.6-5.2 h/d). Consistent PAP users were frequently identified by claims-based algorithms as nonadherent, whereas many inconsistent users were classified by claims-based algorithms as adherent.

INTERPRETATION:

In aggregate US commercial data with nonstandardized PAP coverage rules, concordance between existing claims-based definitions and objective PAP use was low. Caution is warranted when applying existing claims-based algorithms to commercial populations.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Algoritmos / Cooperación del Paciente / Apnea Obstructiva del Sueño Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Límite: Adolescent / Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Región como asunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: Chest Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Algoritmos / Cooperación del Paciente / Apnea Obstructiva del Sueño Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Límite: Adolescent / Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Región como asunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: Chest Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos