Assessing the accuracy of race-and-ethnicity data in the Outcome and Assessment Information Set

BACKGROUND

Limitations in the quality of race-and-ethnicity information in Medicare's data systems constrain efforts to assess disparities in care among older Americans. Using demographic information from standardized patient assessments may be an efficient way to enhance the accuracy and completeness of race-and-ethnicity information in Medicare's data systems, but it is critical to first establish the accuracy of these data as they may be prone to inaccurate observer-reported or third-party-based information. This study evaluates the accuracy of patient-level race-and-ethnicity information included in the Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) submitted by home health agencies.

METHODS

We compared 2017-2022 OASIS-D race-and-ethnicity data to gold-standard self-reported information from the Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems® survey in a matched sample of 304,804 people with Medicare coverage. We also compared OASIS data to indirect estimates of race-and-ethnicity generated using the Medicare Bayesian Improved Surname and Geocoding (MBISG) 2.1.1 method and to existing Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) administrative records.

RESULTS

Compared with existing CMS administrative data, OASIS data are far more accurate for Hispanic, Asian American and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and White race-and-ethnicity; slightly less accurate for American Indian or Alaska Native race-and-ethnicity; and similarly accurate for Black race-and-ethnicity. However, MBISG 2.1.1 accuracy exceeds that of both OASIS and CMS administrative data for every racial-and-ethnic category. Patterns of inconsistent reporting of racial-and-ethnic information among people for whom there were multiple observations in the OASIS and Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) datasets suggest that some of the inaccuracies in OASIS data may result from observation-based reporting that lessens correspondence with self-reported data.

CONCLUSIONS

When health record data on race-and-ethnicity includes observer-reported information, it can be less accurate than both true self-report and a high-performing imputation approach. Efforts are needed to encourage collection of true self-reported data and explicit record-level data on the source of race-and-ethnicity information.

Reaming the intramedullary canal during tibial nailing does not affect in vivo intramuscular pH of the anterior tibialis

Many investigations have evaluated local and systemic consequences of intramedullary (IM) reaming and suggest that reaming may cause, or exacerbate, injury to the soft tissues adjacent to fractures. To date, no study has examined the effect on local muscular physiology as measured by intramuscular pH (IpH). Here, we observe in vivo IpH during IM reaming for tibia fractures.

Methods

Adults with acute tibia shaft fractures (level 1, academic, 2019-2021) were offered enrollment in an observational cohort. During IM nailing, a sterile, validated IpH probe was placed into the anterior tibialis (<5 cm from fracture, continuous sampling, independent research team). IpH before, during, and after reaming was averaged and compared through repeated measures ANOVA. As the appropriate period to analyze IpH during reaming is unknown, the analysis was repeated over periods of 0.5, 1, 2, 5, 10, and 15 minutes prereaming and postreaming time intervals.

Results

Sixteen subjects with tibia shaft fractures were observed during nailing. Average time from injury to surgery was 35.0 hours (SD, 31.8). Starting and ending perioperative IpH was acidic, averaging 6.64 (SD, 0.21) and 6.74 (SD, 0.17), respectively. Average reaming time lasted 15 minutes. Average IpH during reaming was 6.73 (SD, 0.15). There was no difference in IpH between prereaming, intrareaming, and postreaming periods. IpH did not differ regardless of analysis over short or long time domains compared with the duration of reaming.

Conclusions

Reaming does not affect IpH. Both granular and broad time domains were tested, revealing no observable local impact.

Circulating fibrillin fragment concentrations in patients with and without aortic pathology

Objective

Fragments of fibrillin-1 and fibrillin-2 will be detectable in the plasma of patients with aortic dissections and aneurysms. We sought to determine whether the plasma fibrillin fragment levels (PFFLs) differ between patients with thoracic aortic pathology and those presenting with nonaortic chest pain.

