Trends in Telerehabilitation Utilization in the United States 2020-2021.

OBJECTIVE: To examine telerehabilitation utilization in the United States (US) during the first 2 years of the pandemic. DESIGN: We performed a retrospective analysis of outpatient insurance claims from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database to identify the number and proportion of patients using telerehabilitation from 2020 to 2021. Telerehabilitation was identified based on the presence of specific code modifiers and place of service. SETTING: Retrospective claims analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals living in the United States with employer-sponsored insurance plans using outpatient physical or occupational therapy (PT/OT) (N=2,007,524). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Number and proportion of outpatient PT/OT visits completed via telerehabilitation. RESULTS: We identified 21,026,608 PT/OT visits among 2,007,524 patients. Overall, 49,974 (2.5%) patients received ≥1 telerehabilitation visit during the specified timeframe. We observed trends in utilization over time, with utilization peaking in April 2020 when 10.9% of all PT/OT visits were conducted by telerehabilitation. We also observed geographic trends with lower rates of utilization identified in rural areas. State-by-state utilization rates ranged from 10.4% (California) to 0.3% (Wyoming). CONCLUSION: Telerehabilitation may be underutilized as a means of improving access to PT/OT, especially in rural areas of the country. Further research is needed to examine contributing factors to low observed utilization rates, such as provider and patient perceptions of telerehabilitation.

Estimated Savings From Using Added Therapeutic Benefit and Therapeutic Reference Pricing in United States Medicare Drug Price Negotiations.

OBJECTIVES: US Medicare will begin negotiating prices for top-selling drugs in 2023. This study describes and estimates potential savings from a therapeutic reference pricing approach, linking comparative effectiveness with the costs of existing therapeutic alternatives, that Medicare could use to adjust the starting point for price negotiations. METHODS: First, we identified target drugs likely to be selected for Medicare negotiation. Second, we identified comparative effectiveness ratings for target drugs based on French Haute Autorité de Santé reports. For target drugs with minor or no added benefit, we identified therapeutic alternatives based on the French reports and US clinical guidelines. For each target drug with minor or no added benefit, we computed the difference between spending based on the drug's estimated statutory ceiling price and spending based on the weighted average cost of therapeutic alternatives or the lowest cost therapeutic alternative. Finally, we calculated potential annual savings from using a starting point in negotiations based on costs of therapeutic alternatives. RESULTS: Potential drug-level savings to Medicare from using a starting point in negotiations based on average spending across therapeutic alternatives, compared with using the statutory ceiling price alone, ranged from $186 541 340 to $2 173 441 197. Potential savings from using a starting point based on the lowest cost alternative ranged from $199 872 163 to $3 605 904 765. CONCLUSIONS: Although we do not expect Medicare to rely on French comparative effectiveness assessments, this study demonstrates the potential for additional savings when using comparative effectiveness and costs of therapeutic alternatives to inform the starting price for negotiations.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Elective Inpatient Surgical Admissions: Evidence From Maryland.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic led to large-scale cancellation and deferral of elective surgeries. We quantified volume declines, and subsequent recoveries, across all hospitals in Maryland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on elective inpatient surgical volumes were assembled from the Maryland Health Service Cost Review Commission for years 2019-2020. The data covered all hospitals in the state. We compared the volume of elective inpatient surgeries in the second (Q2) and fourth quarters (Q4) of 2020 to those same quarters in 2019. Analysis was stratified by patient, hospital, and service characteristics. RESULTS: Surgical volumes were 55.8% lower in 2020 Q2 than in 2019 Q2. Differences were largest for orthopedic surgeries (74.3% decline), those on Medicare (61.4%), and in urban hospitals (57.3%). By 2020 Q4, volumes for most service lines were within 15% of volumes in 2019 Q4. Orthopedic surgery remained most affected (44.5% below levels in 2019 Q4) and Plastic Surgery (21.9% lower). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 led to large volume declines across hospitals in Maryland followed by a partial recovery. We observed large variability, particularly across service lines. These results can help contextualize case-specific experiences and inform research studying potential health effects of these delays and cancellations.

United States trends in healthcare charges for pediatric firearm injuries.

