Search

Background: Prior research documented racial and ethnic disparities in health care experiences within the Veterans Health Administration (VA). Little is known about such differences in VA-funded community care programs, through which a growing number of Veterans receive health care. Community care is available to Veterans when care is not available through the VA, nearby, or in a timely manner., Objective: To examine differences in Veterans' experiences with VA-funded community care by race and ethnicity and assess changes in these experiences from 2016 to 2021., Design: Observational analyses of Veterans' ratings of community care experiences by self-reported race and ethnicity. We used linear and logistic regressions to estimate racial and ethnic differences in community care experiences, sequentially adjusting for demographic, health, insurance, and socioeconomic factors., Participants: Respondents to the 2016-2021 VA Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients-Community Care Survey., Measures: Care ratings in nine domains., Key Results: The sample of 231,869 respondents included 24,306 Black Veterans (mean [SD] age 56.5 [12.9] years, 77.5% male) and 16,490 Hispanic Veterans (mean [SD] age 54.6 [15.9] years, 85.3% male). In adjusted analyses pooled across study years, Black and Hispanic Veterans reported significantly lower ratings than their White and non-Hispanic counterparts in five of nine domains (overall rating of community providers, scheduling a recent appointment, provider communication, non-appointment access, and billing), with adjusted differences ranging from - 0.04 to - 0.13 standard deviations (SDs) of domain scores. Black and Hispanic Veterans reported higher ratings with eligibility determination and scheduling initial appointments than their White and non-Hispanic counterparts, and Black Veterans reported higher ratings of care coordination, with adjusted differences of 0.05 to 0.21 SDs. Care ratings improved from 2016 to 2021, but differences between racial and ethnic groups persisted., Conclusions: This study identified small but persistent racial and ethnic differences in Veterans' experiences with VA-funded community care, with Black and Hispanic Veterans reporting lower ratings in five domains and, respectively, higher ratings in three and two domains. Interventions to improve Black and Hispanic Veterans' patient experience could advance equity in VA community care., (© 2024. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: Over half of veterans enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) are also enrolled in Medicare, potentially increasing their opportunity to receive low-value health services within and outside VA., Objectives: To characterize the use and cost of low-value services delivered to dually enrolled veterans from VA and Medicare., Design: Retrospective cross-sectional., Participants: Veterans enrolled in VA and fee-for-service Medicare (FY 2017-2018)., Main Measures: We used VA and Medicare administrative data to identify 29 low-value services across 6 established domains: cancer screening, diagnostic/preventive testing, preoperative testing, imaging, cardiovascular testing, and surgery. We determined the count of low-value services per 100 veterans delivered in VA and Medicare in FY 2018 overall, by domain, and by individual service. We applied standardized estimates to determine each service's cost., Key Results: Among 1.6 million dually enrolled veterans, the mean age was 73, 97% were men, and 77% were non-Hispanic White. Overall, 63.2 low-value services per 100 veterans were delivered, affecting 32% of veterans; 22.9 services per 100 veterans were delivered in VA and 40.3 services per 100 veterans were delivered in Medicare. The total cost was $226.3 million (M), of which $62.6 M was spent in VA and $163.7 M in Medicare. The most common low-value service was prostate-specific antigen testing at 17.3 per 100 veterans (VA 55.9%, Medicare 44.1%). The costliest low-value service was percutaneous coronary intervention (VA $10.1 M, Medicare $32.8 M)., Conclusions: Nearly 1 in 3 dually enrolled veterans received a low-value service in FY18, with twice as many low-value services delivered in Medicare vs VA. Interventions to reduce low-value services for veterans should consider their substantial use of such services in Medicare., (© 2024. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: Veterans dually enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) and Medicare commonly experience downstream services as part of a care cascade after an initial low-value service. Our objective was to characterize the frequency and cost of low-value cervical cancer screening and subsequent care cascades among Veterans dually enrolled in VA and Medicare., Methods: This retrospective cohort study used VA and Medicare administrative data from fiscal years 2015 to 2019. The study cohort was comprised of female Veterans aged >65 years and at low risk of cervical cancer who were dually enrolled in VA and Medicare. Within this cohort, we compared differences in the rates and costs of cascade services related to low-value cervical cancer screening for Veterans who received and did not receive screening in FY2018, adjusting for baseline patient- and facility-level covariates using inverse probability of treatment weighting., Results: Among 20,972 cohort-eligible Veterans, 494 (2.4%) underwent low-value cervical cancer screening with 301 (60.9%) initial screens occurring in VA and 193 (39%) occurring in Medicare. Veterans who were screened experienced an additional 26.7 (95% CI, 16.4-37.0) cascade services per 100 Veterans compared to those who were not screened, contributing to $2919.4 (95% CI, -265 to 6104.7) per 100 Veterans in excess costs. Care cascades consisted predominantly of subsequent cervical cancer screening procedures and related outpatient visits with low rates of invasive procedures and occurred in both VA and Medicare., Conclusions: Veterans dually enrolled in VA and Medicare commonly receive related downstream tests and visits as part of care cascades following low-value cervical cancer screening. Our findings demonstrate that to fully capture the extent to which individuals are subject to low-value care, it is important to examine downstream care stemming from initial low-value services across all systems from which individuals receive care., (© 2024 The American Geriatrics Society.)

