Relationships between driving distance, rheumatoid arthritis diagnosis, and disease-modifying antirheumatic drug receipt

Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug Use and Its Effect on Long-term Opioid Use in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

The prevalence of chronic pain is high in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), increasing the risk for opioid use. The objective of this study was to assess disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) use and its effect on long-term opioid use in patients with RA.

METHODS

This cohort study included Medicare beneficiaries with diagnosis of RA who received at least 30-day consecutive prescription of opioids in 2017 (n = 23,608). The patients were grouped into non-DMARD and DMARD users, who were further subdivided into regimens set forth by the American College of Rheumatology. The outcome measured was long-term opioid use in 2018 defined as at least 90-day consecutive prescription of opioids. Dose and duration of opioid use were also assessed. A multivariable model identifying factors associated with non-DMARD use was also performed.

RESULTS

Compared with non-DMARD users, the odds of long-term opioid use were significantly lower among DMARD users (odds ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.95). All regimens except non-tumor necrosis factor biologic + methotrexate were associated with lower odds of long-term opioid use relative to non-DMARD users. The mean total morphine milligram equivalent, morphine milligram equivalent per day, and total days of opioid use were lower among DMARD users compared with non-DMARD users. Older age, male sex, Black race, psychiatric and medical comorbidities, and not being seen by a rheumatologist were significantly associated with non-DMARD use.

CONCLUSION

Disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use was associated with lower odds of long-term opioid use among RA patients with baseline opioid prescription. Factors associated with non-DMARD use represent a window of opportunity for intervention to improve pain-related quality of life in patients living with RA.

Evaluation of Access Disparities to Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Rural and Urban Communities

The American College of Rheumatology guidelines provides a strong recommendation for the use of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) when conventional rheumatoid arthritis treatments fail to meet treatment targets. Although bDMARDs are an effective and important treatment component, access inequalities remain a challenge in many communities worldwide. The purpose of this analysis is to assess nationwide trends in bDMARD access in the United States, with a specific focus on rural and urban access gaps. This study combined multiple county-level databases to assess bDMARD prescriptions from 2015 to 2019. Using geospatial analysis and the Moran’s I statistic, counties were classified according to prescription levels to assess for hotspots and coldspots. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare significant counties across 49 socioeconomic variables of interest. The analysis identified statistically significant hotspot and coldspot prescription clusters within the United States. Coldspot (Low-Low) clusters with low access to bDMARDs are located predominantly in the rural west North Central region, extending down to Oklahoma and Arkansas. Hotspot (High-High) clusters are seen in urban and metro areas of Wisconsin, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia, Oregon, and the southern tip of Texas. Comparing coldspot to hotspot areas of bDMARD access revealed that the Medicare populations were older, more rural, less educated, less impoverished, and less likely to get their bDMARDs from a rheumatologist.

Completeness of cohort-linked U.S. Medicare data: An example from the Agricultural Health Study (1999–2016)

•

We describe linked U.S. Medicare claims data in the Agricultural Health Study.

•

Incomplete claims data were related to geographic, demographic, and health.

•

We saw potential informative missingness by pesticide use and mortality.

•

Incomplete data in Medicare-linked cohorts may impact sample size and validity.

Medicare Fee for Service (FFS) claims data, including inpatient (Part A) and outpatient (Part B) services, provide a valuable resource for research on older adults (≥65 year) in linked U.S. cohorts. Here we describe our experience linking the Agricultural Health Study cohort, including 47,501 licensed pesticide applicators and spouses from North Carolina (NC) and Iowa (IA) to Medicare claims data from 1999 to 2016. Given increased Part C (i.e., managed care/Medicare Advantage) enrollment during this period, and a resulting lack of available Part C claims data prior to 2015, we also explored potential for informative missingness. We compared those with partial or limited/no FFS to those with complete FFS coverage (i.e., ≥11 months per year parts AB, but not C, throughout Medicare enrollment) in relation to baseline farm size, general pesticide use, and mortality, in logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, race, education, and smoking, and stratified by state. While 46,689 participants (98%) were linked to Medicare IDs, only 33,487 (70%) had complete FFS, 9353 (20%) had partial FFS (≥1 year FFS but not complete), and 3849 (8%) had limited/no FFS (Part A or Part C-only). Incomplete FFS was more common in NC, mostly due to Part C, and was associated with farm characteristics, pesticide use, and mortality. These findings indicate that, in addition to reduced sample size in analyses limited to complete FFS, missingness may not be random. The potential impact of incomplete FFS data and changes in coverage type need to be considered when planning linked analyses and interpreting results.