BACKGROUND: From 2009 to 2016, >21,000 children died and an estimated 118,000 suffered non-fatal injuries from firearms in the United States. Limited data is available on resource utilization by injury intent. We use hospital charges as a proxy for resource use and sought to: 1) estimate mean charges for initial ED and inpatient care for acute firearm injuries among children in the U.S.; 2) compare differences in charges by firearm injury intent among children; and 3) evaluate trends in charges for pediatric firearm injuries over time, including within intent subgroups. METHODS: In this repeated cross-sectional analysis of the 2009-2016 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample, we identified firearm injury cases among children aged ≤19 years using ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM external cause of injury codes (e-codes). Injury intent was categorized using e-codes as unintentional, assault-related, self-inflicted, or undetermined. Linear regressions utilizing survey weighting were used to examine associations between injury intent and healthcare charges, and to evaluate trends in mean charges over time. RESULTS: Among 21,951 unweighted cases representing 102,072 pediatric firearm-related injuries, mean age was 16.6 years, and a majority were male (88.2%) and publicly insured (51.5%). Injuries were 53.9% assault-related, 37.7% unintentional, 1.8% self-inflicted, and 6.7% undetermined. Self-inflicted injuries had higher mean charges ($98,988) than assault-related ($52,496) and unintentional ($28,618) injuries (p < 0.001). Self-inflicted injuries remained associated with higher mean charges relative to unintentional injuries, after adjusting for patient demographics, hospital characteristics, and injury severity (p = 0.015). Mean charges for assault-related injuries also remained significantly higher than charges for unintentional injuries in multivariable models (p < 0.001). After adjusting for inflation, mean charges for pediatric firearm-related injuries increased over time (p-trend = 0.018) and were 23.1% higher in 2016 versus 2009. Mean charges increased over time among unintentional injuries (p-trend = 0.002), but not among cases with assault-related or self-inflicted injuries. CONCLUSIONS: Self-inflicted and assault-related firearm injuries are associated with higher mean healthcare charges than unintentional firearm injuries among children. Mean charges for pediatric firearm injuries have also increased over time. These findings can help guide prevention interventions aimed at reducing the substantial burden of firearm injuries among children.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the accuracy of MRI to diagnose appendicitis in the general population.

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published studies since 2005 that evaluate the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in the general population presenting to emergency departments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All retrospective and prospective studies evaluating the accuracy of MRI to diagnose appendicitis published in English and listed in PubMed, Web of Science, Cinahl Plus, and the Cochrane Library since 2005 were included. Excluded studies were those without an explicitly stated reference standard, with insufficient data to calculate the study outcomes, or if the population enrolled was limited to pregnant women or children. Data were abstracted by one investigator and confirmed by another. Data included the number of true positives, true negatives, false positives, false negatives, number of equivocal cases, type of MRI scanner, type of MRI sequence, and demographic data including study setting and gender distribution. Summary test characteristics were calculated. Forest plots and a summary receiver operator characteristic plot were generated. RESULTS: Ten studies met eligibility criteria, representing patients from seven countries. Nine were prospective and two were multicenter studies. A total of 838 subjects were enrolled; 406 (48%) were women. All studies routinely used unenhanced MR images, although two used intravenous contrast-enhancement and three used diffusion-weighted imaging. Using a bivariate random-effects model the summary sensitivity was 96.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92.3%-98.5%) and summary specificity was 95.9% (95% CI: 89.4%-98.4%). CONCLUSION: MRI has a high sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of appendicitis, similar to that reported previously for computed tomography. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2016;43:1346-1354.

Cost of U.S emergency department and inpatient visits for fall injuries in older adults.

