Diagnostic rate estimation from Medicare records: Dependence on claim numbers and latent clinical features.

OBJECTIVE: International Classification of Disorders version 10 (ICD-10) codes contribute heavily to healthcare data. Medicare claims and other data-sources are used to constitute study populations and appraise healthcare processes. How variability in claims-per-beneficiary impacts diagnostic determinations is inadequately understood. The objective of this study is so assess distributional properties of Medicare claims, and examine claim rates impact on code utilization and rate determinations. METHODS: The study population was Medicare beneficiaries aged 75-79.99 with claim(s) in the 5% standard analytical Carrier and Outpatient files, alive and participating in Medicare part B for all 12 months of 2017. Medicare beneficiary files were processed to create records containing all ICD-10 codes specified, key demographics, Part B and vital status, and the total claims for each 2017 beneficiary. Claim number cohorts were characterized. RESULTS: Beneficiaries meeting inclusion criteria totaled 221,625, these having 7,617,503 claims; 96.4% had between 1 and 120 claims. Median claims were 24 for males (females 25); modal claims were 11 (13). Average distinct codes per beneficiary increased with claims number. The assignment of ICD-10 codes, i.e., 'diagnostic rate estimates' (DRE), increased as claim numbers increased for most codes among those most commonly utilized. For some conditions, mostly benign and age-related, DREs plateaued as claim numbers increased. For other conditions, typically associated with clinical acuity, e.g., chest pain, DREs increased steeply with claims. CONCLUSIONS: Older adult Medicare beneficiaries aged 75-80 exhibited varying claims activity over the course of a year. Although DRE dependence on claim numbers varies across ICD-10 codes, rate estimates are higher for beneficiaries with claim numbers above the median.

Caregiver Burden in Caregivers of Children With Special Health Care Needs and Association With Chronic Pain.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) affects millions of individuals in the United States but evidence of its prevalence among caregivers of children with special health care needs is sparse. We sought to estimate the prevalence of CNCP and its association with caregiver burden, in a nationally representative sample. METHODS: Retrospective cross-sectional study using pooled Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data for 2010-2015. Within interviewed households, family groups consisting of at least 1 parent and 1 child (0-17 y) were identified. CNCP was identified by one or more International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9)-CM codes utilizing previously published approaches. Level of caregiver burden was defined using a validated screener questionnaire identifying children with high burden of care (ie, special health care needs), for example, high or low burden. We estimated prevalence of CNCP as a function of caregiver burden, as well as the association of risk factors with CNCP, including parent sociodemographic features, clinical diagnoses, and family level characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 46,525 caregivers of whom 3.6% reported experiencing high caregiving burden. The prevalence of CNCP was 25.5% and 14.0% among parents with high compared with low caregiving burden, respectively. Odds of CNCP were higher among parents with high compared to those with lower caregiver burden (odds ratio=1.29, 95% confidence interval=1.06-1.55). Being obese, experiencing disability, and having a mental health diagnosis were associated with higher odds of CNCP. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic pain is more common among caregivers with high caregiver burden. Our findings highlight the need to further explore the nature and impact of risk factors on caregiver health and disability.

Low Back Pain and Substance Use: Diagnostic and Administrative Coding for Opioid Use and Dependence Increased in U.S. Older Adults with Low Back Pain.

OBJECTIVE: Low back pain (LBP) is a leading cause of pain and disability. Substance use complicates the management of LBP, and potential risks increase with aging. Despite implications for an aging, diverse U.S. population, substance use and LBP comorbidity remain poorly defined. The objective of this study was to characterize LBP and substance use diagnoses in older U.S. adults by age, gender, and race. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of a random national sample. SUBJECTS: Older adults including 1,477,594 U.S. Medicare Part B beneficiaries. METHODS: Bayesian analysis of 37,634,210 claims, with 10,775,869 administrative and 92,903,649 diagnostic code assignments. RESULTS: LBP was diagnosed in 14.8±0.06% of those more than 65 years of age, more in females than in males (15.8±0.08% vs. 13.4±0.09%), and slightly less in those more than 85 years of age (13.3±0.2%). Substance use diagnosis varied by substance: nicotine, 9.6±0.02%; opioid, 2.8±0.01%; and alcohol, 1.3±0.01%. Substance use diagnosis declined with advancing age cohort. Opioid use diagnosis was markedly higher for those in whom LBP was diagnosed (10.5%) than for those not diagnosed with LBP (1.5%). Most older adults (54.9%) with an opioid diagnosis were diagnosed with LBP. Gender differences were modest. Relative rates of substance use diagnoses in LBP were modest for nicotine and alcohol. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with LBP have high relative rates of opioid diagnoses, irrespective of gender or age. Most older adults with opioid-related diagnoses have LBP, compared with a minority of those not opioid diagnosed. In caring for older adults with LBP or opioid-related diagnoses, health systems must anticipate complexity and support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in managing pain comorbidities. Older adults may benefit from proactive incorporation of non-opioid pain treatments. Further study is needed.

Scope and Nature of Pain- and Analgesia-Related Content of the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE).