Geographic Barriers Drive Disparities in Specialty Center Access for Older Adults with Huntington's Disease

BACKGROUND

Huntington's Disease Society of America Centers of Excellence (HDSA COEs) are primary hubs for Huntington's disease (HD) research opportunities and accessing new treatments. Data on the extent to which HDSA COEs are accessible to individuals with HD, particularly those older or disabled, are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To describe persons with HD in the U.S. Medicare program and characterize this population by proximity to an HDSA COE.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries ages ≥65 with HD in 2017. We analyzed data on benefit entitlement, demographics, and comorbidities. QGis software and Google Maps Interface were employed to estimate the distance from each patient to the nearest HDSA COE, and the proportion of individuals residing within 100 miles of these COEs at the state level.

RESULTS

Among 9,056 Medicare beneficiaries with HD, 54.5% were female, 83.0% were white; 48.5% were ≥65 years, but 64.9% originally qualified for Medicare due to disability. Common comorbidities were dementia (32.4%) and depression (35.9%), and these were more common in HD vs. non-HD patients. Overall, 5,144 (57.1%) lived within 100 miles of a COE. Race/ethnicity, sex, age, and poverty markers were not associated with below-average proximity to HDSA COEs. The proportion of patients living within 100 miles of a center varied from < 10% (16 states) to > 90% (7 states). Most underserved states were in the Mountain and West Central divisions.

CONCLUSION

Older Medicare beneficiaries with HD are frequently disabled and have a distinct comorbidity profile. Geographical, rather than sociodemographic factors, define the HD population with limited access to HDSA COEs.

Tele-Rheumatology during the COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction

During the Covid-19 pandemic strategies to prevent transmission of the viral infection obliged our hospital to promote virtual consultations.

Objetive

The objective of this study is to describe the results obtained with the previous strategy of transferring activity to teleconsultation during the period of maximum impact of the pandemic.

Material and methods

Between 16/03 and 10/05/2020 all successive consultations in our unit were performed in virtual rheumatology teleconference (RTC) format. The socio-demographic, geo-functional and clinical characteristics of all patients were collected; a numeric verbal scale (NVS) (where 0 = very dissatisfied to 10 = fully satisfied) was applied to assess the degree of satisfaction of the doctor/patient with the RTC.

Results

469 TC were included. Most patients seen by RTC were women, mean age: 60,83 years. Only 16% had university education. The mean distance travelled for face-to face consultation is 33 Km with a mean total time of 2 h. Most individuals were diagnosed with osteoarthritis/soft tissue rheumatic diseases and/or osteoporosis; 21% had rheumatoid arthritis. The mean length of the TC was 9.64 min. We find more patient satisfaction with the TC when their level of education is higher (OR = 4.12); doctor satisfaction was higher when the individual was better able to manage the Internet (OR = 3.01).

Conclusion

It is possible to transfer rheumatological care activity to TC with a considerable degree of satisfaction for both the patient and the doctor.

Telerheumatology: before, during, and after a global pandemic

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In early 2020, the COVID-19 global pandemic shifted most healthcare to remote delivery methods to protect patients, clinicians, and hospital staff. Such remote care delivery methods include the use of telehealth technologies including clinical video telehealth or telephone visits. Prior to this, research on the acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy of telehealth applied to rheumatology, or telerheumatology, has been limited.

