Area-Level Socioeconomic Disadvantage and Health Care Spending: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Publicly available, US Census-based composite measures of socioeconomic disadvantage are increasingly being used in a wide range of clinical outcomes and health services research. Area Deprivation Index (ADI) and Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) are 2 of the most commonly used measures. There is also early interest in incorporating area-level measures to create more equitable alternative payment models. Objective: To review the evidence on the association of ADI and SVI with health care spending, including claims-based spending and patient-reported barriers to care due to cost. Evidence Review: A systematic search for English-language articles and abstracts was performed in the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases (from inception to March 1, 2023). Peer-reviewed articles and abstracts using a cross-sectional, case-control, or cohort study design and based in the US were identified. Data analysis was performed in March 2023. Findings: This review included 24 articles and abstracts that used a cross-sectional, case-control, or cohort study design. In 20 of 24 studies (83%), ADI and SVI were associated with increased health care spending. No association was observed in the 4 remaining studies, mostly with smaller sample sizes from single centers. In adjusted models, the increase in spending associated with higher ADI or SVI residence was $574 to $1811 for index surgical hospitalizations, $3003 to $24 075 for 30- and 90-day episodes of care, and $3519 for total annual spending for Medicare beneficiaries. In the studies that explored mechanisms, postoperative complications, readmission risk, and poor primary care access emerged as health care system-related drivers of increased spending. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this systematic review suggest that both ADI and SVI can play important roles in efforts to understand drivers of health care spending and in the design of payment and care delivery programs that capture aspects of social risk. At the health care system level, higher health care spending and poor care access associated with ADI or SVI may represent opportunities to codesign interventions with patients from high ADI or SVI areas to improve access to high-value health care and health promotion more broadly.

Sleep Testing and Mortality in a Propensity-matched Cohort of Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Rationale: Many advocate the application of propensity-matching methods to real-world data to answer key questions around obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) management. One such question is whether identifying undiagnosed OSA impacts mortality in high-risk populations, such as those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Objectives: Assess the association of sleep testing with mortality among patients with COPD and a high likelihood of undiagnosed OSA. Methods: We identified patients with COPD and a high likelihood of undiagnosed OSA. We then distinguished those receiving sleep testing within 90 days of index COPD encounters. We calculated propensity scores for testing based on 37 variables and compared long-term mortality in matched groups. In sensitivity analyses, we compared mortality using inverse propensity weighting and instrumental variable methods. We also compared the incidence of nonfatal events including adverse outcomes (hospitalizations and COPD exacerbations) and routine services that are regularly indicated in COPD (influenza vaccination and pulmonary function testing). We compared the incidence of each nonfatal event as a composite outcome with death and separately compared the marginal probability of each nonfatal event independently, with death as a competing risk. Results: Among 135,958 patients, 1,957 (1.4%) received sleep testing. We propensity matched all patients with sleep testing to an equal number without testing, achieving excellent balance on observed confounders, with standardized differences < 0.10. We observed lower mortality risk among patients with sleep testing (incidence rate ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-0.99) and similar results using inverse propensity weighting and instrumental variable methods. Contrary to mortality, we found that sleep testing was associated with a similar or greater risk for nonfatal adverse events, including inpatient COPD exacerbations (subhazard ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.02-1.62) and routine services like influenza vaccination (subhazard ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.17-1.36). Conclusions: Our disparate findings can be interpreted in multiple ways. Sleep testing may indeed cause both reduced mortality and greater incidence of nonfatal adverse outcomes and routine services. However, it is also possible that our findings stem from residual confounding by patients' likelihood of accessing care. Given the limitations of propensity-based analyses, we cannot confidently distinguish these two possibilities. This uncertainty highlights the limitations of using propensity-based analyses to guide patient care and policy decisions.

The Role of Advanced Practice Registered Nurses in the Completion of Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment.

BACKGROUND: The Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) Paradigm records advance care planning for patients with advanced illness or frailty as actionable medical records. The National POLST Paradigm Task Force recommends that physicians, advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), and physician assistants (PAs) be permitted to execute POLST forms. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the percentage of Oregon POLST forms signed by APRNs, and examine the obstacles faced by states attempting to allow APRNs to sign POLST forms. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING/SUBJECTS: 226,101 Oregon POLST Registry forms from 2010 to 2015. MEASUREMENTS: POLST forms in the Oregon Registry were matched with signer type (MD, DO, APRN, PA). RESULTS: 226,101 POLST forms have been added to the Oregon POLST Registry from 2010 to 2015: 85.3% of forms were signed by a physician, 10.9% of forms were signed by an APRN, and 3.8% of forms were signed by a PA. From 2010 to 2015, the overall percentage of POLST forms signed by an APRN has increased from 9.0% in 2010 to 11.9% in 2015. Physicians are authorized signers in all 19 states with endorsed POLST Paradigm programs; 16 of these states also authorize APRN signature, and 3 states (LA, NY, and GA) allow only physicians to sign. CONCLUSIONS: More than 10% of Oregon POLST forms are signed by APRNs. Given the need for timely POLST form completion, ideally by a member of the interdisciplinary team who knows the patient's preferences best, these data support authorizing APRNs to complete POLST forms.