Importance: Within the Veterans Health Administration (VA), the use and cost of low-value services delivered by VA facilities or increasingly by VA Community Care (VACC) programs have not been comprehensively quantified., Objective: To quantify veterans' overall use and cost of low-value services, including VA-delivered care and VA-purchased community care., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study assessed a national population of VA-enrolled veterans. Data on enrollment, sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, and health care services delivered by VA facilities or paid for by the VA through VACC programs were compiled for fiscal year 2018 from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse. Data analysis was conducted from April 2020 to January 2022., Main Outcomes and Measures: VA administrative data were applied using an established low-value service metric to quantify the use of 29 potentially low-value tests and procedures delivered in VA facilities and by VACC programs across 6 domains: cancer screening, diagnostic and preventive testing, preoperative testing, imaging, cardiovascular testing and procedures, and other procedures. Sensitive and specific criteria were used to determine the low-value service counts per 100 veterans overall, by domain, and by individual service; count and percentage of each low-value service delivered by each setting; and estimated cost of each service., Results: Among 5.2 million enrolled veterans, the mean (SD) age was 62.5 (16.0) years, 91.7% were male, 68.0% were non-Hispanic White, and 32.3% received any service through VACC. By specific criteria, 19.6 low-value services per 100 veterans were delivered in VA facilities or by VACC programs, involving 13.6% of veterans at a total cost of $205.8 million. Overall, the most frequently delivered low-value service was prostate-specific antigen testing for men aged 75 years or older (5.9 per 100 veterans); this was also the service with the greatest proportion delivered by VA facilities (98.9%). The costliest low-value services were spinal injections for low back pain ($43.9 million; 21.4% of low-value care spending) and percutaneous coronary intervention for stable coronary disease ($36.8 million; 17.9% of spending)., Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that among veterans enrolled in the VA, more than 1 in 10 have received a low-value service from VA facilities or VACC programs, with approximately $200 million in associated costs. Such information on the use and costs of low-value services are essential to guide the VA's efforts to reduce delivery and spending on such care.

