Search

Objective: To evaluate the impact of the Affordable Care Act's Physician Payments Sunshine Act (PPSA), which mandates disclosure of industry payments to physicians, on physician prescribing of branded statins.Data Sources: Administrative claims data from 2011 to 2015 from three large national commercial insurers were provided by the Health Care Cost Institute.Study Design: We adopted a difference-in-differences and event study design, leveraging the control group of physicians in two states, MA and VT, which implemented state laws on disclosure of industry payments prior to the national PPSA. To further address potential confounding caused by differences in prescribing patterns across states, our analytical sample includes physicians practicing in border counties between the treatment (NH, NY, and RI) and control (MA and VT) states.Data Collection: We restricted our sample to physicians who had at least 50 new-fill prescription claims for statins during the five-year study period, with at least one new-fill prescription claim each year.Principal Findings: We found that the PPSA led to a 7% (p < 0.001) reduction in monthly new prescriptions of brand-name statin over the study period, with little change in generic prescribing. The reduction in branded prescriptions was concentrated among physicians with the highest tercile of drug spending pre-PPSA, with a decrease of 15% (p < 0.001) in new branded statin prescriptions. The decline was most prominent after mandated reporting of industry payments began before the payment data was published.Conclusions: The PPSA may have achieved its intended effect of reducing branded prescriptions at least in the short run, particularly among physicians most likely to have engaged in excessive or low-value prescribing of branded drugs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dry eye disease (DED) is a multifactorial disease that causes ocular discomfort and visual impairment on a damaged ocular surface. Lifitegrast, a novel T-cell integrin antagonist, was approved in the United States in July 2016 as a 5% (50 mg/mL) ophthalmic solution for DED management. Currently, no meta-analysis and systemic review based on relevant studies have been conducted. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lifitegrast in patients with DED. We systematically searched Embase, Medline, PubMed, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies evaluating lifitegrast effects on symptomatic DED. Then, inferior corneal staining score, total corneal staining score (TCSS), nasal lissamine staining score (NLSS), total lissamine staining score, ocular discomfort score (ODS), eye discomfort score (visual analog scale (VAS) score), eye dryness score (EDS), ocular surface disease index score (OSDI-S), and tear break-up time (TBUT) were assessed. Clinical global impression and safety profiles were also evaluated. The studies were pooled in a random-effects model. We included five RCTs, one case–control study, and four longitudinal or retrospective studies, comprising 3197 participants. In the meta-analysis, lifitegrast was superior to the placebo because it improved TCSS, NLSS, TBUT, ODS, eye discomfort score, EDS, and OSDI-Sin DED. However, lifitegrast showed higher risks for ocular and non-ocular treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) overall or at a mild or moderate level. Nonetheless, its incidence of adverse events slightly differed from that in the placebo, especially instillation site discomforts and dysgeusia, thereby considered safe and tolerable. Claims of withdrawal during follow-up caused by TEAEs were extremely rare. Lifitegrast improves DED, although dysgeusia, installation site pain, and irritation may be a concern for some. Overall, most of the adverse events are tolerable. Lifitegrast can alleviate refractory DED and improves patients' quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: After activation of the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) in 2012, hospitals nationwide experimented broadly with the implementation of Transitional Care (TC) strategies to reduce hospital readmissions. Although numerous evidence-based TC models exist, they are often adapted to local contexts, rendering large-scale evaluation difficult. Little systematic evidence exists about prevailing implementation patterns of TC strategies among hospitals, nor which strategies in which combinations are most effective at improving patient outcomes. We aimed to identify and define combinations of TC strategies, or groups of transitional care activities, implemented among a large and diverse cohort of U.S. hospitals, with the ultimate goal of evaluating their comparative effectiveness.Methods: We collected implementation data for 13 TC strategies through a nationwide, web-based survey of representatives from short-term acute-care and critical access hospitals (N = 370) and obtained Medicare claims data for patients discharged from participating hospitals. TC strategies were grouped separately through factor analysis and latent class analysis.Results: We observed 348 variations in how hospitals implemented 13 TC strategies, highlighting the diversity of hospitals' TC strategy implementation. Factor analysis resulted in five overlapping groups of TC strategies, including those characterized by 1) medication reconciliation, 2) shared decision making, 3) identifying high risk patients, 4) care plan, and 5) cross-setting information exchange. We determined that the groups suggested by factor analysis results provided a more logical grouping. Further, groups of TC strategies based on factor analysis performed better than the ones based on latent class analysis in detecting differences in 30-day readmission trends.Conclusions: U.S. hospitals uniquely combine TC strategies in ways that require further evaluation. Factor analysis provides a logical method for grouping such strategies for comparative effectiveness analysis when the groups are dependent. Our findings provide hospitals and health systems 1) information about what groups of TC strategies are commonly being implemented by hospitals, 2) strengths associated with the factor analysis approach for classifying these groups, and ultimately, 3) information upon which comparative effectiveness trials can be designed. Our results further reveal promising targets for comparative effectiveness analyses, including groups incorporating cross-setting information exchange. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As health systems transition to value-based care, improving transitional care (TC) remains a priority. Hospitals implementing evidence-based TC models often adapt them to local contexts. However, limited research has evaluated which groups of TC strategies, or transitional care activities, commonly implemented by hospitals correspond with improved patient outcomes. In order to identify TC strategy groups for evaluation, we applied a data-driven approach informed by literature review and expert opinion.Methods: Based on a review of evidence-based TC models and the literature, focus groups with patients and family caregivers identifying what matters most to them during care transitions, and expert review, the Project ACHIEVE team identified 22 TC strategies to evaluate. Patient exposure to TC strategies was measured through a hospital survey (N = 42) and prospective survey of patients discharged from those hospitals (N = 8080). To define groups of TC strategies for evaluation, we performed a multistep process including: using ACHIEVE'S prior retrospective analysis; performing exploratory factor analysis, latent class analysis, and finite mixture model analysis on hospital and patient survey data; and confirming results through expert review. Machine learning (e.g., random forest) was performed using patient claims data to explore the predictive influence of individual strategies, strategy groups, and key covariates on 30-day hospital readmissions.Results: The methodological approach identified five groups of TC strategies that were commonly delivered as a bundle by hospitals: 1) Patient Communication and Care Management, 2) Hospital-Based Trust, Plain Language, and Coordination, 3) Home-Based Trust, Plain language, and Coordination, 4) Patient/Family Caregiver Assessment and Information Exchange Among Providers, and 5) Assessment and Teach Back. Each TC strategy group comprises three to six, non-mutually exclusive TC strategies (i.e., some strategies are in multiple TC strategy groups). Results from random forest analyses revealed that TC strategies patients reported receiving were more important in predicting readmissions than TC strategies that hospitals reported delivering, and that other key co-variates, such as patient comorbidities, were the most important variables.Conclusion: Sophisticated statistical tools can help identify underlying patterns of hospitals' TC efforts. Using such tools, this study identified five groups of TC strategies that have potential to improve patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Over 5 million patients in the United States have type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) with chronic kidney disease (CKD); antidiabetic drug selection for this population is complex and has important implications for outcomes. Objective: To better understand how providers choose antidiabetic drugs in T2D with CKD Design: Mixed methods. Interviews with providers underwent qualitative analysis using grounded theory to identify themes related to antidiabetic drug prescribing. A provider survey used vignettes and direct questions to quantitatively assess prescribers' knowledge and preferences. A retrospective cohort analysis of real-world prescribing data assessed the external validity of the interview and survey findings. Participants: Primary care physicians, endocrinologists, nurse-practitioners, and physicians' assistants were eligible for interviews; primary care physicians and endocrinologists were eligible for the survey; prescribing data were derived from adult patients with serum creatinine data. Main Measures: Interviews were qualitative; for the survey and retrospective cohort, proportion of patients receiving metformin was the primary outcome. Key Results: Interviews with 9 providers identified a theme of uncertainty about guidelines for prescribing antidiabetic drugs in patients with T2D and CKD. The survey had 105 respondents: 74 primary care providers and 31 endocrinologists. Metformin was the most common choice for patients with T2D and CKD. Compared to primary care providers, endocrinologists were less likely to prescribe metformin at levels of kidney function at which it is contraindicated and more likely to correctly answer a question about metformin's contraindications (71% versus 41%) (p <.05). Real-world data were consistent with survey findings, and further showed low rates of use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (<10%) in patients with eGFR below 60 ml/min/1.73m2. Conclusions: Providers are unsure how to treat T2D with CKD and incompletely informed as to existing guidelines. This suggests opportunities to improve care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Despite concerted actions to streamline care transitions, the journey from hospital to home remains hazardous for patients and caregivers. Remarkably little is known about the patient and caregiver experience during care transitions, the services they need, or the outcomes they value. The aims of this study were to (1) describe patient and