BACKGROUND: Falls are a leading cause of injury and hospital readmissions in older adults. Understanding the distribution of acute treatment costs across inpatient and emergency department settings is critical for informed investment and evaluation of fall prevention efforts. METHODS: This study used the 2016-2018 National Inpatient Sample and National Emergency Department Sample. Annual treatment cost of fall injury among adults 65 years and older was estimated from charges, applying cost-to-charge and professional fee ratios. Weighted multivariable generalized linear models were used to separately estimate cost for inpatient and emergency department (ED) setting by injury type and individual demographic and health characteristics after adjusting for payer and hospital level characteristics. RESULTS: Older adults incurred an estimated 922,428 inpatient and 2.3 million ED visits annually due to falls with combined annual costs of $19.8 billion. Over half of inpatient visits for fall injury were for fracture. Notably, 23% of inpatient visits were for fractures other than hip fracture and 14% of inpatient visits were for multiple fractures with costs totaling $3.4 billion and $2.5 billion, respectively. Annual ED costs were driven by superficial injury totaling $1.5 billion. Cost of ED visits were higher for adults 85 years and older (adjusted cost ratio (aCR): 1.11, 95% Confidence Interval (CI)I: 1.11-1.12) and those with dementia (aCR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.13-1.15). Higher inpatient and ED visit cost was also associated with high-energy falls and discharge to post-acute care. CONCLUSION: The study found that more than 3 million older adults in the United States seek hospital care for fall injuries annually, a major concern given increasing capacity strain on hospitals and EDs. The $20 billion in annual acute treatment costs attributed to fall injury indicate an urgent need to implement evidence-based fall prevention interventions and underscores the importance of newly launched ED-based fall prevention efforts and investments in geriatric emergency departments.

Lumbar Decompression With and Without Fusion for Lumbar Stenosis With Spondylolisthesis: A Cost Utility Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Markov model. OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of lumbar decompression alone (DA) with lumbar decompression with fusion (DF) for the management of adults undergoing surgery for lumbar stenosis with associated degenerative spondylolisthesis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Rates of lumbar fusion have increased for all indications in the United States over the last 20 years. Recent randomized controlled trial data, however, have suggested comparable functional outcomes and lower reoperation rates for lumbar decompression and fusion as compared with DA in the treatment of lumbar stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multistate Markov model was constructed from the US payer perspective of a hypothetical cohort of patients with lumbar stenosis with associated spondylolisthesis requiring surgery. Data regarding clinical improvement, costs, and reoperation were generated from contemporary randomized trial evidence, meta-analyses of recent prospective studies, and large retrospective cohorts. Base case, one-way sensitivity analysis, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted, and the results were compared with a WTP threshold of $100,000 (in 2022 USD) over a two-year time horizon. A discount rate of 3% was utilized. RESULTS: The incremental cost and utility of DF relative to DA were $12,778 and 0.00529 aggregated quality adjusted life years. The corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $2,416,281 far exceeded the willingness to pay threshold of $100,000. In sensitivity analysis, the results varied the most with respect to rate of improvement after DA, rate of improvement after lumbar decompression and fusion, and odds ratio of reoperation between the two groups. Zero percent of one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses achieved cost-effectiveness at the willingness-to-pay threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of contemporary surgical data, DF is not cost-effective compared with DA in the surgical management of lumbar stenosis with associated spondylolisthesis over a two-year time horizon.