Background and Objectives: Many kidney transplant recipients enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration are also enrolled in Medicare and eligible to receive both Veterans Health Administration and private sector care. Where these patients receive transplant care and its association with mortality are unknown., Design, Setting, Participants, & Measurements: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of veterans who underwent kidney transplantation between 2008 and 2016 and were dually enrolled in Veterans Health Administration and Medicare at the time of surgery. We categorized patients on the basis of the source of transplant-related care ( i.e ., outpatient transplant visits, immunosuppressive medication prescriptions, calcineurin inhibitor measurements) delivered during the first year after transplantation defined as Veterans Health Administration only, Medicare only ( i.e ., outside Veterans Health Administration using Medicare), or dual care (mixed use of Veterans Health Administration and Medicare). Using multivariable Cox regression, we examined the independent association of post-transplant care source with mortality at 5 years after kidney transplantation., Results: Among 6206 dually enrolled veterans, 975 (16%) underwent transplantation at a Veterans Health Administration hospital and 5231 (84%) at a non-Veterans Health Administration hospital using Medicare. Post-transplant care was received by 752 patients (12%) through Veterans Health Administration only, 2092 (34%) through Medicare only, and 3362 (54%) through dual care. Compared with patients who were Veterans Health Administration only, 5-year mortality was significantly higher among patients who were Medicare only (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.5 to 3.1) and patients who were dual care (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 2.1)., Conclusions: Most dually enrolled veterans underwent transplantation at a non-Veterans Health Administration transplant center using Medicare, yet many relied on Veterans Health Administration for some or all of their post-transplant care. Veterans who received Veterans Health Administration-only post-transplant care had the lowest 5-year mortality., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Importance: Low-value care is associated with harm among patients and with wasteful health care spending but has not been well characterized in the Veterans Health Administration., Objectives: To characterize the frequency of and variation in low-value diagnostic testing for 4 common conditions at Veterans Affairs medical centers (VAMCs) and to examine the correlation between receipt of low-value testing for each condition., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used Veterans Health Administration data from 127 VAMCs from fiscal years 2014 to 2015. Data were analyzed from April 2018 to March 2020., Exposures: Continuous enrollment in Veterans Health Administration during fiscal year 2015., Main Outcomes and Measures: Receipt of low-value testing for low back pain, headache, syncope, and sinusitis. For each condition, sensitive and specific criteria were used to evaluate the overall frequency and range of low-value testing, adjusting for sociodemographic and VAMC characteristics. VAMC-level variation was calculated using median adjusted odds ratios. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the degree of correlation between low-value testing for each condition at the VAMC level., Results: Among 1 022 987 veterans, the mean (SD) age was 60 (16) years, 1 008 336 (92.4%) were male, and 761 485 (69.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 343 024 veterans (31.4%) were diagnosed with low back pain, 79 176 (7.3%) with headache, 23 776 (2.2%) with syncope, and 52 889 (4.8%) with sinusitis. With the sensitive criteria, overall and VAMC-level low-value testing frequency varied substantially across conditions: 4.6% (range, 2.7%-10.1%) for sinusitis, 12.8% (range, 8.6%-22.6%) for headache, 18.2% (range, 10.9%-24.6%) for low back pain, and 20.1% (range, 16.3%-27.7%) for syncope. With the specific criteria, the overall frequency of low-value testing across VAMCs was 2.4% (range, 1.3%-5.1%) for sinusitis, 8.6% (range, 6.2%-14.6%) for headache, 5.6% (range, 3.6%-7.7%) for low back pain, and 13.3% (range, 11.3%-16.8%) for syncope. The median adjusted odds ratio ranged from 1.21 for low back pain to 1.40 for sinusitis. At the VAMC level, low-value testing was most strongly correlated for syncope and headache (ρ = 0.56; P < .001) and low back pain and headache (ρ = 0.48; P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, low-value diagnostic testing was common, varied substantially across VAMCs, and was correlated between veterans' receipt of different low-value tests at the VAMC level. The findings suggest a need to address low-value diagnostic testing, even in integrated health systems, with robust utilization management practices.

Background: In 2018, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) issued Notice 2018-08 requiring facilities to complete "case reviews" for Veterans identified in the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Mitigation (STORM) dashboard as high risk for adverse outcomes among patients prescribed opioids. Half of the facilities were randomly assigned to a Notice version including additional oversight. We evaluated implementation strategies used, whether strategies differed by randomization arm, and which strategies were associated with case review completion rates., Methods: Facility points of contact completed a survey assessing their facility's use of 68 implementation strategies based on the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy. We collected respondent demographic information, facility-level characteristics, and case review completion rates (percentage of high-risk patients who received a case review). We used Kruskal-Wallis tests and negative binomial regression to assess strategy use and factors associated with case reviews., Results: Contacts at 89 of 140 facilities completed the survey (64%) and reported using a median of 23 (IQR 16-31) strategies. The median case review completion rate was 71% (IQR 48-95%). Neither the number or types of strategies nor completion rates differed by randomization arm. The most common strategies were using the STORM dashboard (97%), working with local opinion leaders (80%), and recruiting local partners (80%). Characteristics associated with case review completion rates included respondents being ≤ 35 years old (incidence rate ratio, IRR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.67) and having < 5 years in their primary role (IRR 1.23; 95% CI 1.01-1.51), and facilities having more prior academic detailing around pain and opioid safety (IRR 1.40, 95% CI 1.12-1.75). Controlling for these characteristics, implementation strategies associated with higher completion rates included (1) monitoring and adjusting practices (adjusted IRR (AIRR) 1.40, 95% CI 1.11-1.77), (2) identifying adaptations while maintaining core components (AIRR 1.28, 95% CI 1.03-1.60), (3) conducting initial training (AIRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.02-1.50), and (4) regularly sharing lessons learned (AIRR 1.32, 95% CI 1.09-1.59)., Conclusions: In this national evaluation of strategies used to implement case reviews of patients at high risk of opioid-related adverse events, point of contact age and tenure in the current role, prior pain-related academic detailing at the facility, and four specific implementation strategies were associated with case review completion rates, while randomization to additional centralized oversight was not., Trial Registration: This project is registered at the ISRCTN Registry with number ISRCTN16012111. The trial was first registered on May 3, 2017.