Methods

PFFLs were measured in patients with thoracic aortic aneurysm (n = 27) or dissection (n = 28). For comparison, patients without aortic pathology who had presented to the emergency department with acute chest pain (n = 281) were categorized into three groups according to the cause of the chest pain: ischemic cardiac chest pain; nonischemic cardiac chest pain; and noncardiac chest pain. The PFFLs were measured using a sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

Results

Fibrillin-1 fragments were detectable in all patients and were lowest in the ischemic cardiac chest pain group. Age, sex, and the presence of hypertension were associated with differences in fibrillin-1 fragment levels. Fibrillin-2 fragments were detected more often in the thoracic aneurysm and dissection groups than in the emergency department chest pain group (P < .0001). Patients with aortic dissection demonstrated a trend toward increased detectability (P = .051) and concentrations (P = .06) of fibrillin-2 fragments compared with patients with aortic aneurysms. Analysis of specific antibody pairs identified fibrillin-1 B15-HRP26 and fibrillin-2 B205-HRP143 as the most informative in distinguishing between the emergency department and aortic pathology groups.

Conclusions

Patients with thoracic aortic dissections demonstrated elevated plasma fibrillin-2 fragment levels (B205-HRP143) compared with patients presenting with ischemic or nonischemic cardiac chest pain and increased fibrillin-1 levels (B15-HRP26) compared with patients with ischemic cardiac chest pain. Investigation of fibrillin-1 and fibrillin-2 fragment generation might lead to diagnostic, therapeutic, and prognostic advances for patients with thoracic aortic dissection.

Screening for Unhealthy Drug Use: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Illicit drug use is among the most common causes of preventable morbidity and mortality in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature on screening and interventions for drug use to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through September 18, 2018; literature surveillance through September 21, 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Test accuracy studies to detect drug misuse and randomized clinical trials of screening and interventions to reduce drug use.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Critical appraisal and data abstraction by 2 reviewers and random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Sensitivity, specificity, drug use and other health, social, and legal outcomes.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine studies (N = 84 206) were included. Twenty-eight studies (n = 65 720) addressed drug screening accuracy. Among adults, sensitivity and specificity of screening tools for detecting unhealthy drug use ranged from 0.71 to 0.94 and 0.87 to 0.97, respectively. Interventions to reduce drug use were evaluated in 52 trials (n = 15 659) of psychosocial interventions, 7 trials (n = 1109) of opioid agonist therapy, and 13 trials (n = 1718) of naltrexone. Psychosocial interventions were associated with increased likelihood of drug use abstinence (15 trials, n = 3636; relative risk [RR], 1.60 [95% CI, 1.24 to 2.13]; absolute risk difference [ARD], 9% [95% CI, 5% to 15%]) and reduced number of drug use days (19 trials, n = 5085; mean difference, -0.49 day in the last 7 days [95% CI, -0.85 to -0.13]) vs no psychosocial intervention at 3- to 4-month follow-up. In treatment-seeking populations, opioid agonist therapy and naltrexone were associated with decreased risk of drug use relapse (4 trials, n = 567; RR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.82]; ARD, -35% [95% CI, -67% to -3%] and 12 trials, n = 1599; RR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.85]; ARD, -18% [95% CI, -26% to -10%], respectively) vs placebo or no medication. While evidence on harms was limited, it indicated no increased risk of serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Several screening instruments with acceptable sensitivity and specificity are available to screen for drug use, although there is no direct evidence on the benefits or harms of screening. Pharmacotherapy and psychosocial interventions are effective at improving drug use outcomes, but evidence of effectiveness remains primarily derived from trials conducted in treatment-seeking populations.

Screening and Behavioral Counseling Interventions to Reduce Unhealthy Alcohol Use in Adolescents and Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Unhealthy alcohol use is common, increasing, and a leading cause of premature mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To review literature on the effectiveness and harms of screening and counseling for unhealthy alcohol use to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through October 12, 2017; literature surveillance through August 1, 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

Test accuracy studies and randomized clinical trials of screening and counseling to reduce unhealthy alcohol use.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Independent critical appraisal and data abstraction by 2 reviewers. Counseling trials were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Sensitivity, specificity, drinks per week, exceeding recommended limits, heavy use episodes, abstinence (for pregnant women), and other health, family, social, and legal outcomes.