Work Productivity Loss After Minimally Displaced Complete Lateral Compression Pelvis Fractures.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify work impairment and economic losses due to lost employment, lost work time (absenteeism), and lost productivity while working (presenteeism) after a lateral compression pelvic ring fracture. Secondarily, productivity loss of patients treated with surgical fixation versus nonoperative management was compared. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a prospective, multicenter trial. SETTING: Two level I academic trauma centers. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Adult patients with a lateral compression pelvic fracture (OTA/AO 61-B1/B2) with a complete posterior pelvic ring fracture and less than 10 mm of initial displacement. Excluded were patients who were not working or non-ambulatory before their pelvis fracture or who had a concomitant spinal cord injury. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Work impairment, including hours lost to unemployment, absenteeism, and presenteeism, measured by Work Productivity and Activity Impairment assessments in the year after injury. Results after non-operative and operative treatment were compared. RESULTS: Of the 64 included patients, forty-seven percent (30/64) were treated with surgical fixation, and 53% (30/64) with nonoperative management. 63% returned to work within 1 year of injury. Workers lost an average of 67% of a 2080-hour average work year, corresponding with $56,276 in lost economic productivity. Of the 1395 total hours lost, 87% was due to unemployment, 3% to absenteeism, and 10% to presenteeism. Surgical fixation was associated with 27% fewer lost hours (1155 vs. 1583, P = 0.005) and prevented $17,266 in average lost economic productivity per patient compared with nonoperative management. CONCLUSIONS: Lateral compression pelvic fractures are associated with a substantial economic impact on patients and society. Surgical fixation reduces work impairment and the corresponding economic burden. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Effect of Aspirin Versus Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin Thromboprophylaxis on Medication Satisfaction and Out-of-Pocket Costs: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparin for thromboprophylaxis after orthopaedic trauma. However, recent evidence suggests that aspirin is similar in efficacy and safety. To understand patients' experiences with these medications, we compared patients' satisfaction and out-of-pocket costs after thromboprophylaxis with aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of the PREVENTion of CLots in Orthopaedic Trauma (PREVENT CLOT) trial, conducted at 21 trauma centers in the U.S. and Canada. We included adult patients with an operatively treated extremity fracture or a pelvic or acetabular fracture. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 30 mg of low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin) twice daily or 81 mg of aspirin twice daily for thromboprophylaxis. The duration of the thromboprophylaxis, including post-discharge prescription, was based on hospital protocols. The study outcomes included patient satisfaction with and out-of-pocket costs for their thromboprophylactic medication measured on ordinal scales. RESULTS: The trial enrolled 12,211 patients (mean age and standard deviation [SD], 45 ± 18 years; 62% male), 9725 of whom completed the question regarding their satisfaction with the medication and 6723 of whom reported their out-of-pocket costs. The odds of greater satisfaction were 2.6 times higher for patients assigned to aspirin than those assigned to low-molecular-weight heparin (odds ratio [OR]: 2.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.39 to 2.80; p < 0.001). Overall, the odds of incurring any out-of-pocket costs for thromboprophylaxis medication were 51% higher for patients assigned to aspirin compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (OR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.37 to 1.66; p < 0.001). However, patients assigned to aspirin had substantially lower odds of out-of-pocket costs of at least $25 (OR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.18; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Use of aspirin substantially improved patients' satisfaction with their medication after orthopaedic trauma. While aspirin use increased the odds of incurring any out-of-pocket costs, it protected against costs of ≥$25, potentially improving health equity for thromboprophylaxis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The influence of Medicare Part D on the list pricing of brand drugs.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the Medicare Part D market share of brand drugs with their net-to-list price ratio. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: SSR Health Brand Net Price Tool and Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, 2007-2019. STUDY DESIGN: For each drug, we calculated the ratio of net to list price and the percent of users that were Medicare-eligible. We compared these cross-sectionally in each year and estimated a difference-in-differences model comparing drugs with high or low Medicare market shares (MMS) after following changes to program incentives in 2010. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: The sample included brand drugs without generic competitors appearing in both datasets. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Net-to-list price ratios were negatively correlated with MMS in the later years of our sample. In 2019, a 10% increase in MMS was associated with a significant 4.6% [95% CI: 2.1%, 7.1%] decrease in net-to-list ratio. Difference-in-differences showed net-to-list price ratios of drugs with above median MMS fell relative to those with below median MMS. By 2019, we observe an absolute reduction of -0.2 [95% CI: -0.29, -0.11], representing 28% reduction relative to the average ratio in 2010. CONCLUSIONS: Greater exposure to the Medicare Part D market was associated with larger differences between net and list prices of drugs.

Comparison of Price Index Methods and Drug Price Inflation Estimates for Hepatitis C Virus Medications.

Importance: Measuring drug price inflation is challenging because new drugs continually enter the market, some drugs transition from branded to generic, and current inflation indexes do not account for these market basket changes. Instead, they measure the price increases after new drugs have been launched. Therefore, the public pays the higher costs of newer and usually more expensive drugs, but the inflation indexes do not reflect the increases over existing drugs previously used to treat the same conditions. Objective: To assess how price index methods can affect estimates of drug price inflation using a case study of hepatitis C virus (HCV) medication and to explore other approaches for constructing a price index. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from outpatient pharmacies to compile a list of all HCV medications that were ever on the market (brand and generic) from 2013 to 2020. Using National Drug Codes of HCV drugs, a 20% nationally representative sample of Medicare Part D claims from 2013 to 2020 was queried. Alternative drug price indexes, including product-level vs class-level product and quantity definitions were developed in which gross vs net price definitions were used and an adjustment was created and applied to capture treatment duration because newer drugs often required a shorter duration. Main Outcomes and Measures: Price index value and rate of inflation from 2013 to 2020 for each methodologic approach to constructing a drug pricing index. Results: In all, 27 different HCV drug regimens were identified in Medicare Part D claims in 2013 to 2020. A product-level approach for measuring inflation estimated a 10% gross drug price increase from 2013 to 2020 for HCV drugs, whereas a class-level approach including the higher prices of the new drugs showed a 31% gross price increase. After adjusting for manufacturer rebates to estimate net prices, the findings showed that HCV drug prices fell by 31% from 2013 to 2020. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study indicate that the current product-level methods to estimate drug price inflation underestimated price increases for HCV drugs by failing to include the high launch prices of new market entrants. Using a class-level approach, the index captured higher spending on new products at launch. Prescription-level analyses, which did not consider shorter durations of treatment, overestimated price increases.