RECENT FINDINGS

Telerheumatology visits were found to be noninferior to in-person visits and are often more time and cost effective for patients. Clinicians and patients both noted the lack of a physical exam in telehealth visits and patients missed the opportunity to have lab work done or other diagnostic tests they are afforded with in-person visits. Overall, patients and clinicians had positive attitudes toward the use of telerheumatology and agreed on its usefulness, even beyond the pandemic.

SUMMARY

Although telerheumatology has the potential to expand the reach of rheumatology practice, some of the most vulnerable patients still lack the most basic resources required for a telehealth visit. As the literature on telerheumatology continues to expand, attention should be paid to health equity, the digital divide, as well as patient preferences in order to foster true shared decision-making over telehealth.

Tele-Rheumatology During the COVID-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

During the COVID-19 pandemic strategies to prevent transmission of the viral infection obliged our hospital to promote virtual consultations.

OBJETIVE

The objective of this study is to describe the results obtained with the previous strategy of transferring activity to teleconsultation during the period of maximum impact of the pandemic.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 16/03 and 10/05/2020 all successive consultations in our unit were performed in virtual rheumatology teleconference (RTC) format. The socio-demographic, geo-functional and clinical characteristics of all patients were collected; a numeric verbal scale (NVS) (where 0=very dissatisfied to 10=fully satisfied) was applied to assess the degree of satisfaction of the doctor/patient with the RTC.

RESULTS

469 TC were included. Most patients seen by RTC were women, mean age: 60,83 years. Only 16% had university education. The mean distance travelled for face-to face consultation is 33 Km with a mean total time of 2hours. Most individuals were diagnosed with osteoarthritis/soft tissue rheumatic diseases and/or osteoporosis; 21% had rheumatoid arthritis. The mean length of the TC was 9.64minutes. We find more patient satisfaction with the TC when their level of education is higher (OR=4.12); doctor satisfaction was higher when the individual was better able to manage the Internet (OR=3.01).

CONCLUSION

It is possible to transfer rheumatological care activity to TC with a considerable degree of satisfaction for both the patient and the doctor.

Rural health issues in rheumatology: a review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Early access to rheumatology is imperative to achieve appropriate outcomes in rheumatologic diseases. But there seems to be a significant gap and disparity in the access to rheumatology care between urban and rural areas. This review was undertaken to analyze this issue.

RECENT FINDINGS

A significant delay in diagnosis of rheumatic disorder has been correlated to the travel distance to rheumatologist. It is also clear that currently, a significant rheumatology workforce shortage exists and is projected to worsen significantly, thereby making this gap and disparity much bigger.

SUMMARY

The scope of this gap and disparity in rheumatology care for rural patients remains incompletely defined and quantified. It is felt to be a significant issue and it is important to invest resources to obtain information about its scope. In addition, a number of solutions already exist which can be implemented using current network and infrastructure. These include relatively low-cost interventions such as patient navigator, remote rheumatology experts and if possible tele-rheumatology. These interventions can assist temporarily but a major improvement will require policy change at federal and state government level as well as involvement, buy-in, and incentivization of the providers and health networks providing rheumatology care.

Outcomes, Satisfaction, and Costs of a Rheumatology Telemedicine Program: A Longitudinal Evaluation

OBJECTIVES

Rural veterans with inflammatory arthritis (IA) lack medical access because of geographic barriers. Telemedicine (TM) holds great promise in relieving these disparities. We have prospectively measured patient-centered data surrounding a TM care program at a federal health system and compared these with usual care (UC).