Background: Obtaining prescription medications from multiple health systems may complicate coordination of care. Older Veterans who obtain medications concurrently through Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits and Medicare Part D benefits (dual users) are at higher risk of unintended negative outcomes., Objective: To explore characteristics predicting dual drug benefit use from both VA and Medicare Part D in a national sample of older Veterans with dementia., Methods: Administrative data were obtained from the VA and Medicare for a national sample of 110,828 Veterans with dementia ages 68 and older in 2010. Veterans were classified into three drug benefit user groups based on the source of all prescription medications they obtained in 2010: VA-only, Part D-only, and Dual Use. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine predictors of drug benefit user group. The source of prescriptions was described for each of the ten most frequently used drug classes and opioids., Results: Fifty-six percent of Veterans received all of their prescription medications from VA-only, 28% from Part D-only, and 16% from both VA and Part D. Veterans who were eligible for Medicaid or who had a priority group score conferring less generous drug benefits within the VA were more likely to be Part D-only or dual users. Nearly one fourth of Veterans taking opioids concurrently received opioid prescriptions from dual sources (24.7%)., Conclusions: Medicaid eligibility and Veteran priority group status, which largely decrease copayments for drugs obtained outside versus within the VA, respectively, were the main factors predicting drug user benefit group. Policies to encourage single-system prescribing and enhance communication across health systems are crucial to preventing negative health outcomes related to care fragmentation., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: More than half of enrollees in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) are also covered by Medicare and can choose to receive their prescriptions from VA or from Medicare-participating providers. Such dual-system care may lead to unsafe opioid use if providers in these 2 systems do not coordinate care or if prescription use is not tracked between systems., Objective: To evaluate the association between dual-system opioid prescribing and death from prescription opioid overdose., Design: Nested case-control study., Setting: VA and Medicare Part D., Participants: Case and control patients were identified from all veterans enrolled in both VA and Part D who filled at least 1 opioid prescription from either system. The 215 case patients who died of a prescription opioid overdose in 2012 or 2013 were matched (up to 1:4) with 833 living control patients on the basis of date of death (that is, index date), using age, sex, race/ethnicity, disability, enrollment in Medicaid or low-income subsidies, managed care enrollment, region and rurality of residence, and a medication-based measure of comorbid conditions., Measurements: The exposure was the source of opioid prescriptions within 6 months of the index date, categorized as VA only, Part D only, or VA and Part D (that is, dual use). The outcome was unintentional or undetermined-intent death from prescription opioid overdose, identified from the National Death Index. The association between this outcome and source of opioid prescriptions was estimated using conditional logistic regression with adjustment for age, marital status, prescription drug monitoring programs, and use of other medications., Results: Among case patients, the mean age was 57.3 years (SD, 9.1), 194 (90%) were male, and 181 (84%) were non-Hispanic white. Overall, 60 case patients (28%) and 117 control patients (14%) received dual opioid prescriptions. Dual users had significantly higher odds of death from prescription opioid overdose than those who received opioids from VA only (odds ratio [OR], 3.53 [95% CI, 2.17 to 5.75]; P < 0.001) or Part D only (OR, 1.83 [CI, 1.20 to 2.77]; P = 0.005)., Limitation: Data are from 2012 to 2013 and cannot capture prescriptions obtained outside the VA or Medicare Part D systems., Conclusion: Among veterans enrolled in VA and Part D, dual use of opioid prescriptions was independently associated with death from prescription opioid overdose. This risk factor for fatal overdose among veterans underscores the importance of care coordination across health care systems to improve opioid prescribing safety., Primary Funding Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