Incorporating Dynamic Pricing in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Are Known Unknowns Valuable?

BACKGROUND: Current practice in health technology assessment (HTA) of pharmaceuticals conducts cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) based on a static price or the estimated price at market launch. Recent publications suggest incorporating dynamic pricing. To test the feasibility and importance of including dynamic pricing, we compared the standard static approach to four dynamic scenarios by replicating US-based HTA evaluations with dynamic pricing inputs. METHODS: The four case examples included omalizumab (Xolair®) for the treatment of allergic asthma, elagolix (Orilissa®) for the treatment of endometriosis, ocrelizumab (Ocrevus®) for the treatment of primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS), and dupilumab (Dupixent®) for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD). The primary outcome was the relative percentage change in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for two dynamic pricing scenarios versus static pricing. Secondary outcomes included the absolute difference in ICERs versus base-case and an assessment of decision uncertainty. RESULTS: Base-case ICERs were $327,000, $102,000, $700,000, and $102,000 for allergic asthma, endometriosis, PPMS, and AD, respectively. Across scenarios and case examples, the range of ICERs versus base-case varied from decreases of 56% to increases of 232%. The absolute difference in ICERs versus base-case ranged from decreases of $120,000 to increases of $758,000. Conclusions on cost effectiveness were altered in 2/16 scenarios across the four case examples. CONCLUSIONS: Given the decision context that US payers face, with prices varying over time, findings suggest further research to reduce uncertainty around price trajectories, as well as conducting or updating multiple assessments over the lifecycle of pharmaceutical products.

Ambulatory Surgery Centers Versus Hospital Outpatient Departments for Orthopaedic Surgeries.

BACKGROUND: The goals of this study were to compare the utilization and costs of ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) versus hospital outpatient department (HOPD) for commonly performed outpatient orthopaedic surgical procedures. METHODS: Commercially insured patients undergoing elective, outpatient orthopaedic surgery were queried using an administrative claims database. We queried the following surgeries: carpal tunnel release, lumbar microdiskectomy, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, knee arthroscopy, arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, and bunion repair. Total costs were defined as the sum of all payments for a surgical episode. Professional fees were defined as payments to the primary orthopaedic surgeon and technical fees as all other payments. Comparisons between ASC and HOPD reimbursements were conducted using bivariate statistics and generalized linear models controlling for patient age, sex, and Elixhauser comorbidity index. RESULTS: Among 990,980 cases of outpatient orthopaedic surgery done from 2013 to 2018, the utilization rate of ASCs increased from 31% to 34% across all procedures assessed: compound annual growth rate of 3.3% for lumbar microdiscectomy, 1.8% for knee arthroscopy, 1.4% for anterior cruciate ligament, 1.4% for carpal tunnel release, 1.2% for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, and 0.5% for bunion repair (P < 0.001 for all). The average total costs were 26% lower at ASCs than HOPDs (P < 0.001 for each procedure). The average technical fees were 33% lower at ASCs than HOPDs (P < 0.001 for each procedure). Both total costs and technical fees were less for ASCs than HOPDs after controlling for patient age, sex, and Elixhauser comorbidity index (P < 0.001 for each procedure). Over the study period, the mean total costs at HOPDs increased by 2.5% yearly, whereas the mean total costs at ASCs decreased by 0.1% yearly. The average surgeon professional fees declined in both care settings over time. CONCLUSION: From 2013 to 2018, there was an increase in ASC utilization for common outpatient orthopaedic surgeries. ASCs were overall less costly than HOPDs for outpatient orthopaedic surgeries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