caregiver experiences during care transitions and (2) characterize patient and caregiver desired outcomes of care transitions and the health services associated with them.Methods: We interviewed 138 patients and 110 family caregivers recruited from 6 health networks across the United States. We conducted 34 homogenous focus groups (103 patients, 65 caregivers) and 80 key informant interviews (35 patients, 45 caregivers). Audio recordings were transcribed and analyzed using principles of grounded theory to identify themes and the relationship between them.Results: Patients and caregivers identified 3 desired outcomes of care transition services: (1) to feel cared for and cared about by medical providers, (2) to have unambiguous accountability from the health care system, and (3) to feel prepared and capable of implementing care plans. Five care transition services or provider behaviors were linked to achieving these outcomes: (1) using empathic language and gestures, (2) anticipating the patient's needs to support self-care at home, (3) collaborative discharge planning, (4) providing actionable information, and (5) providing uninterrupted care with minimal handoffs.Conclusions: Clear accountability, care continuity, and caring attitudes across the care continuum are important outcomes for patients and caregivers. When these outcomes are achieved, care is perceived as excellent and trustworthy. Otherwise, the care transition is experienced as transactional and unsafe, and leaves patients and caregivers feeling abandoned by the health care system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Poorly managed hospital discharges and care transitions between health care facilities can cause poor outcomes for both patients and their caregivers. Unfortunately, the usual approach to health care delivery does not support continuity and coordination across the settings of hospital, doctors' offices, home or nursing homes. Though complex efforts with multiple components can improve patient outcomes and reduce 30-day readmissions, research has not identified which components are necessary. Also we do not know how delivery of core components may need to be adjusted based on patient, caregiver, setting or characteristics of the community, or how system redesign can be accelerated.Methods/design: Project ACHIEVE focuses on diverse Medicare populations such as individuals with multiple chronic diseases, patients with low health literacy/numeracy and limited English proficiency, racial and ethnic minority groups, low-income groups, residents of rural areas, and individuals with disabilities. During the first phase, we will use focus groups to identify the transitional care outcomes and components that matter most to patients and caregivers to inform development and validation of assessment instruments. During the second phase, we will evaluate the comparative effectiveness of multi-component care transitions programs occurring across the U.S. Using a mixed-methods approach for this evaluation, we will study historical (retrospective) and current and future (prospective) groups of patients, caregivers and providers using site visits, surveys, and clinical and claims data. In this natural experiment observational study, we use a fractional factorial study design to specify comparators and estimate the individual and combined effects of key transitional care components.Discussion: Our study will determine which evidence-based transitional care components and/or clusters most effectively produce patient and caregiver desired outcomes overall and among diverse patient and caregiver populations in different healthcare settings. Using the results, we will develop concrete, actionable recommendations regarding how best to implement these strategies. Finally, this work will provide tools for hospitals, community-based organizations, patients, caregivers, clinicians and other stakeholders to help them make informed decisions about which strategies are most effective and how best to implement them in their communities.Trial Registration: Registered as NCT02354482 on clinicaltrials.gov on 1/29/2015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following the adaptation of the Paris Agreement at COP21, it was noted that the traditional measures of carbon emissions have several limitations; and a reliable and relevant carbon emissions measurement is important to formulate a response to the challenge of climate change. This study, therefore, explores the relationship between international trade and consumption-based carbon emissions, which is a trade adjusted indicator; and measures the outflow and the inflow of emissions through exports and imports separately. We also include technological innovation in the model to understand its impact on consumption-based carbon emissions. The results show that exports and consumption-based carbon emissions are negatively associated, and technological innovation helps reducing the adverse effect of CO 2 growth. In contrast, Imports and gross domestic product are positively linked with consumption-based carbon emissions. The findings also suggest the countries which embraced the Paris Climate Agreement must focus on consumption-based carbon emissions rather than the production-based carbon emissions. • We employ ARDL bound test and error correction model to analyze consumption based carbon emission in USA. • Consumption-based carbon emission is a reliable and more appropriate measure of climate change. • Technological innovation is an important factor in formulating policy response to combat climate change. • Exports play a positive role and help reducing carbon emission. • United States of America (USA) is the net importer of carbon emission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]