The United States is facing an opioid crisis in which overdose is the leading cause of injury death-misuse of opioids constitutes the vast majority of those deaths. In 2016 alone, over 42,000 people died from opioid overdose, an increase of 27% from the prior year. Deployment of the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Mitigation (STORM), a clinical decision support tool to improve opioid safety, is one response by the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) to the opioid crisis. STORM identifies VHA patients at very high risk of opioid-related adverse events and lists potential risk mitigation strategies. Deployment of STORM also helps VHA meet certain requirements of the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act of 2016. In alignment with the VHA's learning health care system initiative, a multidisciplinary team designed a randomized evaluation of a policy approach to mandating case reviews of very-high-risk patients identified by STORM and the impacts of patient inclusion versus exclusion in mandated STORM case reviews using a stepped-wedge design. The STORM evaluation involves drafting the policy notice, shepherding it through the VHA approval process, and implementing the cluster randomized design. This mixed-methods evaluation includes (1) a qualitative assessment of medical center implementation strategies with the aim of understanding of how STORM is incorporated into practice, and (2) quantitative analyses of the relations between policy mandates and STORM inclusion on opioid-related adverse events. The findings from this synergistic research design will yield critical insights for VHA leadership to refine opioid prescribing-related policy and practice.

Objective: To evaluate the effect of dual use of VA/Medicare Part D drug benefits on antihypertensive medication supply in older Veterans with dementia., Data Sources/study Setting: National, linked 2007-2010 Veterans Affairs (VA) and Medicare utilization and prescription records for 50,763 dementia patients with hypertension., Study Design: We used inverse probability of treatment (IPT)-weighted multinomial logistic regression to examine the association of dual prescription use with undersupply and oversupply of antihypertensives., Data Collection/extraction Methods: Veterans Affairs and Part D prescription records were used to classify patients as VA-only, Part D-only, or dual VA/Part D users of antihypertensives and summarize their antihypertensive medication supply in 2010: (1) appropriate supply of all prescribed antihypertensive classes, (2) undersupply of ≥1 class with no oversupply of another class, (3) oversupply of ≥1 class with no undersupply, or (4) both undersupply and oversupply., Principal Findings: Dual prescription users were more likely than VA-only users to have undersupply only (aOR = 1.28; 95 percent CI = 1.18-1.39), oversupply only (aOR = 2.38; 95 percent CI = 2.15-2.64), and concurrent under- and oversupply (aOR = 2.89; 95 percent CI = 2.53-3.29), versus appropriate supply of all classes., Conclusions: Obtaining antihypertensives through both VA and Part D was associated with increased antihypertensive under- and oversupply. Efforts to understand how best to coordinate dual-system prescription use are critically needed., (© Health Research and Educational Trust.)

Background: Overlapping use of opioids and benzodiazepines is associated with increased risk for overdose. Veterans receiving medications concurrently from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Medicare may be at higher risk for such overlap., Objective: To assess the association between dual use of VA and Medicare drug benefits and receipt of overlapping opioid and benzodiazepine prescriptions., Design: Cross-sectional., Setting: VA and Medicare., Participants: All veterans enrolled in VA and Medicare Part D who filled at least 2 opioid prescriptions in 2013 (n = 368 891)., Measurements: Outcomes were the proportion of patients with a Pharmacy Quality Alliance (PQA) measure of opioid-benzodiazepine overlap (≥2 filled prescriptions for benzodiazepines with ≥30 days of overlap with opioids) and the proportion of patients with high-dose opioid-benzodiazepine overlap (≥30 days of overlap with a daily opioid dose >120 morphine milligram equivalents). Augmented inverse probability