The price paradox of biosimilar-like long-acting insulin.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the uptake and out-of-pocket (OOP) costs of Basaglar, the first long-acting insulin biosimilar, in a commercially insured population in the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of commercial pharmacy claims and pharmacy co-payment offsets. METHODS: We assessed Basaglar uptake by examining trends in the composition of the long-acting insulin market in the United States from 2014 to 2018. As patient demographics and plan type may be important determinants of biosimilar uptake, we also assessed characteristics of all long-acting insulin users by drug. We examined Basaglar OOP costs by assessing mean OOP costs per claim for users of Basaglar and other long-acting insulins, overall and by plan type, and the number and source of co-payment offsets for Basaglar and other insulin glargine products from Basaglar market entry through 2018. We used multivariate linear models to examine the relationship between Basaglar OOP expenditures and insurer-negotiated amounts, overall and by plan type. RESULTS: Basaglar experienced a rapid uptake. However, there was no evidence that Basaglar users had lower OOP costs than reference product (Lantus) users. CONCLUSIONS: Given our results and the approval of the first interchangeable biosimilar, we recommend the empirical evaluation of biosimilar cost savings to patients and insurers prior to promoting their automatic substitution.

Streamlining Trauma Research Evaluation With Advanced Measurement (STREAM) Study: Implementation of the PROMIS Toolbox Within an Orthopaedic Trauma Clinical Trials Consortium.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II.

The 1-Year Economic Impact of Work Productivity Loss Following Severe Lower Extremity Trauma.

BACKGROUND: Severe lower extremity trauma among working-age adults is highly consequential for returning to work; however, the economic impact attributed to injury has not been fully quantified. The purpose of this study was to examine work and productivity loss during the year following lower extremity trauma and to calculate the economic losses associated with lost employment, lost work time (absenteeism), and productivity loss while at work (presenteeism). METHODS: This is an analysis of data collected prospectively across 3 multicenter studies of lower extremity trauma outcomes in the United States. Data were used to construct a Markov model that accumulated hours lost over time due to lost employment, absenteeism, and presenteeism among patients from 18 to 64 years old who were working prior to their injury. Average U.S. wages were used to calculate economic loss overall and by sociodemographic and injury subgroups. RESULTS: Of 857 patients working prior to injury, 47.2% had returned to work at 1 year. The average number of productive hours of work lost was 1,758.8/person, representing 84.6% of expected annual productive hours. Of the hours lost, 1,542.3 (87.7%) were due to working no hours or lost employment, 71.1 (4.0%) were due to missed hours after having returned, and 145.4 (8.3%) were due to decreased productivity while working. The 1-year economic loss due to injury totaled $64,427/patient (95% confidence interval [CI], $63,183 to $65,680). Of the 1,758.8 lost hours, approximately 88% were due to not being employed (working zero hours), 4% were due to absenteeism, and 8% were due to presenteeism. Total productivity loss was higher among older adults (≥40 years), men, those with a physically demanding job, and the most severe injuries (i.e., those leading to amputation as well as Gustilo type-IIIB tibial fractures and type-III pilon/ankle fractures). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe lower extremity trauma carry a substantial economic burden. The costs of lost productivity should be considered when evaluating outcomes.

National trends in extremity fracture hospitalizations among older adults between 2003 and 2017.

BACKGROUND: Fractures in late life are highly consequential for health, services use, and spending. Little is known about trends in extremity fracture hospitalizations among older adults in the United States. DESIGN: Retrospective longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: The 2003-2017 National Inpatient Sample (NIS), a representative sample of U.S. community hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized adults aged 65 and older with a diagnosis of upper or lower extremity fracture. MEASUREMENTS: Incidence of extremity fracture hospitalization and mortality, using NIS discharge and trend weights, and population denominators derived from the U.S. Census Bureau. Incidence was reported separately for men and women by age, fracture diagnosis, and injury mechanism. Weighted linear regression was used to test for significant trends over time. RESULTS: Incidence of extremity fracture hospitalizations declined in both women (15.7%, p trend < 0.001) and men (3.2%, p trend < 0.001) between 2003 and 2017. This trend was primarily attributed to a decline in low energy femur fractures which accounted for 65% of all fracture hospitalizations. Among older adults with an extremity fracture hospitalization, mortality declined from 5.1% in 2003 to 3.3% in 2017 in men, and from 2.6% to 1.9% in women (p trend < 0.001). High energy fractures were due to falls (53%), motor vehicle accidents (34%), and other high impact injuries (13%). Overall, 12% of extremity fracture hospitalizations were attributed to high-energy injuries: increases were observed among men ages 65-74 (20%; p trend < 0.001) and 75-84 (10%; p trend = 0.013), but not among women of any age. CONCLUSION: Observed declines in the incidence of extremity fracture hospitalizations and related mortality are encouraging. However, increasing incidence of fracture hospitalization from high energy injuries among men suggests that older adults with complex injuries will be seen with more prevalence in the future.

