Dataset Information

Trends in healthcare visits and antimicrobial prescriptions for acute infectious diarrhea in individuals aged 65 years or younger in Japan from 2013 to 2018 based on administrative claims database: a retrospective observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The inappropriate use of antimicrobials for acute infectious diarrhea is widespread and leads to the problem of antimicrobial resistance. To improve the use of antimicrobials, it is first necessary to understand the actual situation of diarrheal disease and to identify potential targets for intervention. This study aimed to investigate the recent epidemiological characteristics of and antimicrobial prescriptions for acute infectious diarrhea in Japan.

Methods

This was a retrospective observational study of outpatients aged 0-65 years, separated into children (age 0-17 years) and adults (age 18-65 years), diagnosed with acute infectious diarrhea, using the administrative claims database of the Japan Medical Data Center from 2013 to 2018. We evaluated the number of eligible visits/number of database registrants (defined as the visit rate). The analysis of the antimicrobial prescription rate was restricted to otherwise healthy individuals diagnosed with acute infectious diarrhea alone by excluding patients with multiple disease diagnoses and with medical backgrounds of chronic bowel diseases or immunocompromised conditions. We further classified them by diagnosis of bacterial or nonbacterial acute infectious diarrhea.

Results

The total number of eligible visits for acute infectious diarrhea was 2,600,065. The visit rate, calculated based on the number of eligible visits by database registrants, was higher in children (boys, 0.264; girls, 0.229) than in adults (men, 0.070; women, 0.079), with peaks in early summer and winter. The peaks for visits in adults lagged those of children. In total, 482,484 visits were analyzed to determine the antimicrobial prescription rate; 456,655 (94.6%) were diagnosed with nonbacterial acute infectious diarrhea. Compared with children (boys, 0.305; girls, 0.304), the antimicrobial prescription rate was higher in adults, and there were differences between sexes in adults (men, 0.465; women, 0.408). Fosfomycin and fluoroquinolone were most frequently used for nonbacterial acute infectious diarrhea in children (44.1%) and adults (50.3%), respectively.

Conclusions

These results revealed overprescription of antimicrobials for acute infectious diarrhea in this administrative claims database in Japan and contribute to the development of antimicrobial stewardship strategies and the identification of targets for efficiently reducing inappropriate antimicrobial use.

SUBMITTER: Ono A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8454076 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesAdministrative claims data sets are often used for emergency care research and policy investigations of healthcare resource utilization, acute care practices, and evaluation of quality improvement interventions. Despite the high profile of emergency department (ED) visits in analyses using administrative claims, little work has evaluated the degree to which existing definitions based on claims data accurately captures conventionally defined hospital-based ED services. We sought to construct an operational definition for ED visitation using a comprehensive Medicare data set and to compare this definition to existing operational definitions used by researchers and policymakers.MethodsWe examined four operational definitions of an ED visit commonly used by researchers and policymakers using a 20% sample of the 2012 Medicare Chronic Condition Warehouse (CCW) data set. The CCW data set included all Part A (hospital) and Part B (hospital outpatient, physician) claims for a nationally representative sample of continuously enrolled Medicare fee-for-services beneficiaries. Three definitions were based on published research or existing quality metrics including: 1) provider claims-based definition, 2) facility claims-based definition, and 3) CMS Research Data Assistance Center (ResDAC) definition. In addition, we developed a fourth operational definition (Yale definition) that sought to incorporate additional coding rules for identifying ED visits. We report levels of agreement and disagreement among the four definitions.ResultsOf 10,717,786 beneficiaries included in the sample data set, 22% had evidence of ED use during the study year under any of the ED visit definitions. The definition using provider claims identified a total of 4,199,148 ED visits, the facility definition 4,795,057 visits, the ResDAC definition 5,278,980 ED visits, and the Yale definition 5,192,235 ED visits. The Yale definition identified a statistically different (p < 0.05) collection of ED visits than all other definitions including 17% more ED visits than the provider definition and 2% fewer visits than the ResDAC definition. Differences in ED visitation counts between each definition occurred for several reasons including the inclusion of critical care or observation services in the ED, discrepancies between facility and provider billing regulations, and operational decisions of each definition.ConclusionCurrent operational definitions of ED visitation using administrative claims produce different estimates of ED visitation based on the underlying assumptions applied to billing data and data set availability. Future analyses using administrative claims data should seek to validate specific definitions and inform the development of a consistent, consensus ED visitation definitions to standardize research reporting and the interpretation of policy interventions.

Project description:ImportanceCurrently, there are limited published data regarding resource use and spending on cancer care in the US.ObjectiveTo characterize the most frequent medical services provided and the associated spending for privately insured patients with cancer in the US.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used data from the MarketScan database for the calendar year 2018 from a sample of 27.1 million privately insured individuals, including patients with a diagnosis of the 15 most prevalent cancers, predominantly from large insurers and self-insured employers. Overall societal health care spending was estimated for each cancer type by multiplying the mean total spending per patient (estimated from MarketScan) by the number of privately insured patients living with that cancer in 2018, as reported by the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Analyses were performed from February 1, 2018, to July 8, 2021.ExposuresEvaluation and management as prescribed by treating care team.Main outcomes and measuresCurrent Procedural Terminology and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes based on cancer diagnosis code.ResultsThe estimated cost of cancer care in 2018 for 402 115 patients with the 15 most prevalent cancer types was approximately $156.2 billion for privately insured adults younger than 65 years in the US. There were a total of 38.4 million documented procedure codes for 15 cancers in the MarketScan database, totaling $10.8 billion. Patients with breast cancer contributed the greatest total number of services (10.9 million [28.4%]), followed by those with colorectal cancer (3.9 million [10.2%]) and prostate cancer (3.6 million [9.4%]). Pathology and laboratory tests contributed the highest number of services performed (11.7 million [30.5%]), followed by medical services (6.3 million [16.4%]) and medical supplies and nonphysician services (6.1 million [15.9%]). The costliest cancers were those of the breast ($3.4 billion [31.5%]), followed by lung ($1.1 billion [10.2%]) and colorectum ($1.1 billion [10.2%]). Medical supplies and nonphysician services contributed the highest total spent ($4.0 billion [37.0%]), followed by radiology ($2.1 billion [19.4%]) and surgery ($1.8 billion [16.7%]).Conclusions and relevanceThis analysis suggests that patients with breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers had the greatest number of services performed, particularly for pathology and laboratory tests, whereas patients with breast, lung, lymphoma, and colorectal cancer incurred the greatest costs, particularly for medical supplies and nonphysician services. The cost of cancer care in 2018 for the 15 most prevalent cancer types was estimated to be approximately $156.2 billion for privately insured adults younger than 65 years in the US.