weighting regression was used to compare these measures by prescription drug source: VA only, Medicare only, or VA and Medicare (dual use)., Results: Of 368 891 eligible veterans, 18.3% received prescriptions from the VA only, 30.3% from Medicare only, and 51.4% from both VA and Medicare. The proportion with PQA opioid-benzodiazepine overlap was larger for the dual-use group than the VA-only group (23.1% vs. 17.3%; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.27 [95% CI, 1.24 to 1.30]) and Medicare-only group (23.1% vs. 16.5%; aRR, 1.12 [CI, 1.10 to 1.14]). The proportion with high-dose overlap was also larger for the dual-use group than the VA-only group (4.7% vs. 2.3%; aRR, 2.23 [CI, 2.10 to 2.36]) and Medicare-only group (4.7% vs. 2.9%; aRR, 1.06 [CI, 1.02 to 1.11])., Limitation: Data are from 2013 and cannot capture medications purchased without insurance; unmeasured confounding may remain in this cross-sectional study., Conclusion: Among a national cohort of veterans dually enrolled in VA and Medicare, receiving prescriptions from both sources was associated with greater risk for receiving potentially unsafe overlapping prescriptions for opioids and benzodiazepines., Primary Funding Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Objectives: To estimate the prevalence and consequences of receiving prescription opioids from both the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Medicare Part D., Methods: Among US veterans enrolled in both VA and Part D filling 1 or more opioid prescriptions in 2012 (n = 539 473), we calculated 3 opioid safety measures using morphine milligram equivalents (MME): (1) proportion receiving greater than 100 MME for 1 or more days, (2) mean days receiving greater than 100 MME, and (3) proportion receiving greater than 120 MME for 90 consecutive days. We compared these measures by opioid source., Results: Overall, 135 643 (25.1%) veterans received opioids from VA only, 332 630 (61.7%) from Part D only, and 71 200 (13.2%) from both. The dual-use group was more likely than the VA-only group to receive greater than 100 MME for 1 or more days (34.3% vs 10.9%; adjusted risk ratio [ARR] = 3.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.9, 3.1), have more days with greater than 100 MME (42.5 vs 16.9 days; adjusted difference = 16.4 days; 95% CI = 15.7, 17.2), and to receive greater than 120 MME for 90 consecutive days (7.8% vs 3.1%; ARR = 2.2; 95% CI = 2.1, 2.3)., Conclusions: Among veterans dually enrolled in VA and Medicare Part D, dual use of opioids was associated with more than 2 to 3 times the risk of high-dose opioid exposure.

Background: The Veterans Choice Program (VCP) was created to ensure timely access to health care in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Under this program, medications may be ordered by select non-VA clinicians to be dispensed by VA pharmacies, creating new challenges in ensuring medication safety., Objectives: To examine pharmaceutical use during the first year of the VCP and to understand barriers and facilitators for VA pharmacists to dispensing medications under the VCP., Study Design: Mixed-methods evaluation., Methods: We captured all prescriptions dispensed through the VCP and described the demographics of VCP users and their medications. We also conducted semistructured interviews of VA pharmacists, focusing on VA formulary management and experiences dispensing opioid and hepatitis C (HCV) medications. Codebook development and coding followed iterative qualitative methods., Results: Overall, 17,346 Veterans received 56,426 VCP prescriptions from November 7, 2014 through November 7, 2015. The total medication cost was $27 million, 90% of which was for only 2772 HCV prescriptions. Topical eye drops and opioids represented the most commonly dispensed prescriptions (15.6% and 9.2% of all prescriptions, respectively). Pharmacists reported numerous challenges to dispensing VCP medications, including time required to contact non-VA clinicians about formulary issues, requiring controlled substance prescriptions to be hand delivered to VA pharmacies, and lack of access to laboratory data required to safely dispense medications., Conclusions: HCV-related medication costs predominated the first year of VCP, but this is likely to change going forward. The safe use of opioids, efficient management of nonformulary medications, and unintended new barriers to access created by the VCP must be addressed.

