Dataset Information

Variation in care of patients with elderly-onset inflammatory bowel disease in Ontario, Canada: A population-based cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Variation in health care, when not based on patient preference, may result in poorer care. We determined whether variation in health services utilization, gastroenterologist care and outcomes existed among patients with elderly-onset inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Methods

Patients with IBD (diagnosed ≥65 years) were identified from population-based health administrative data from Ontario, Canada (1999 to 2014). We assessed variation across multispecialty physician networks in gastroenterologist care and outcomes using multilevel logistic regression. Median odds ratios (MOR) described variation. We evaluated the association between gastroenterologist supply, specialist care and outcomes.

Results

In 4806 patients, there was significant variation in having ever seen a gastroenterologist (MOR 3.35, P < 0.0001), having a gastroenterologist as the primary IBD care provider (MOR 4.16, P < 0.0001), 5-year colectomy risk in ulcerative colitis (MOR 1.38, P = 0.01), immunomodulator use (MOR 1.47, P = 0.001), and corticosteroid use (MOR 1.26, P = 0.006). No variation in emergency department visits, hospitalizations or intestinal resection (Crohn's) was noted. Patients in networks with fewer gastroenterologists were less likely to see a gastroenterologist (odds ratio [OR] 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15 to 0.56), have a gastroenterologist as their primary care provider (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.59), be hospitalized within 5 years (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.98), and be prescribed biologics within 1 year (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.89).

Conclusions

Utilization of gastroenterology care in patients with elderly-onset IBD varies greatly. Patients treated by gastroenterologists and in networks with more gastroenterologists have better outcomes. There is a need to ensure all individuals with IBD have equal access to and utilization of specialist care to ensure the best possible outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Kuenzig ME

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8023856 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background & aimsThe incidence of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) in older adults is increasing. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate progression of elderly onset (EO) IBD in population-based cohorts and compared it with adult onset (AO) IBD.MethodsIn a systematic review through June 1, 2019, we identified population-based cohort studies of EO IBD reporting the cumulative risk of hospitalization, surgery, mortality, treatment patterns, escalation, and/or malignancy. Data were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis as cumulative risk of events at 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years, and compared with data from patients with AO IBD in the same cohorts.ResultsWe identified 9 studies, comprising 14,765 patients with EO IBD. In patients with EO Crohn's disease (CD), the cumulative 5-year risk of surgery was 22.6% (95% CI, 18.7-27.2) and was similar to that of patients with AO CD (relative risk [RR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80-1.34). Overall exposure to corticosteroids was comparable between patients with EO CD vs AO CD (5-year risk: 55.4%; 95% CI, 53.4-57.4; RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78-1.00), but exposure to immunomodulators (31.5%; 95% CI, 29.7-33.4; RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51-0.77) or biologic agents (6.5%; 95% CI, 5.6-7.6; RR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.25-0.52) was significantly lower for patients with EO CD than for patients with AO CD. Similarly, in patients with EO ulcerative colitis (UC), the cumulative 5-year risk of surgery was 7.8% (95% CI, 5.0-12.0), similar to the risk for patients with AO UC (RR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.79-2.11). Overall exposure to corticosteroids was comparable between patients with EO UC vs AO UC (5-year risk: 57.2%; 95% CI, 55.6-58.7; RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.91-1.06), but exposure to immunomodulators (16.1%; 95% CI, 15.0-17.2; RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.54-0.62) or biologic agents (2.0%; 95% CI, 1.6-2.5; RR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.24-0.52) was significantly lower for patients with EO UC than for patients with AO UC. Patients with EO IBD appeared to have increased mortality, but not malignancy, compared with the general population. There were few data on comorbidities or adverse effects of medications.ConclusionsIn a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that patients with EO IBD have a similar risk of surgery as patients with AO IBD. However, patients with EO IBD are less likely to receive treatment with immunomodulators or biologic agents.