METHODS

Veterans with previously established IA were enrolled in TM follow-up. Data collected longitudinally before and after entering the program included Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID-3), out-of-pocket visit costs and distances traveled, and patient satisfaction instruments. Demographics were recorded. Similar data were collected on a convenience sample of concurrent IA patients receiving UC.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients were observed, including 25 receiving TM care and 60 receiving UC. No differences in demographics, satisfaction scores, or RAPID-3 were noted at baseline between groups. Univariate linear regression of cross-sectional baseline data suggests satisfaction instrument scores were predicted by RAPID-3 (β = -0.64/10 points, p = 0.01), as well as distance (β = -0.19/100 miles, p = 0.02) and cost (β = -0.37/$100, p = 0.05). A multivariate model indicates both distance (β = -0.17/100 miles, p = 0.02) and RAPID-3 (β = -0.47/10 points, p < 0.03) were predictors for visit satisfaction. In longitudinal follow-up via TM, satisfaction (Δ = 0.03, p = 0.94) and RAPID-3 (Δ = 0.27, p = 0.89) remained similar to baseline among TM patients, whereas distance traveled (Δ = -384.8 miles/visit, p < 0.01) and visit costs (Δ = -$113.8/visit, p < 0.01) were reduced.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-reported outcomes for care delivered via TM were similar to UC, with significant cost and distance savings. Patient-centered factors such as distance to care should be considered in design care delivery models, as they appear to drive patient satisfaction in conjunction with disease control.

Association of Geography and Access to Health Care Providers With Long-Term Prescription Opioid Use in Medicare Patients With Severe Osteoarthritis: A Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the variation in long-term opioid use in osteoarthritis (OA) patients according to geography and health care access.

METHODS

We designed an observational cohort study among OA patients undergoing total joint replacement (TJR) in the Medicare program (2010 through 2014). The independent variables of interest were the state of residence and health care access, which was quantified at the primary care service area (PCSA) level as categories of number of practicing primary care providers (PCPs) and categories of rheumatologists per 1,000 Medicare beneficiaries. The percentage of OA patients taking long-term opioids (≥90 days in the 360-day period immediately preceding TJR) within each PCSA was the outcome variable in a multilevel, generalized linear regression model, adjusting for case-mix at the PCSA level and for policies, including rigor of prescription drug monitoring programs and legalized medical marijuana, at the state level.

RESULTS

A total of 358,121 patients with advanced OA, with a mean age of 74 years, were included from 4,080 PCSAs. The unadjusted mean percentage of long-term opioid users varied widely across states, ranging from 8.9% (Minnesota) to 26.4% (Alabama), and this variation persisted in the adjusted models. Access to PCPs was only modestly associated with rates of long-term opioid use between PCSAs with highest (>8.6) versus lowest (<3.6) concentration of PCPs (adjusted mean difference 1.4% [95% confidence interval 0.8%, 2.0%]), while access to rheumatologists was not associated with long-term opioid use.

CONCLUSION

We note a substantial statewide variation in rates of long-term treatment with opioids in OA, which is not fully explained by the differences in access to health care providers, varying case-mix, or state-level policies.

Distance from Home to Research Center: A Barrier to In-Person Visits but Not Treatment Adherence in a Stroke Trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Clinical trials often seek to enroll patients from both urban and rural areas to safeguard the generalizability of results. However, maintaining contact with patients who live away from a recruitment site, including rural areas, can be challenging. In this research we examine the effect of distance between patient and study centers on treatment adherence and retention.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of 2,466 participants in the Insulin Resistance Intervention after Stroke trial who were enrolled from research sites in the United States. Driving distance between the zipcodes of patient's reported place of residence and the study center was calculated. Outcome measures were loss to follow-up, completion of annual in-person visits, adherence to preventive therapy, and adherence to study drug in the first 3 years of participation. Logistic regression models were used to adjust for confounders.

RESULTS

Distance from residence to research center was not associated with loss to follow-up, adherence to study drug, or adherence to preventive therapy (p > 0.05 for each). However, patients who lived farther from the research center (>120 miles), compared to patients who lived closer (<60 miles), were less likely to complete the second annual in-person visit (62 vs. 81%; adjusted OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.31-0.75) and third visit (53 vs. 75%; adjusted OR 0.44; 95% CI 0.29-0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

Distance between patient and study center was an independent predictor of missed in-person visits but not with adherence to study treatment or preventive care.

Use of Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs for Inflammatory Arthritis in US Veterans: Effect of Specialty Care and Geographic Distance

Objective.

To evaluate the effect of access to and distance from rheumatology care on the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in US veterans with inflammatory arthritis (IA).

Methods.

Provider encounters and DMARD dispensations for IA (rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis) were evaluated in national Veterans Affairs (VA) datasets between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015.