Background: Recent federal policy changes attempt to expand veterans' access to providers outside the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Receipt of prescription medications across unconnected systems of care may increase the risk for unsafe prescribing, particularly in persons with dementia., Objective: To investigate the association between dual health care system use and potentially unsafe medication (PUM) prescribing., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: National VA outpatient care facilities in 2010., Participants: 75 829 veterans with dementia who were continuously enrolled in Medicare from 2007 to 2010; 80% were VA-only users, and 20% were VA-Medicare Part D (dual) users., Measurements: Augmented inverse propensity weighting was used to estimate the effect of dual-system versus VA-only prescribing on 4 indicators of PUM prescribing in 2010: any exposure to Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) high-risk medication in older adults (PUM-HEDIS), any daily exposure to prescriptions with a cumulative Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden (ACB) score of 3 or higher (PUM-ACB), any antipsychotic prescription (PUM-antipsychotic), and any PUM exposure (any-PUM). The annual number of days of each PUM exposure was also examined., Results: Compared with VA-only users, dual users had more than double the odds of exposure to any-PUM (odds ratio [OR], 2.2 [95% CI, 2.2 to 2.3]), PUM-HEDIS (OR, 2.4 [CI, 2.2 to 2.8]), and PUM-ACB (OR, 2.1 [CI, 2.0 to 2.2]). The odds of PUM-antipsychotic exposure were also greater in dual users (OR, 1.5 [CI, 1.4 to 1.6]). Dual users had an adjusted average of 44.1 additional days of any-PUM exposure (CI, 37.2 to 45.0 days)., Limitation: Observational study design of veteran outpatients only., Conclusion: Among veterans with dementia, rates of PUM prescribing are significantly higher among dual-system users than with VA-only users., Primary Funding Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Objectives: To describe variations in potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and characterize the extent to which switching to an incidence-based indicator would affect health system quality rankings., Design: Observational study., Setting: Veterans Health Administration in 2011., Participants: Older adults receiving outpatient primary care., Measurements: PIP was defined according to the National Committee for Quality Assurance High-Risk Medications in the Elderly list. Ranks were separately assigned for prevalent and incident PIP at the regional, network, and healthcare system levels., Results: National PIP prevalence was 12.3% (167,766/1,360,251), and incidence was 5.8% (78,604/1,360,251). PIP prevalence ranged from 3.5% to 33.1% across healthcare systems (interquartile range (IQR) = 9.2-15.5%). PIP incidence ranged from 1.2% to 14.9% (IQR = 4.1-7.2%). Rank order in PIP prevalence and incidence was correlated (Spearman correlation; ρ = 0.934, P < .001), although substantial changes in ranks were seen for some healthcare systems, with seven of 139 (5.0%) systems shifting more than 30 rank positions and 21 (15.1%) systems shifting 16 to 30 positions., Conclusion: Prevalence- and incidence-based indicators of prescribing quality were strongly correlated. Transitioning to incidence-based indicators would not produce an initial disruption in quality rankings for most healthcare systems and might yield more-salient measures for tracking healthcare quality., (© 2015, Copyright the Authors Journal compilation © 2015, The American Geriatrics Society.)

Importance: Self-monitoring of blood glucose is a costly component of care for diabetes mellitus, with unclear benefits for patients not taking insulin. Veterans with dual Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Medicare benefits have access to test strips through both systems, raising the potential for overuse., Objectives: To examine the patterns of test strip receipt among older veterans with diabetes and determine whether receipt of strips from dual health care systems is associated with overuse., Design, Setting, and Participants: We performed a cross-sectional, retrospective cohort study using national VA administrative data linked to Medicare Parts A, B, and D claims for fiscal years 2008 and 2009. A total of 363,996 community-dwelling veterans 65 years or older with diabetes who used the VA health care system and received test strips in fiscal year 2009 were included in the study., Exposures: Receipt of test strips from the VA only, Medicare only, or both the VA and Medicare; covariates included sociodemographics, comorbidity, diabetes complications, and hemoglobin A1c level., Main Outcomes and Measures: Quantity of test strips dispensed and overuse of test strips, defined as more than 1 strip per day (>365 strips per year) among those taking no diabetes medications, oral diabetes medications alone, or long-acting insulin without short-acting insulin or more than 4 strips per day (>1460 strips per year) among those taking short-acting insulin., Results: Overall, 260,688 older veterans (71.6%) with diabetes received strips from the VA only, 82,826 (22.8%) from Medicare only, and 20,482 (5.6%) from the VA and Medicare. Veterans receiving strips from both the VA and Medicare received more strips (median, 600; interquartile range [IQR], 350-1000) than the Medicare only (median, 400; IQR, 200-700) and VA only (median, 200; IQR, 100-500) groups (P < .001) and had substantially greater odds of overuse than the VA only group (55.4% vs 15.8%) (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 16.3; 95% CI, 14.6-18.1 for no medications; 55.3% vs 6.0%; OR, 19.8; 95% CI, 18.9-20.8 for oral medications; 87.4% vs 65.5%; OR, 3.69; 95% CI, 3.30-4.14 for long-acting insulin; and 32.8% vs 13.5%; OR, 3.24; 95% CI, 3.05-3.45 for short-acting insulin). Patterns were similar when using more conservative thresholds of overuse., Conclusions and Relevance: Veterans who receive glucose test strips through both the VA and Medicare use more strips and are more likely to potentially overuse strips. These results illustrate the profound importance of understanding dual VA and Medicare coverage and are emblematic of waste and inefficiency.