Project description:BackgroundStigma and high-care needs can present barriers to the provision of high-quality primary care for people with opioid use disorder (OUD) and those prescribed opioids for chronic pain. We explored the likelihood of securing a new primary care provider (PCP) among people with varying histories of opioid use who had recently lost access to their PCP.Methods and findingsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using linked administrative data among residents of Ontario, Canada whose enrolment with a physician practicing in a primary care enrolment model (PEM) was terminated between January 2016 and December 2017. We assigned individuals to 3 groups based upon their opioid use on the date enrolment ended: long-term opioid pain therapy (OPT), opioid agonist therapy (OAT), or no opioid. We fit multivariable models assessing the primary outcome of primary care reattachment within 1 year, adjusting for demographic characteristics, clinical comorbidities, and health services utilization. Secondary outcomes included rates of emergency department (ED) visits and opioid toxicity events. Among 154,970 Ontarians who lost their PCP, 1,727 (1.1%) were OAT recipients, 3,644 (2.4%) were receiving long-term OPT, and 149,599 (96.5%) had no recent prescription opioid exposure. In general, OAT recipients were younger (median age 36) than those receiving long-term OPT (59 years) and those with no recent prescription opioid exposure (44 years). In all exposure groups, the majority of individuals had their enrolment terminated by their physician (range 78.1% to 88.8%). In the primary analysis, as compared to those not receiving opioids, OAT recipients were significantly less likely to find a PCP within 1 year (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50 to 0.61, p < 0.0001). We observed no significant difference between long-term OPT and opioid unexposed individuals (aHR 0.96; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.01, p = 0.12). In our secondary analysis comparing the period of PCP loss to the year prior, we found that rates of ED visits were elevated among people not receiving opioids (adjusted rate ratio (aRR) 1.20, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.22, p < 0.0001) and people receiving long-term OPT (aRR 1.37, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.48, p < 0.0001). We found no such increase among OAT recipients, and no significant increase in opioid toxicity events in the period following provider loss for any exposure group. The main limitation of our findings relates to their generalizability outside of PEMs and in jurisdictions with different financial incentives incorporated into primary care provision.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed gaps in access to primary care among people who receive prescription opioids, particularly among OAT recipients. Ongoing efforts are needed to address the stigma, discrimination, and financial disincentives that may introduce barriers to the healthcare system, and to facilitate access to high-quality, consistent primary care services for chronic pain patients and those with OUD.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Many people experience imprisonment each year, and this population bears a disproportionate burden of morbidity and mortality. States have an obligation to provide equitable health care in prison and to attend to care on release. Our objective was to describe health care utilization in prison and post-release for persons released from provincial prison in Ontario, Canada in 2010, and to compare health care utilization with the general population. METHODS:We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study. We included all persons released from provincial prison to the community in 2010, and age- and sex-matched general population controls. We linked identities for persons released from prison to administrative health data. We matched each person by age and sex with four general population controls. We examined ambulatory care and emergency department utilization and medical-surgical and psychiatric hospitalization, both in prison and in the three months after release to the community. We compared rates with those of the general population. RESULTS:The rates of all types of health care utilization were significantly higher in prison and on release for people released from prison (N = 48,861) compared to general population controls (N = 195,444). Comparing those released from prison to general population controls in prison and in the 3 months after release, respectively, utilization rates were 5.3 (95% CI 5.2, 5.4) and 2.4 (95% CI 2.4, 2.5) for ambulatory care, 3.5 (95% CI 3.3, 3.7) and 5.0 (95% CI 4.9, 5.3) for emergency department utilization, 2.3 (95% CI 2.0, 2.7) and 3.2 (95% CI 2.9, 3.5) for medical-surgical hospitalization, and 21.5 (95% CI 16.7, 27.7) and 17.5 (14.4, 21.2) for psychiatric hospitalization. Comparing the time in prison to the week after release, ambulatory care use decreased from 16.0 (95% CI 15.9,16.1) to 10.7 (95% CI 10.5, 10.9) visits/person-year, emergency department use increased from 0.7 (95% CI 0.6, 0.7) to 2.6 (95% CI 2.5, 2.7) visits/person-year, and hospitalization increased from 5.4 (95% CI 4.8, 5.9) to 12.3 (95% CI 10.1, 14.6) admissions/100 person-years for medical-surgical reasons and from 8.6 (95% CI 7.9, 9.3) to 17.3 (95% CI 14.6, 20.0) admissions/100 person-years for psychiatric reasons. CONCLUSIONS:Across care types, health care utilization in prison and on release is elevated for people who experience imprisonment in Ontario, Canada. This may reflect high morbidity and suboptimal access to quality health care. Future research should identify reasons for increased use and interventions to improve care.