RESULTS

One hundred thirteen studies (N = 314 466) were included. No studies examined benefits or harms of screening programs to reduce unhealthy alcohol use. For adolescents (10 studies [n = 171 363]), 1 study (n = 225) reported a sensitivity of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.83) and specificity of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.86) using the AUDIT-C (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption) to detect the full spectrum of unhealthy alcohol use. For adults (35 studies [n = 114 182]), brief screening instruments commonly reported sensitivity and specificity between 0.70 and 0.85. Two trials of the effects of interventions to reduce unhealthy alcohol use in adolescents (n = 588) found mixed results: one reported a benefit in high-risk but not moderate-risk drinkers, and the other reported a statistically significant reduction in drinking frequency for boys but not girls; neither reported health or related outcomes. Across all populations (68 studies [n = 36 528]), counseling interventions were associated with a decrease in drinks per week (weighted mean difference, -1.6 [95% CI, -2.2 to -1.0]; 32 studies [37 effects; n = 15 974]), the proportion exceeding recommended drinking limits (odds ratio [OR], 0.60 [95% CI, 0.53 to 0.67]; 15 studies [16 effects; n = 9760]), and the proportion reporting a heavy use episode (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.77]; 12 studies [14 effects; n = 8108]), and an increase in the proportion of pregnant women reporting abstinence (OR, 2.26 [95% CI, 1.43 to 3.56]; 5 studies [n = 796]) after 6 to 12 months. Health outcomes were sparsely reported and generally did not demonstrate group differences in effect. There was no evidence that these interventions could be harmful.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among adults, screening instruments feasible for use in primary care are available that can effectively identify people with unhealthy alcohol use, and counseling interventions in those who screen positive are associated with reductions in unhealthy alcohol use. There was no evidence that these interventions have unintended harmful effects.

Behavioral and Pharmacotherapy Weight Loss Interventions to Prevent Obesity-Related Morbidity and Mortality in Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Overweight and obesity have been associated with adverse health effects.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review evidence on benefits and harms of behavioral and pharmacotherapy weight loss and weight loss maintenance interventions in adults to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed Publisher-Supplied Records, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies published through June 6, 2017; ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials through August 2017; and ongoing surveillance in targeted publications through March 23, 2018. Studies from previous reviews were reevaluated for inclusion.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) focusing on weight loss or weight loss maintenance in adults.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were abstracted by one reviewer and confirmed by another. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted for weight loss outcomes in behavior-based interventions.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Health outcomes, weight loss or weight loss maintenance, reduction in obesity-related conditions, and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 122 RCTs (N = 62 533) and 2 observational studies (N = 209 993) were identified. Compared with controls, participants in behavior-based interventions had greater mean weight loss at 12 to 18 months (-2.39 kg [95% CI, -2.86 to -1.93]; 67 studies [n = 22065]) and less weight regain (-1.59 kg [95% CI, -2.38 to -0.79]; 8 studies [n = 1408]). Studies of medication-based weight loss and maintenance interventions also reported greater weight loss or less weight regain in intervention compared with placebo groups at 12 to 18 months (range, -0.6 to -5.8 kg; no meta-analysis). Participants with prediabetes in weight loss interventions had a lower risk of developing diabetes compared with controls (relative risk, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.51 to 0.89]). There was no evidence of other benefits, but most health outcomes such as mortality, cardiovascular disease, and cancer were infrequently reported. Small improvements in quality of life in some medication trials were noted but were of unclear clinical significance. There was no evidence of harm such as cardiovascular disease from behavior-based interventions; higher rates of adverse events were associated with higher dropout rates in medication groups than in placebo groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Behavior-based weight loss interventions with or without weight loss medications were associated with more weight loss and a lower risk of developing diabetes than control conditions. Weight loss medications, but not behavior-based interventions, were associated with higher rates of harms. Long-term weight and health outcomes data, as well as data on important subgroups, were limited.