Search

ObjectiveIt is unclear if biosimilars of biologics for inflammatory arthritis are realizing their promise to increase competition and improve accessibility. This study evaluates biosimilar tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) utilization across rheumatology practices in the United States and compares whether patients initiating biosimilars remain on these treatments at least as long as new initiators of bio-originators.MethodsWe identified a cohort of patients initiating a TNFi biosimilar between January 2017 and September 2018 from an electronic health record registry containing data from 218 rheumatology practices and over 1 million rheumatology patients in the United States. We also identified a cohort of patients who initiated the bio-originator TNFi during the same period. We calculated the proportion of biosimilar prescriptions compared with other TNFi's and compared persistence on these therapies, adjusting for age, sex, diagnoses codes, and insurance type.ResultsWe identified 909 patients prescribed the biosimilar infliximab-dyyb, the only biosimilar prescribed, and 4413 patients with a new prescription for the bio-originator infliximab. Biosimilar patients tended to be older, have a diagnosis code for rheumatoid arthritis, and covered by Medicare insurance. Over the study period, biosimilar prescriptions reached a maximum of 3.5% of all TNFi prescriptions. Patients persisted on the biosimilar at least as long as the bio-originator infliximab (hazard ratio [HR] 0.83, P = 0.07).ConclusionThe uptake of biosimilars in the United States remains low despite persistence on infliximab-dyyb being similar to the infliximab bio-originator. These results add to clinical studies that should provide greater confidence to patients and physicians regarding biosimilar use.

Background: Despite the suggested benefits of shared decision-making (SDM), its implementation in policy and practice has been slow and inconsistent. Use of complex adaptive systems (CAS) theory may provide understanding of how healthcare system factors influence implementation of SDM. Methods: Using the example of choice of mode of birth after a previous caesarean section, in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients, providers, and decision makers in British Columbia, Canada, to explore the system characteristics and processes that influence implementation of SDM. Implementation and knowledge translation principles guided study design, and constructionist grounded theory informed iterative data collection and analysis. Findings: Analysis of interviews (n=58) revealed that patients formed early preferences for mode of delivery (after the primary caesarean) through careful deliberation of social risks and benefits. Physicians acted as information providers of clinical risks and benefits, while decision makers revealed concerns related to liability and patient safety. These concerns stemmed from perceptions of limited access to surgical resources, which had resulted from budget constraints. Discussion and conclusions: To facilitate the effective implementation of SDM in policy and practice it may be critical to initiate SDM once patients become aware of their healthcare options, assist patients to address the social risks that influence their preferences, manage perceptions of risk related to patient safety and litigation among physicians, and enhance access to healthcare resources.

ObjectiveThe Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) is a national electronic health record (EHR)-enabled registry. RISE passively collects data from EHRs of participating practices, provides advanced quality measurement and data analytic capacities, and fulfills national quality reporting requirements. Here we report the registry's architecture and initial data, and we demonstrate how RISE is being used to improve the quality of care.MethodsRISE is a certified Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Qualified Clinical Data Registry, allowing collection of data without individual patient informed consent. We analyzed data between October 1, 2014 and September 30, 2015 to characterize initial practices and patients captured in RISE. We also analyzed medication use among rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and performance on several quality measures.ResultsAcross 55 sites, 312 clinicians contributed data to RISE; 72% were in group practice, 21% in solo practice, and 7% were part of a larger health system. Sites contributed data on 239,302 individuals. Among the subset with RA, 34.4% of patients were taking a biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) at their last encounter, and 66.7% were receiving a nonbiologic DMARD. Examples of quality measures include that 55.2% had a disease activity score recorded, 53.6% a functional status score, and 91.0% were taking a DMARD in the last year.ConclusionRISE provides critical infrastructure for improving the quality of care in rheumatology and is a unique data source to generate new knowledge. Data validation and mapping are ongoing and RISE is available to the research and clinical communities to advance rheumatology.

Addressing inadequacies in the implementation of existing evidence-based approaches into practice, such as injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT), is imperative for the management of opioid use disorder. With the expansion of iOAT, stakeholder perspectives are needed to inform program optimization. This study aimed to understand stakeholder and provider perspectives on iOAT care and how it can be improved to better meet service users' needs. Semi-structured interviews (n = 11), email correspondence (n = 2), a focus group (n = 4), and one regional meeting were conducted with iOAT stakeholders to receive feedback on how iOAT can better meet service users' needs. Qualitative analysis employed a thematic and interpretive description approach to identify key themes, presented as a thematic summary. Stakeholder narratives highlight the importance they attribute to client autonomy, individualized care, tensions between providers and the system (policies, governing structures, etc., that establish, facilitate and determine how iOAT is delivered in Canada) as well as power dynamics between providers and service users. IOAT providers and stakeholders surveyed in this study are committed to seeing the needs of service users met but often feel constrained by system-level regulations that influence power dynamics between providers and service users. Findings underline pragmatic suggestions to advance person-centered care as a way to make iOAT accessible and individualized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a lack of evidence in Canada surrounding the costs to parents and society to raise a child with intellectual disability. Knowledge of these costs is necessary to ensure appropriate governmental support to families and to assess the financial impact of new diagnostic tests and treatments. Method: We adapted 2 paper-based cost diaries into an online retrospective survey and evaluated it using a small pilot study of individuals with Down syndrome. Results: Parents completed the survey with apparent ease, giving answers requiring little clarification; they used comment fields to add data that elaborated on both financial and emotional costs. Costs appeared concordant with those reported in other countries. Conclusion: The survey successfully documents care time required, impact on employment, and other expenses. Minor modifications were made as a result of this pilot, and the survey is now available for wider use.