Assessment of Care Cascades Following Low-Value Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing Among Veterans Dually Enrolled in the US Veterans Health Administration and Medicare Systems

Should Military Veterans Be Classified as High Risk for Prostate Cancer Screening? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the unique risks of prostate cancer among U.S. veterans, and to advocate for improved care by raising awareness of the gaps in current AUA guidelines that do not address the specific needs of military personnel and veterans.

METHODS

Ovid interface, Google Scholar, PubMed, and Medline were searched for studies investigating prostate cancer in veterans published between 1975 and 2023. Search terms: "veteran", "military", "molecular markers", "prostate cancer", "prostate cancer risk", and "military exposure" were used. Articles meeting inclusion criteria underwent analysis, data synthesis, and meta-analysis where applicable.

RESULTS

Results from 45 articles indicate a significant increase in prostate cancer risk associated with exposure to Agent Orange (OR 1.97 [95% CI: 1.64-2.37], P <.00001), aromatic hydrocarbons (OR 1.14 [95% CI: 1.01-1.28], P = .03), and a slight increase with cadmium exposure (OR 1.03 [95% CI: 0.96-1.09], P = .42). While some evidence suggests an association between Camp Lejeune and prostate cancer risk in retrospective cohort studies, logistical regression analysis study did not entirely substantiate this relationship.

CONCLUSION

This review identifies several exposures that elevate prostate cancer risk. Military veterans should be further questioned about their exposures and potentially treated as a high-risk screening group. Further research is warranted to strengthen these associations, as the current evidence remains limited.

Use and Cost of Low-Value Services Among Veterans Dually Enrolled in VA and Medicare

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.

Medicaid Insurance is Associated With Decreased MRI Use for Ankle Sprains Compared With Private Insurance: A Retrospective Large-database Analysis

BACKGROUND

Advanced imaging modalities are expensive, and access to advanced imaging services may vary by socioeconomic factors, creating the potential for unwarranted variations in care. Ankle sprains are a common injury for which variations in MRI use can occur, both via underuse of indicated MRIs (appropriate use) and overuse of nonindicated MRIs (inappropriate use). High-value, equitable healthcare would decrease inappropriate use and increase appropriate use of MRI for this common injury. It is unknown whether socioeconomic factors are associated with underuse of indicated MRIs and overuse of nonindicated MRIs for ankle sprains.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Using ankle sprains as a paradigm injury, given their high population incidence, we asked: (1) Does MRI use for ankle sprains vary by insurance type? (2) After controlling for relevant confounding variables, did patients who received an MRI have higher odds of undergoing ankle surgery?

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2019, a total of 6,710,223 patients were entered into the PearlDiver Mariner Patient Records Database with a diagnosis of ankle sprain. We considered patients with continuous enrollment in the database for at least 1 year before and 2 years after the diagnosis as potentially eligible. Based on that, 68% (4,567,106) were eligible; a further 20% (1,372,478) were excluded because of age younger than 18 years, age at least 65 years with Medicaid insurance, or age < 65 years with Medicare insurance. Another 0.1% (9169) had incomplete data, leaving 47% (3,185,459) for analysis here. Patients with Medicaid insurance differed from patients with Medicare Advantage or private insurance with respect to age, gender, region, and comorbidity burden. The primary outcome was ankle MRI occurring within 12 months after diagnosis. The use of ankle surgery after MRI in each cohort was measured as a secondary outcome. We used multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate the association between insurance type and MRI use while adjusting for age, gender, region, and comorbidity burden. Separate multivariable regression models were created to evaluate the association between receiving an MRI and subsequent ankle surgery for each insurance type, adjusting for age, gender, region, and comorbidity burden. Within 12 months of an ankle sprain diagnosis, 1% (3522 of 339,457) of patients with Medicaid, 2% (44,793 of 2,627,288) of patients with private insurance, and 1% (1660 of 218,714) of patients with Medicare Advantage received an MRI.

RESULTS

After controlling for age, gender, region, and comorbidity burden, patients with Medicaid had lower odds of receiving an MRI within 12 months after ankle sprain diagnosis than patients with private insurance (odds ratio 0.60 [95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.62]; p < 0.001). Patients with Medicaid who received an MRI had higher adjusted odds of undergoing subsequent ankle surgery (OR 23 [95% CI 21 to 26]; p < 0.001) than patients with private insurance (OR 12.7 [95% CI 12 to 13]; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Although absolute MRI use was generally low, there was substantial relative variation by insurance type. Given the high incidence of ankle sprains in the general population, these relative differences can translate to tens of thousands of MRIs. Further studies are needed to evaluate the reasons for decreased appropriate MRI use in patients with Medicaid and overuse of MRI in patients with private insurance. The establishment of clinical practice guidelines by orthopaedic professional societies and more stringent gatekeeping for MRI use by health insurers could reduce unwarranted variations in MRI use.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, prognostic study.

Care cascades following low-value cervical cancer screening in dually enrolled Veterans

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.

Veterans Health Administration (VA) vs. Non-VA Healthcare Quality: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The Veterans Health Administration (VA) serves Veterans in the nation's largest integrated healthcare system. VA seeks to provide high quality of healthcare to Veterans, but due to the VA Choice and MISSION Acts, VA increasingly pays for care outside of its system in the community. This systematic review compares care provided in VA and non-VA settings, and includes published studies from 2015 to 2023, updating 2 prior systematic reviews on this topic.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and PsychINFO from 2015 to 2023 for published literature comparing VA and non-VA care, including VA-paid community care. Records were included at the abstract or full-text level if they compared VA medical care with care provided in other healthcare systems, and included clinical quality, safety, access, patient experience, efficiency (cost), or equity outcomes. Data from included studies was abstracted by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved by consensus. Results were synthesized narratively and via graphical evidence maps.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies were included after screening 2415 titles. Twelve studies compared VA and VA-paid community care. Most studies assessed clinical quality and safety, and studies of access were second most common. Only six studies assessed patient experience and six assessed cost or efficiency. Clinical quality and safety of VA care was better than or equal to non-VA care in most studies. Patient experience in VA care was better than or equal to experience in non-VA care in all studies, but access and cost/efficiency outcomes were mixed.

DISCUSSION

VA care is consistently as good as or better than non-VA care in terms of clinical quality and safety. Access, cost/efficiency, and patient experience between the two systems are not well studied. Further research is needed on these outcomes and on services widely used by Veterans in VA-paid community care, like physical medicine and rehabilitation.