Background: Medicare Part D and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) use different approaches to manage prescription drug benefits, with implications for spending. Medicare relies on private plans with distinct formularies, whereas the VA administers its own benefit using a national formulary., Objective: To compare overall and regional rates of brand-name drug use among older adults with diabetes in Medicare and the VA., Design: Retrospective cohort., Setting: Medicare and the VA, 2008., Patients: 1,061,095 Medicare Part D beneficiaries and 510,485 veterans aged 65 years or older with diabetes., Measurements: Percentage of patients taking oral hypoglycemics, statins, and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) who filled brand-name drug prescriptions and percentage of patients taking long-acting insulins who filled analogue prescriptions. Sociodemographic- and health status-adjusted hospital referral region (HRR) brand-name drug use was compared, and changes in spending were calculated if use of brand-name drugs in 1 system mirrored the other., Results: Brand-name drug use in Medicare was 2 to 3 times that in the VA: 35.3% versus 12.7% for oral hypoglycemics, 50.7% versus 18.2% for statins, 42.5% versus 20.8% for ACE inhibitors or ARBs, and 75.1% versus 27.0% for insulin analogues. Adjusted HRR-level brand-name statin use ranged (from the 5th to 95th percentiles) from 41.0% to 58.3% in Medicare and 6.2% to 38.2% in the VA. For each drug group, the 95th-percentile HRR in the VA had lower brand-name drug use than the 5th-percentile HRR in Medicare. Medicare spending in this population would have been $1.4 billion less if brand-name drug use matched that of the VA., Limitation: This analysis cannot fully describe the factors underlying differences in brand-name drug use., Conclusion: Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes use 2 to 3 times more brand-name drugs than a comparable group within the VA, at substantial excess cost.

Background: Antipsychotic medications are commonly prescribed to nursing home residents despite their well-established adverse event profiles. Because little is known about their use in Veterans Affairs (VA) nursing homes [ie, Community Living Centers (CLCs)], we assessed the prevalence and risk factors for antipsychotic use in older residents of VA CLCs., Methods: This cross-sectional study included 3692 Veterans age 65 or older who were admitted between January 2004 and June 2005 to one of 133 VA CLCs and had a stay of ≥90 days. We used VA Pharmacy Benefits Management data to examine antipsychotic use and VA Medical SAS datasets and the Minimum Data Set to identify evidence-based indications for antipsychotic use (eg, schizophrenia, dementia with psychosis). We used multivariable logistic regression and generalized estimating equations to identify factors independently associated with antipsychotic receipt., Results: Overall, 948/3692(25.7%) residents received an antipsychotic, of which 59.3% had an evidence-based indication for use. Residents with aggressive behavior [odds ratio (OR)=2.74, 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.04-3.67] and polypharmacy (9+ drugs; OR=1.84, 95% CI, 1.41-2.40) were more likely to receive antipsychotics, as were users of antidepressants (OR=1.37, 95% CI, 1.14-1.66), anxiolytic/hypnotics (OR=2.30, 95% CI, 1.64-3.23), or drugs for dementia (OR=1.52, 95% CI, 1.21-1.92). Those residing in Alzheimer/dementia special care units were also more likely to receive an antipsychotic (OR=1.66, 95% CI, 1.26-2.21). Veterans with dementia but no documented psychosis were as likely as those with an evidence-based indication to receive an antipsychotic (OR=1.10, 95% CI, 0.82-1.47)., Conclusions: Antipsychotic use is common among VA nursing home residents aged 65 and older, including those without a documented evidence-based indication for use. Further quality improvement efforts are needed to reduce potentially inappropriate antipsychotic prescribing.