Dataset Information

Evaluation of the Cascade of Diabetes Care in the United States, 2005-2016.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Treatment advances in diabetes can meaningfully improve outcomes only if they effectively reach the populations at risk.

Objectives

To evaluate whether the cascade of US diabetes care, defined as diabetes diagnosis, linkage to care, and achievement of individual and combined treatment targets, improved from 2005 to 2016 and to investigate potential disparities in US diabetes care.

Design, setting, and participants

Nationally representative, serial cross-sectional studies included in the 2005-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were evaluated. Data on nonpregnant US adults (age ≥18 years) with diabetes who had reported fasting for 9 or more hours (n = 1742 diagnosed and 746 undiagnosed) were included. Data analysis was performed from August 1, 2018, to May 10, 2019.

Exposures

Time period (2005-2008, 2009-2012, and 2013-2016), age, sex, race/ethnicity, health insurance, and educational level incorporated into logistic regression models predicting odds of target achievement.

Main outcomes and measures

Proportion of participants overall and stratified by age, sex, and race/ethnicity who were linked to diabetes care and met glycemic (hemoglobin A1c <7.0%-8.5%, depending on age and complications), blood pressure (<140/90 mm Hg), cholesterol level (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dL), and smoking abstinence targets and a composite of all targets.

Results

In 2013-2016, of 1742 US adults with diagnosed diabetes, 94% (95% CI, 92%-96%) were linked to diabetes care; 64% (95% CI, 58%-69%) met hemoglobin A1c level, 70% (95% CI, 64%-75%) met blood pressure level, and 57% (95% CI, 51%-62%) met cholesterol level targets; 85% were nonsmokers (95% CI, 82%-88%); and 23% (95% CI, 17%-29%) achieved the composite goal. Results were similar in 2005-2008 (composite 23%) and in 2009-2012 (composite 25%). There was no significant improvement in diagnosis or target achievement during the study period. Compared with middle-aged adults (45-64 years) with diagnosed diabetes, older patients (≥65 years) had higher odds (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.70; 95% CI, 1.17-2.48) and younger adults (18-44 years) had lower odds (aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.97) of meeting the composite target. Women had lower odds of achieving the composite target than men (aOR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.45-0.80). Non-Hispanic black individuals vs non-Hispanic white individuals had lower odds of achieving the composite target (aOR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.39-0.83). Having health insurance was the strongest predictor of linkage to diabetes care (aOR, 3.96; 95% CI, 2.34-6.69).

Conclusions and relevance

It appears that the diabetes care cascade in the United States has not significantly improved between 2005 and 2016. This study's findings suggest that gaps in diabetes care that were present in 2005, particularly among younger adults (18-44 years), women, and nonwhite individuals, persist.

SUBMITTER: Kazemian P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6692836 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Little is known to date about national trends in the prescribing of skeletal muscle relaxants (SMRs), the use of which is associated with important safety concerns, especially in older adults and in those who use concomitant opioids. Objective:To measure national trends in SMR prescribing over a 12-year period. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cross-sectional study used data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from January 2005 to December 2016. Data were analyzed from August 21, 2018, to July 18, 2019. The study included patients with ambulatory care visits who had encounters with non-federally funded, office-based physicians in the United States. Exposures:SMR use, categorized as newly prescribed or continued therapy at the office visit. Main Outcomes and Measures:Ambulatory care visits-overall and stratified by calendar year, geographic region, and patient age, sex, and race-in which an SMR was newly prescribed or continued were quantified. Among office visits in which an SMR was newly prescribed, diagnoses were assessed. Concomitant medications were quantified for all office visits, stratified by new or continued therapy. Survey visit weights were used to estimate nationally representative measures, and age-standardized rates were generated by geographic region using US Census data. Results:This study included a total of 314 970 308 office visits (mean [SD] age, 53.5 [15.2] years; 194 621 102 [61.8%] men and 120 349 206 [38.2%] women). In 2016, there were 30?730?262 (95% CI, 30?626?464-30?834?060) US ambulatory care visits in which an SMR was either newly prescribed or continued as ongoing therapy. Patients in these visits were most frequently female (58.2% [95% CI, 57.9%-58.6%]), white (53.7% [95% CI, 53.4%-54.0%]), and aged 45 to 64 years (48.5% [95% CI, 48.2%-48.9%]). During the study period, office visits with a prescribed SMR nearly doubled from 15.5 million (95% CI, 15.4-15.6 million) in 2005 to 30.7 million (95% CI, 30.6-30.8 million) in 2016. Although visits for new SMR prescriptions remained stable, office visits with continued SMR drug therapy tripled from 8.5 million (95% CI, 8.4-8.5 million) visits in 2005 to 24.7 million (95% CI, 24.6-24.8 million) visits in 2016. Older adults accounted for 22.2% (95% CI, 21.8%-22.6%) of visits with an SMR prescription. Concomitant use of an opioid was recorded in 67.2% (95% CI, 62.0%-72.5%) of all visits with a continuing SMR prescription. Conclusions and Relevance:This study found that SMR use increased rapidly between 2005 and 2016, which is a concern given the prominent adverse effects and limited long-term efficacy data associated with their use. These findings suggest that approaches are needed to limit the long-term use of SMRs, especially in older adults, similar to approaches to limit long-term use of opioids and benzodiazepines.