Background: "The ongoing opioid crisis lies at the intersection of two substantial public health challenges-reducing the burden of suffering from pain and containing the rising toll of the harms that can result from the use of opioid medications" [1]. Improved pain education for health care providers is an essential component of the multidimensional response to both still-unmet challenges [2,3]. Despite the importance of licensing examinations in assuring competency in health care providers, there has been no prior appraisal of pain and related content within the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE). Methods: An expert panel developed a novel methodology for characterizing USMLE questions based on pain core competencies and topical and public health relevance. Results: Under secure conditions, raters used this methodology to score 1,506 questions, with 28.7% (432) identified as including the word "pain." Of these, 232 questions (15.4% of the 1,506 USMLE questions reviewed) were assessed as being fully or partially related to pain, rather than just mentioning pain but not testing knowledge of its mechanisms and their implications for treatment. The large majority of questions related to pain (88%) focused on assessment rather than safe and effective pain management, or the context of pain. Conclusions: This emphasis on assessment misses other important aspects of safe and effective pain management, including those specific to opioid safety. Our findings inform ways to improve the long-term education of our medical and other graduates, thereby improving the health care of the populations they serve.

Pain, comorbidities, and clinical decision-making: conceptualization, development, and pilot testing of the Pain in Aging, Educational Assessment of Need instrument.

Introduction: Pain is highly prevalent in older adults and often contextualized by multiple clinical conditions (pain comorbidities). Pain comorbidities increase with age and this makes clinical decisions more complex. To address gaps in clinical training and geriatric pain management, we established the Pain in Aging-Educational Assessment of Need (PAEAN) project to appraise the impacts of medical and mental health conditions on clinical decision-making regarding older adults with pain. We here report development and pilot testing of the PAEAN survey instrument to assess clinician perspectives. Methods: Mixed-methods approaches were used. Scoping review methodology was applied to appraise both research literature and selected Medicare-based data. A geographically and professionally diverse interprofessional advisory panel of experts in pain research, medical education, and geriatrics was formed to advise development of the list of pain comorbidities potentially impacting healthcare professional clinical decision-making. A survey instrument was developed, and pilot tested by diverse licensed healthcare practitioners from 2 institutions. Respondents were asked to rate agreement regarding clinical decision-making impact using a 5-point Likert scale. Items were scored for percent agreement. Results: Scoping reviews indicated that pain conditions and comorbidities are prevalent in older adults but not universally recognized. We found no research literature directly guiding pain educators in designing pain education modules that mirror older adult clinical complexity. The interprofessional advisory panel identified 26 common clinical conditions for inclusion in the pilot PAEAN instrument. Conditions fell into three main categories: "major medical", i.e., cardio-vascular-pulmonary; metabolic; and neuropsychiatric/age-related. The instrument was pilot tested by surveying clinically active healthcare providers, e.g., physicians, nurse practitioners, who all responded completely. Median survey completion time was less than 3 min. Conclusion: This study, developing and pilot testing our "Pain in Aging-Educational Assessment of Need" (PAEAN) instrument, suggests that 1) many clinical conditions impact pain clinical decision-making, and 2) surveying healthcare practitioners about the impact of pain comorbidities on clinical decision-making for older adults is highly feasible. Given the challenges intrinsic to safe and effective clinical care of older adults with pain, and attendant risks, together with the paucity of existing relevant work, much more education and research are needed.

Impact of Veterans Affairs Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Centers: Incubators of innovation in geriatrics.

Since their inception in 1975, the Department of Veterans Affairs Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Centers (GRECCs) have served as incubators of innovation in geriatrics. Their contributions to the VA mission were last reviewed in 2012. Herein, we describe the continuing impact of GRECCs in research, clinical, and educational areas, focusing on the period between 2018 and 2022. GRECC research spans the continuum from bench to bedside, with a growing research portfolio notable for highly influential publications. GRECC education connects healthcare professions trainees and practicing clinicians, as well as Veterans and their caregivers, to engaging learning experiences. Clinical advancements, including age-friendly care, span the continuum of care and leverage technology to link disparate geographical sites. GRECCs are uniquely positioned to serve older adults given their alignment with the largest integrated health system in the United States and their integration with academic health centers. As such, the GRECCs honor Veterans as they age by building VA capacity to care for the increasing number of aging Veterans seeking care from VA. GRECC advancements also benefit non-VA healthcare systems, their academic affiliates, and non-Veteran older adults. GRECCs make invaluable contributions to advancing geriatric and gerontological science, training healthcare professionals, and developing innovative models of geriatric care.

A guide for authors and readers of the American Society for Nutrition Journals on the proper use of P values and strategies that promote transparency and improve research reproducibility.

Two questions regarding the scientific literature have become grist for public discussion: 1) what place should P values have in reporting the results of studies? 2) How should the perceived difficulty in replicating the results reported in published studies be addressed? We consider these questions to be 2 sides of the same coin; failing to address them can lead to an incomplete or incorrect message being sent to the reader. If P values (which are derived from the estimate of the effect size and a measure of the precision of the estimate of the effect) are used improperly, for example reporting only significant findings, or reporting P values without account for multiple comparisons, or failing to indicate the number of tests performed, the scientific record can be biased. Moreover, if there is a lack of transparency in the conduct of a study and reporting of study results, it will not be possible to repeat a study in a manner that allows inferences from the original study to be reproduced or to design and conduct a different experiment whose aim is to confirm the original study's findings. The goal of this article is to discuss how P values can be used in a manner that is consistent with the scientific method, and to increase transparency and reproducibility in the conduct and analysis of nutrition research.