Deborah A. Levine

Prevalence and Predictors of Osteoporosis Treatment in Nursing Home Residents with Known Osteoporosis or Recent Fracture

SummaryWe studied nursing home residents with osteoporosis or recent fracture to determine the frequency and predictors of osteoporosis treatment. There was wide variation in performance, and both clinical and systems variables predicted use. This study shows that improvement in osteoporosis care is possible and important for many nursing homes.IntroductionWe determined the prevalence and predictors of osteoporosis evaluation and treatment in high-risk nursing home residents.MethodsWe identified 67 nursing facilities in North Carolina and Arizona with >xa010 residents with osteoporosis or recent hip fracture. Medical records (nu2009=u2009895) were abstracted for osteoporosis evaluation [dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), vitamin D level, serum calcium), treatment (calcium, vitamin D, osteoporosis medication, hip protectors), clinical, and systems covariates. Data were analyzed at the facility level using mixed models to account for the complex nesting of residents within providers and nursing facilities.ResultsCalcium and vitamin D was prescribed for 69% of residents, bisphosphonates for 19%, calcitonin for 14%, other pharmacologic therapies for 6%, and hip protectors for 2%. Overall, 36% received any bone protection (medication or hip protectors), with wide variation among facilities (0–85%). Factors significantly associated with any bone protection included female gender [odds ratio (OR) 2.4, (1.5–3.7)] and nonurban/suburban location [1.5, (1.1–2.2)]. Residents with esophagitis, peptic ulcer disease (PUD), or dysphagia [0.6, (0.4–0.9)] and alcohol abuse [0.2, (0.0–0.9)] were less likely to receive treatment.ConclusionsThere is substantial variation in the quality of osteoporosis treatment across nursing homes. Interventions that improve osteoporosis quality of care are needed.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Emergency Department Waiting Time for Stroke Patients in the United States

Emergency department waiting time (EDWT), the time from arrival at the ED to evaluation by an emergency physician, is a critical component of acute stroke care. We assessed racial/ethnic differences in EDWT in a national sample of patients with ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke. We identified 543 ED visits for ischemic stroke (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] codes 433.x1, 434.xx, and 436.xx) and hemorrhagic stroke (ICD-9-CM codes 430.xx, 431.xx, and 432.xx) in persons age ≥ 18 years representing 2.1 million stroke-related ED visits in the United States using the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey for years 1997-2000 and 2003-2005. Using linear regression (outcome, log-transformed EDWT) and logistic regression (outcome, EDWT > 10 minutes, based on National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke guidelines), we adjusted associations between EDWT and race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic whites [designated whites herein], non-Hispanic blacks [blacks], and Hispanics) for age, sex, region, mode of transportation, insurance, hospital characteristics, triage status, hospital admission, stroke type, and survey year. Compared with whites, blacks had a longer EDWT in univariate analysis (67% longer, P = .03) and multivariate analysis (62% longer, P = .03), but Hispanics had a similar EDWT in both univariate analysis (31% longer, P = .65) and multivariate analysis (5% longer, P = .91). Longer EDWT was also seen with nonambulance mode of arrival, urban hospitals, or nonemergency triage. Race was significantly associated with EDWT > 10 minutes (whites, 55% [referent]; blacks, 70% [P = .03]; Hispanics, 62% [P = .53]). These differences persisted after adjustment (blacks: odds ratio [OR] = 2.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05-4.09; Hispanics: OR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.52-2.22). Blacks, but not Hispanics, had significantly longer EDWT than whites. The longer EDWT in black stroke patients may lead to treatment delays and sub-optimal stroke care.

Characteristics that Predict Physician Participation in a Web-Based CME Activity: The MI-Plus Study

Introduction: Physician use of the Internet for practice improvement has increased dramatically over the last decade, but research shows that many physicians choose not to participate. The current study investigated the association of specific physician characteristics with enrollment rates and intensity of participation in a specific Internet‐delivered educational intervention to improve care to post–myocardial infarction (MI) patients. Methods: Primary‐care physicians were recruited for participation in a randomized controlled trial designed to compare effectiveness of an intervention Web site versus a control Web site in the management of adult chronic disease. Physicians were informed that the intervention focused on ambulatory post–myocardial infarction patients. Physician characteristics were obtained from a commercial vendor with data merged from the American Medical Association and Alabama State Licensing Board. Enrollment and Web use were tracked electronically. Results: Out of a sample of 1337 eligible physicians, 177 (13.2%) enrolled in the study. Enrollment was higher for physicians with more post‐MI patients (≥20 vs < 20 patients, 15.3% vs 9.3%, P = .002) and for those practicing in rural compared to urban areas (16.3% vs 12.1%, P = .046). Intensity of use of the Internet courses after initial enrollment was not predicted by physician characteristics in the current sample. Discussion: Physicians with more post‐MI patients and rural practice location were found to predict enrollment in an Internet‐delivered continuing medical education (CME) intervention designed to improve care for post‐MI patients. These factors predicted program interest but not program use. More research is needed to replicate these findings to investigate variables that determine physician engagement in Internet CME.