Project description:Importance: While the literature documenting health disparities has advanced in recent decades, less is known about the pattern of racial/ethnic disparities in emergency care in the United States. Objective: To describe the trends and differences of health outcomes and resource utilization among racial/ethnic groups in US emergency care for adult patients over a 12-year period. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study of emergency department (ED) data from the nationally representative National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Survey (NHAMCS) examined multiple dimensions of ED care and treatment from 2005 to 2016 among adults in the US. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes include ED care outcomes (hospital admission, ICU admission, and death in the ED/hospital), resource utilization outcomes (medical imaging use, blood test, and procedure use), and patients' waiting time in the ED. The main exposure variable is race/ethnicity including white patients (non-Hispanic), black patients (non-Hispanic), Hispanic patients, Asian patients, and Other. Results: During the 12-year study period, NHAMCS collected data on 247,989 adult (> 18 years old) ED encounters, providing a weighted sample of 1,065,936,835 ED visits for analysis. Asian patients were 1.21 times more likely than white patients to be admitted to the hospital following an ED visit (aOR 1.21, 95% CI 1.12-1.31). Hispanic patients presented no significant difference in hospital admission following an ED visit (aOR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97-1.06) with white patients. Black patients were 7% less likely to receive an urgent ESI score than white patients less likely to receive immediate or emergent scores, as opposed to semi- or non-urgent scores. Black patients were also 10% less likely than white patients to be admitted to the hospital and were 1.26 times more likely than white patients to die in the ED or hospital. Conclusions and Relevance: Race is associated with significant differences in ED treatment and admission rates, which may represent disparities in emergency care. Hispanic and Asian Americans were equal or more likely to be admitted to the hospital compared to white patients. Black patients received lower triage scores and higher mortality rates. Further research is needed to understand the underlying causes and long-term health consequences of these disparities.

