Receipt of Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs Among Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis in Medicare Managed Care Plans

Stanford University, Department of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, 1000 Welch Rd, Ste 203, Stanford, CA 94304, USA.
JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association (Impact Factor: 30.39). 02/2011; 305(5):480-6. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2011.67
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In 2005, the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) introduced a quality measure to assess the receipt of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
To identify sociodemographic, community, and health plan factors associated with DMARD receipt among Medicare managed care enrollees.
We analyzed individual-level HEDIS data for 93,143 patients who were at least 65 years old with at least 2 diagnoses of RA within a measurement year (during 2005-2008). Logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations were used to determine factors associated with DMARD receipt and logistic regression was used to adjust health plan performance for case mix.
Receipt or nonreceipt of DMARD.
The mean age of patients was 74 years; 75% were women and 82% were white. Overall performance on the HEDIS measure for RA was 59% in 2005, increasing to 67% in 2008 (P for trend <.001). The largest difference in performance was based on age: patients aged 85 years and older had a 30 percentage point lower rate of DMARD receipt (95% confidence interval [CI], -29 to -32 points; P < .001), compared with patients 65 to 69 years of age, even after adjusting for other factors. Lower percentage point rates were also found for patients who were men (-3 points; 95% CI, -5 to -2 points; P < .001), of black race (-4 points; 95% CI, -6 to -2 points; P < .001), with low personal income (-6 points; 95% CI, -8 to -5 points; P < .001), with the lowest zip code-based socioeconomic status (-4 points; 95% CI, -6 to 2 points; P < .001), or enrolled in for-profit health plans (-4 points; 95% CI, -7 to 0 points; P < .001); and in the Middle Atlantic region (-7 points; 95% CI, -13 to -2 points; P < .001) and South Atlantic regions (-11 points; 95% CI, -20 to -3 points; P < .001) as compared with the Pacific region. Performance varied widely by health plan, ranging from 16% to 87%.
Among Medicare managed care enrollees carrying a diagnosis of RA between 2005 and 2008, 63% received a DMARD. Receipt of DMARDs varied based on demographic factors, socioeconomic status, geographic location, and health plan.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES:: This article is intended to update case managers on recent advances in comparative effectiveness research (CER) led by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The article explores potential implications and applications of CER findings to case management practice. PRIMARY PRACTICE SETTINGS:: All case management settings. FINDINGS/CONCLUSIONS:: An ongoing national movement to advance CER is intended to provide health care professionals with answers to questions about which diagnostic methods, therapies, devices, and services, among the available alternatives for a given disease or condition, may be most effective and safe for individual patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR CASE MANAGEMENT:: Knowledge and application of CER findings may benefit case managers in their roles of improving resource utilization, controlling costs, providing stewardship, coordinating care, educating patients, and promoting treatment adherence and self-sufficiency. The findings from a 2013 study on the comparative effectiveness of outpatient case management programs have implications for improving case management models, reinforcing standards in the profession, and advancing research in the field. Continuing education on CER is important for promoting positive values and appropriate applications of its findings to case management practice.
    Professional case management 01/2013; 18(4):168-179. DOI:10.1097/NCM.0b013e3182901e57
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To explore how effectively information presentation formats used in a patient decision aid communicated the ability of a disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug to slow the rate of progression of rheumatoid arthritis related structural joint damage (SJD). 91 first year psychology students and 91 RA patients participated in a prospective randomized, single blind, factorial experimental design evaluating the effect of four information formats on: satisfaction with risk communication, verbatim and gist recall of a hypothetical anti-rheumatic drug's ability to slow the rate of progression of SJD. Both groups underestimated the hypothetical drug's ability to slow SJD. Formats that supported the narrative statement with a reinforcing graphic element resulted in recall closer to the true value. Comparison of the results from testing of RA patients and college students were remarkably similar across formats. Rate of progression as communicated by narrative statement plus a graphic element (i.e. speedometer metaphor or pictograph) aided recall better than a narrative statement alone. Our results suggest that testing decision aid components with non-patients may provide data generalizable to patient populations. Graphics must be used carefully in patient decision aids as they can enhance recall, but may also introduce unintended recall bias.
    Patient Education and Counseling 07/2011; 86(3):329-34. DOI:10.1016/j.pec.2011.06.001 · 2.60 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Modelling cost-effectiveness of new drugs for RA has become increasingly prevalent and sophisticated. This situation has arisen largely because regulatory agencies, such as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, have demanded models from industry and have commissioned independent models. Many technical aspects of health economic models have converged—yet the results of models differ greatly. These differences can be accounted for in large part by differences in assumptions about the nature of patients likely to be treated; likely treatment sequences; likely responses to treatment; likely continuation on drug and likely disease progression, in particular. Such parameters cannot be fixed and evolve with changing practice and are ideally captured by contemporary data. Importantly, data from the local setting to which a health economic problem is applied are necessary, but in the absence of ideal sources, for the many contributions needed, considerable differences in opinion and biases are commonplace. In the final analysis, all models are just that, models, and as such an approximation of real life. Thus, although considerable heat is generated during debates about model parameters, model outputs may just yield sufficient light for regulatory agencies allocating resources.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England) 09/2011; 50 Suppl 4(suppl 4):iv48-iv52. DOI:10.1093/rheumatology/ker246 · 4.44 Impact Factor


Available from