Awareness, treatment, and control of vascular risk factors among stroke survivors.

INTRODUCTIONnStroke survivors should recognize and control vascular risk factors to prevent recurrent strokes. We therefore assessed the prevalence, treatment, and control of hypertension, diabetes, and dyslipidemia among stroke survivors versus stroke-free control subjects.nnnMETHODSnWe conducted cross-sectional analysis from the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study cohort, which includes oversampling from the Stroke Belt and African Americans. Patients were interviewed by telephone then visited for blood pressure, glucose, and lipid measurements. There were 2830 participants reporting a past stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (stroke survivors) and 24,886 participants without past stroke or TIA (control subjects). Outcome measures included the recognition, treatment, and control of hypertension, diabetes, and dyslipidemia.nnnRESULTSnStroke survivors were more likely to have unrecognized hypertension (18.7% v 13.5%, P < .0003), unrecognized stage 2 hypertension (4.4% v 2.2%, P < .0006), and unrecognized diabetes (4.2% v 3.2%, P < .026) versus control subjects. Stroke survivors were more likely to be treated for hypertension (92.4% v 89.0%, P < .0001), diabetes (88.3% v 81.4%, P < .0001), and dyslipidemia (76.3% v 61.9%, P < .0001). However, despite treatment, stroke survivors were more likely to have hypertension (33.3% v 30.4%, P=.0074) and stage 2 hypertension (9.1% v 7.6%, P=.017). Predictors of unrecognized and undertreated risk factors in stroke survivors include increasing body mass index, black race, and lower education.nnnCONCLUSIONnDespite having a past stroke or TIA, stroke survivors had higher rates of unrecognized hypertension, unrecognized diabetes, and undertreated hypertension. Better efforts are needed to help stroke survivors recognize and control vascular risk factors to prevent recurrent stroke.

Insurance type and sepsis-associated hospitalizations and sepsis-associated mortality among US adults: a retrospective cohort study.

IntroductionSocio-demographic and clinical factors associated with increased sepsis risk, including older age, non-white race and specific co-morbidities, are more common among patients with Medicare or Medicaid or no health insurance. We hypothesized that patients with Medicare and/or Medicaid or without health insurance have a higher risk of sepsis-associated hospitalization or sepsis-associated death than those with private health insurance.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of records from the 2003 Nationwide Inpatient Sample. We stratified the study cohort by Medicare age-qualification (18 to 64 and 65+ years old). We examined the association between insurance category and sepsis diagnosis and death among admissions involving sepsis. We used validated diagnostic codes to determine the presence of sepsis, co-morbidities and organ dysfunction and to provide risk-adjustment.ResultsAmong patients 18 to 64 years old, those with Medicaid (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.50), Medicare (AOR 1.96), Medicaid + Medicare (AOR 2.22) and the uninsured (AOR 1.18) had significantly higher risk-adjusted odds of a sepsis-associated admission than those with private insurance (all P < 0.0001). Those with Medicaid (AOR 1.17, P < 0.001) and those without insurance (AOR 1.45, P < 0.001) also had significantly higher adjusted odds of sepsis-associated hospital mortality than those with private insurance. Among those 65+ years old, those with Medicaid (AOR 1.43), Medicare alone (AOR 1.13) or Medicaid + Medicare (AOR 1.62) had significantly higher risk-adjusted odds of sepsis-associated admission than those with private insurance and Medicare (all P < 0.0001). Among sepsis patients 65+, uninsured patients had significantly higher risk-adjusted odds (AOR 1.45, P = 0.0048) and those with Medicare alone had significantly lower risk-adjusted odds (AOR 0.92, P = 0.0072) of hospital mortality than those with private insurance and Medicare. Lack of health insurance remained associated with sepsis-associated mortality after stratification of hospitals into quartiles based on rates of sepsis-associated admissions or mortality in both age strata.ConclusionsRisks of sepsis-associated hospitalization and sepsis-associated death vary by insurance. These increased risks were not fully explained by the available socio-demographic factors, co-morbidities or hospital rates of sepsis-related admissions or deaths.