Outpatient Physical Therapy Use Following Tibial Fractures: A Retrospective Commercial Claims Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize outpatient physical therapy (OPT) use following tibial fractures and examine the variability of OPT attendance, time of initiation, number of visits, and length of care by patient, injury, and treatment factors. In the absence of clinical guidelines, results will guide future efforts to optimize OPT following tibial fractures. METHODS: This study used 2016 to 2017 claims from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims Research Database. The cohort included 9079 patients with International Classification of Diseases: Tenth Revision (ICD-10) diagnosis codes for tibial fractures. Use in the year following initial fracture management was determined using Current Procedural Terminology codes. Differences in use were examined using χ2 tests, t tests, and Kruskal-Wallace tests. RESULTS: Sixty-seven percent of patients received OPT the year following fracture. OPT attendance was higher in female patients, in patients with 1 or no major comorbidity, and in the western United States. Attendance was higher in patients with upper tibial fractures, moderate-severity injuries, and treatment with external fixation and in patients discharged to an inpatient rehabilitation facility. Patients started OPT on average [SD] 50 [52.6] days after fracture and attended 18 [16.1] visits over the course of 101 [86.4] days. The timing of OPT, the number of visits attended, and the length of OPT care varied by patient, injury, and treatment-level factors. CONCLUSIONS: One-third of insured patients do not receive OPT following tibial fracture. The timing of OPT initiation, the length of OPT care, and the number of visits attended by patients with tibial fractures were highly variable. Further research is needed to standardize referral and prescription practices for OPT following tibial fractures. IMPACT: OPT use varies based on patient, injury, and treatment-level factors following tibial fractures. Results from this study can be used to inform future efforts to optimize rehabilitation care for patients with tibial fractures.

Factors Associated With Manufacturer Drug Coupon Use at US Pharmacies.

Importance: Drug companies offer coupons to lower the out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs, yet little is known about why they do so for some drugs but not for others. Objective: To examine whether the following factors are associated with manufacturer drug coupon use: (1) patient-cost characteristics (mean per-patient cost per drug, mean patient copay); (2) drug characteristics (generics availability or "later-in-class-entrant" drugs); (3) drug-class characteristics (in-class coupon use among competitors; in-class generic competition; in-class mean cost and copay). Design Setting and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort analysis of anonymized transactional pharmacy claims sourced from retail US pharmacies from October 2017 to September 2019, supplemented with information derived from Medi-Span, Red Book, and FDA.gov. Data were analyzed from September 2020 to February 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was availability of a manufacturer's coupon. The secondary outcome was the mean proportion of transactions in which a coupon was used for each product. Results: The sample of 2501 unique brand-name prescription drugs accounted for a total of 8 995 141 claims. Manufacturers offered a coupon for 1267 (50.7%) of these drugs. When the manufacturer offered a coupon, it was used in a mean (SD) 16.3% (20.3%) of the transactions. Within a drug class, higher mean total cost per patient was positively associated with the likelihood of coupon use (odds ratio [OR], 1.03 per 10% increase; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04), but higher mean patient copay was inversely associated (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99). For drug characteristics, single-source later-in-class-entrant products were associated with a greater likelihood of coupon use compared with first entrants and multisource brands (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.09-1.89). The intensity of coupon use was associated with later-in-class-entrant products and the class mean per-patient cost (4.16-percentage-point increase; 95% CI, 1.20-7.13; 0.27 per 10% increase; 95% CI, 0.09-0.44). Drugs with a new in-class brand-name competitor had greater mean coupon use compared with drugs without a new competitor (10.2% of claims with a coupon vs 5.9%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of transactional pharmacy claims, higher mean per-patient total cost within a class was significantly associated with the likelihood of coupon use, but not patient out-of-pocket cost. Manufacturers' coupons were more likely to be used for expensive later-in-class-entrant products facing within-class competition where coupon use was prevalent.