Identifying Patients with Group 3 Pulmonary Hypertension Associated with COPD or ILD Using an Administrative Claims Database

Lung - Group 3 pulmonary hypertension (PH) describes a subpopulation of patients with PH due to chronic lung disease and/or hypoxia, with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and...     

Healthcare resource utilization and costs among women diagnosed with uterine fibroids compared to women without uterine fibroids

Objective: To perform a retrospective, matched-cohort, longitudinal evaluation of annual pre- and post-diagnosis costs incurred among women with uterine fibroids (UF) (cases) compared to controls without UF.

Methods: Data were derived from the IBM Watson Health MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicaid Multi-State databases. Women aged 18–64?years with ≥1 inpatient or outpatient medical claim with an initial UF diagnosis (index date) from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2014 were included. Healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) data including pharmacy, outpatient and inpatient hospital claims were collected for 1?year pre-index and ≤5?years post-index. All-cause costs (adjusted to 2017 $US) were compared between cases and controls using multivariable regression models.

Results: Analysis included 205,098 (Commercial) and 24,755 (Medicaid) case–control pairs. HCRU and total all-cause healthcare costs were higher for cases versus controls during the pre-index year and all years post-index. Total unadjusted mean all-cause costs were $1197 higher (p?<?.0001; Commercial) and $2813 higher (standardized difference 0.08; Medicaid) for cases during the pre-index year. Total adjusted mean all-cause costs in the first year post-index were $14,917 for cases versus $5717 for controls in the Commercial population, and $20,244 versus $10,544, respectively, in the Medicaid population. In Years 2–5 post-index, incremental mean adjusted total costs decreased, but remained significantly higher for cases versus controls at all time points in both populations (all p?<?.05).

Conclusions: Costs were higher for women with UF compared to women without UF during the pre-index year and over 5?years post-index; differences were greatest in the first year post-index.     

Adherence to medications by patients after acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND: Nonadherence to medication may lead to poor medical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To describe medication-taking behavior of patients with a history of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) for 4 classes of drugs and determine the relationship between self-reported adherence and patient characteristics. METHODS: Consenting patients with the diagnosis of ACS were interviewed by telephone approximately 10 months after discharge. The survey elicited data characterizing the patient, current medication regimens, beliefs about drug therapy, reasons for discontinuing medications, and adherence. The survey included the Beliefs About Medicine Questionnaire providing 4 scales: Specific Necessity, Specific Concerns, General Harm, and General Overuse, and the Medication Adherence Scale (MAS). Multivariate regression was used to determine the independent variables with the strongest association to the MAS. A p value < or = 0.05 was considered significant for all analyses. RESULTS: Two hundred eight patients were interviewed. Mean +/- SD age was 64.9 +/- 13.0 years, with 60.6% male, 95.7% white, 57.3% with a college education, 87.9% living with > or =1 other person, and 42% indicating excellent or very good health. The percentage of patients continuing on medication at the time of the survey category ranged from 87.4% (aspirin) to 66.0% (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors). Reasons for stopping medication included physician discontinuation or adverse effects. Of patients still on drug therapy, the mean MAS was 1.3 +/- 0.4, with 53.8% indicating nonadherence (score >1). The final regression model showed R(2) = 0.132 and included heart-related health status and Specific Necessity as significant predictor variables. CONCLUSIONS: After ACS, not all patients continue their drugs or take them exactly as prescribed. Determining beliefs about illness and medication may be helpful in developing interventions aimed at improving adherence.     

Impact of Patient Selection Criteria and Treatment History on Comparisons of Alternative Therapies: A Case Study of Atypical Antipsychotics

Background:  Comparative effectiveness analyses using retrospective databases may be highly sensitive to common design decisions employed by researchers.
Objective:  To test the sensitivity of statistical results to common research methods in retrospective database analyses. Comparisons of time to all-cause discontinuation (TTAD) across antipsychotic drug therapies are used to illustrate these effects.
Methods:  Data from the California Medicaid Program were used to identify 231,635 episodes of antipsychotic drug therapy. Four sequential analyses of TTAD were performed on all patients, patients with 1 year of post-treatment data, and patients with schizophrenia and using models that included variables documenting drug treatment history.
Results:  Patients using atypical antipsychotics consistently achieve longer TTAD than patients treated with conventional antipsychotics. Nevertheless, estimated differences narrowed when analyses included only patients with schizophrenia. Risperidone performed better than olanzapine when diagnosis was not limited to schizophrenia, and quetiapine outperformed olanzapine and risperidone when the analysis did not control for treatment history. This latter result reflects the disproportionate use of quetiapine in long-duration augmentation episodes. There were no statistical differences across alternative atypical antipsychotics once the analysis excluded patients without a diagnosis of schizophrenia and included patient treatment history in the analysis.
Conclusions:  Comparative effectiveness analyses of alternative drug therapies are sensitive to diagnosis and patient drug treatment history. Data on these factors can be derived from paid claims data and should be used to provide more accurate comparisons of effectiveness across drugs and to provide results that cover the full range of clinical scenarios that clinicians face.