Project description:Importance:Individuals with prediabetes are at increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease. The incidence and prevalence of type 2 diabetes in the US adolescent population have increased in the last decade. Therefore, it is important to monitor the prevalence of prediabetes and varying levels of glucose tolerance to assess the future risk of type 2 diabetes in the youngest segment of the population. Objective:To examine the prevalence of impaired fasting glucose (IFG), impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), and increased glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels in US adolescents (aged 12-18 years) and young adults (aged 19-34 years) without diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cross-sectional analyses of the 2005-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey assessed a population-based sample of adolescents and young adults who were not pregnant, did not have diabetes, and had measured fasting plasma glucose, 2-hour plasma glucose after a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test, and HbA1c levels. Analysis began in April 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures:Impaired fasting glucose was defined as fasting plasma glucose of 100 mg/dL to less than 126 mg/dL, IGT as 2-hour plasma glucose of 140 mg/dL to less than 200 mg/dL, and increased HbA1c level as HbA1c level between 5.7% and 6.4%. The prevalence of IFG, isolated IFG, IGT, isolated IGT, increased HbA1c level, isolated increased HbA1c level, and prediabetes (defined as having IFG, IGT, or increased HbA1c level) were estimated. Fasting insulin levels and cardiometabolic risk factors across glycemic abnormality phenotypes were also compared. Obesity was defined as having age- and sex-specific body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) in the 95th percentile or higher in adolescents or 30 or higher in young adults. Results:Of 5786 individuals, 2606 (45%) were adolescents and 3180 (55%) were young adults. Of adolescents, 50.6% (95% CI, 47.6%-53.6%) were boys, and 50.6% (95% CI, 48.8%-52.4%) of young adults were men. Among adolescents, the prevalence of prediabetes was 18.0% (95% CI, 16.0%-20.1%) and among young adults was 24.0% (95% CI, 22.0%-26.1%). Impaired fasting glucose constituted the largest proportion of prediabetes, with prevalence of 11.1% (95% CI, 9.5%-13.0%) in adolescents and 15.8% (95% CI, 14.0%-17.9%) in young adults. In multivariable logistic models including age, sex, race/ethnicity, and body mass index, the predictive marginal prevalence of prediabetes was significantly higher in male than in female individuals (22.5% [95% CI, 19.5%-25.4%] vs 13.4% [95% CI, 10.8%-16.5%] in adolescents and 29.1% [95% CI, 26.4%-32.1%] vs 18.8% [95% CI, 16.5%-21.3%] in young adults). Prediabetes prevalence was significantly higher in individuals with obesity than in those with normal weight (25.7% [95% CI, 20.0%-32.4%] vs 16.4% [95% CI, 14.3%-18.7%] in adolescents and 36.9% [95% CI, 32.9%-41.1%] vs 16.6% [95% CI, 14.2%-19.4%] in young adults). Compared with persons with normal glucose tolerance, adolescents and young adults with prediabetes had significantly higher non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, systolic blood pressure, central adiposity, and lower insulin sensitivity (P?<?.05 for all). Conclusions and Relevance:In the United States, about 1 of 5 adolescents and 1 of 4 young adults have prediabetes. The adjusted prevalence of prediabetes is higher in male individuals and in people with obesity. Adolescents and young adults with prediabetes also present an unfavorable cardiometabolic risk profile, putting them both at increased risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases.

Project description:ContextApproximately 80% of US tuberculosis (TB) cases verified during 2015-2016 were attributed to untreated latent TB infection (LTBI). Identifying factors associated with LTBI treatment failure might improve treatment effectiveness.ObjectiveTo identify patients with indicators of isoniazid (INH) LTBI treatment initiation, completion, and failure.MethodsWe searched inpatient and outpatient claims for International Classification of Diseases (Ninth and Tenth Revisions), National Drug, and Current Procedural Terminology codes. We defined treatment completion as 180 days or more of INH therapy during a 9-month period. We defined LTBI treatment failure as an active TB disease diagnosis more than 1 year after starting LTBI treatment among completers and used exact logistic regression to model possible differences between groups. Among treatment completers, we matched 1 patient who failed treatment with 2 control subjects and fit regression models with covariates documented on medical claims paid 6 months or less before INH treatment initiation.ParticipantsCommercially insured US patients in a large commercial database with insurance claims paid during 2005-2016.Main outcome measures(1) Trends in treatment completion; (2) odds ratios (ORs) for factors associated with treatment completion and treatment failure.ResultsOf 21 510 persons who began LTBI therapy during 2005-2016, 10 725 (49.9%) completed therapy. Treatment noncompletion is associated with those younger than 45 years, living in the Northeast or South Census regions, and women. Among persons who completed treatment, 30 (0.3%) progressed to TB disease. Diagnoses of rheumatoid arthritis during the 6 months before treatment initiation and being aged 65 years or older (reference: ages 0-24 years) were significantly associated with INH LTBI treatment failure (adjusted exact OR = 5.1; 95% CI, 1.2-28.2; and adjusted exact OR = 5.1; 95% CI, 1.2-25.3, respectively).ConclusionApproximately 50% of persons completed INH LTBI therapy, and of those, treatment failure was associated with rheumatoid arthritis and persons 65 years or older among a cohort of US LTBI patients with commercial health insurance.