Results.

Among 12,589 veterans with IA, 23.5% saw a rheumatology provider. In the general IA population, 25.3% and 13.6% of veterans were exposed to a synthetic DMARD (sDMARD) and biologic DMARD (bDMARD), respectively. DMARD exposure was 2.6- to 3.4-fold higher in the subpopulation using rheumatology providers, compared to the general IA population. The distance between veterans’ homes and the closest VA rheumatology site was < 40 miles (Near) for 55.9%, 40–99 miles (Intermediate) for 31.7%, and ≥ 100 miles (Far) for 12.4%. Veterans in the Intermediate and Far groups were less likely to see a rheumatology provider than veterans in the Near group (RR = 0.72 and RR = 0.49, respectively). Exposure to bDMARD was 34% less frequent in the Far group than the Near group. In the subpopulation who used rheumatology care, the bDMARD exposure discrepancy did not persist between distance groups.

Conclusion.

Use of rheumatology care and DMARD was low for veterans with IA. DMARD exposure was strongly associated with rheumatology care use. Veterans in the general IA population living far from rheumatology sites accessed rheumatology care and bDMARD less frequently than veterans living close to rheumatology sites.

Factors associated with access to rheumatologists for Medicare patients

OBJECTIVE

Despite looming rheumatologist shortages and a growing number of patients with arthritis and other rheumatic conditions, nationwide estimates of access to rheumatology care have never been reported. We aimed to measure travel times as a proxy to access to care and to determine the individual and area-level factors associated with long travel times to rheumatologists in the U.S.

METHODS

We used Medicare Part B claims for the 2009 Medicare Chronic Condition Warehouse 5% rheumatoid arthritis/osteoarthritis cohort. Using Google Maps we estimated driving time from the center of a beneficiary's home ZIP code to the center of their rheumatologist's office ZIP code. We examined predictors of travel time ≥90 min in a series of generalized linear mixed models adjusting for rheumatologist supply, rurality, and individual patient characteristics including age, race, gender, and income.

RESULTS

We included 41,693 Medicare beneficiaries with 1 or more visits to a rheumatologist in 2009. The median estimated beneficiary travel time to a rheumatologist was 22 min [interquartile range (IQR): 12-40 min]. Overall, 7% of beneficiaries traveled 90 min or longer to visit a rheumatologist. Even after adjusting for covariates, independent predictors of long travel times included living in areas with no or low supply of rheumatologists and living in the Mountain region of the U.S.

CONCLUSIONS

A small but significant proportion of patients in the U.S. traveled very long distances to visit a rheumatologist, and most of these individuals resided in areas with no or low supplies of rheumatologists. These data suggest that addressing shortages in rheumatology care for patients in low-supply areas is a key target for improving access to rheumatologists.

The global challenges and opportunities in the practice of rheumatology: white paper by the World Forum on Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases

Rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) represent a multitude of degenerative, inflammatory and auto-immune conditions affecting millions of people worldwide. Persons with these diseases may potentially experience severe chronic pain, joint damage, increasing disability and even death. With an increasingly ageing population, the prevalence and burden of RMDs are predicted to increase, placing greater demands on the global practice of rheumatology and related healthcare budgets. Effective treatment of RMDs currently faces a number of challenges in both the developed and developing world, and individual countries may face more specific local challenges. However, limited understanding of the burden of RMDs amongst public health professionals and policy-makers means that these diseases are often not considered a public health priority. The objective of this review is to increase awareness of the RMDs and to identify opportunities to address RMD challenges on both a local and global scale. On 26 September 2014, rheumatology experts from five different continents met at the World Forum on Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases (WFRMD) to discuss and identify some key challenges for the RMDs community today. The outcomes are presented in this review, focusing on access to rheumatology services, diagnostics and therapies, rheumatology education and training and on clinical trials, as well as investigator-initiated and epidemiological research. The long-term vision of the WFRMD is to increase perception of the RMDs as a major burden to society and to explore potential opportunities to improve global and local RMD care.