Hailu Cheng

Brigham and Women's Hospital , Boston, MA, United States

Are you Hailu Cheng?

Claim your profile

Publications (5)15.69 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many state Medicaid programs use prior authorization programs to limit spending on cyclooxygenase-2 selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (coxibs). However, the evidence base for the prior authorization criteria has not been examined previously. We determined whether prior authorization was required for coxibs in state Medicaid programs and collected data on what precise criteria needed to be met for a coxib prescription to be authorized. Prior authorization criteria were compared to clinical evidence regarding which patients are most likely to benefit from coxibs. By mid-2004, 35 states had implemented prior authorization requirements for coxibs. Of 5 major clinical factors that identify patients likely to benefit from coxibs, 18 states (51%) included all 5 factors and 9 states (26%) included 2 or fewer. Most states (33/35; 94%) required a previous trial of nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs before a coxib would be authorized. Several prior authorization programs included factors that had no connection to the clinical evidence. State Medicaid prior authorization policies for coxibs are heterogeneous in terms both of the criteria required to obtain a coxib and of the relationship of those criteria to clinical evidence. Development of clinically rational prescription drug policies should be a goal for all health insurers and represents an important priority for Medicare's prescription drug benefit program.
    Medical Care 08/2006; 44(7):658-63. · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess current osteoporosis treatment guidelines, studies of osteoporosis treatment, and interventions to improve osteoporosis treatment. We searched the medical literature for articles published between January 1, 1992, and December 31, 2003, and assessed all relevant articles using a structured data abstraction process. Because of substantial heterogeneity in study design, no attempt was made to summarize the data using meta-analytic techniques. Seventy-six articles met criteria for inclusion. Eighteen practice guidelines were studied. Most guidelines were consistent in key treatment recommendations. Among 18 studies of treatment rates in patients who had fractures, the weighted average varied from 22% for nonhormonal treatment to 19% for calcium. We found slightly higher treatment rates for patients taking oral glucocorticoids or for those older than 65 years. There were no consistent correlates of which patients received treatment. Six studies that examined treatment frequencies after bone densitometry all found that patients with lower bone mineral density were more likely to receive treatment. Most of the 8 interventions designed to improve osteoporosis treatment showed improvement in treatment rates; however, only 3 were randomized, and these showed the smallest effects. Frequency of treatment of osteoporosis in at-risk populations is low. However, our assessment of the literature revealed no clear and consistent predictors of undertreatment. Few carefully controlled interventions have been reported.
    Mayo Clinic Proceedings 03/2005; 80(2):194-202. · 5.79 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To identify potential obstacles to bone mineral density (BMD) testing, we performed a structured review of current osteoporosis screening guidelines, studies of BMD testing patterns, and interventions to increase BMD testing. We searched medline and HealthSTAR from 1992 through 2002 using appropriate search terms. Two authors examined all retrieved articles, and relevant studies were reviewed with a structured data abstraction form. A total of 235 articles were identified, and 51 met criteria for review: 24 practice guidelines, 22 studies of screening patterns, and 5 interventions designed to increase BMD rates. Of the practice guidelines, almost one half (47%) lacked a formal description of how they were developed, and recommendations for populations to screen varied widely. Screening frequencies among at-risk patients were low, ranging from 1% to 47%. Only eight studies assessed factors associated with BMD testing. Female patient gender, glucocorticoid dose, and rheumatologist care were positively associated with BMD testing; female physicians, rheumatologists, and physicians caring for more postmenopausal patients were more likely to test patients. Five articles described interventions to increase BMD testing rates, but only two tested for statistical significance and no firm conclusions can be drawn. This systematic review identified several possible contributors to suboptimal BMD testing rates. Osteoporosis screening guidelines lack uniformity in their development and content. While some patient and physician characteristics were found to be associated with BMD testing, few articles carefully assessed correlates of testing. Almost no interventions to improve BMD testing to screen for osteoporosis have been rigorously evaluated.
    Journal of General Internal Medicine 08/2004; 19(7):783-90. · 3.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:  To identify potential obstacles to bone mineral density (BMD) testing, we performed a structured review of current osteoporosis screening guidelines, studies of BMD testing patterns, and interventions to increase BMD testing.DESIGN:  We searched medline and HealthSTAR from 1992 through 2002 using appropriate search terms. Two authors examined all retrieved articles, and relevant studies were reviewed with a structured data abstraction form.MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:  A total of 235 articles were identified, and 51 met criteria for review: 24 practice guidelines, 22 studies of screening patterns, and 5 interventions designed to increase BMD rates. Of the practice guidelines, almost one half (47%) lacked a formal description of how they were developed, and recommendations for populations to screen varied widely. Screening frequencies among at-risk patients were low, ranging from 1% to 47%. Only eight studies assessed factors associated with BMD testing. Female patient gender, glucocorticoid dose, and rheumatologist care were positively associated with BMD testing; female physicians, rheumatologists, and physicians caring for more postmenopausal patients were more likely to test patients. Five articles described interventions to increase BMD testing rates, but only two tested for statistical significance and no firm conclusions can be drawn.CONCLUSIONS:  This systematic review identified several possible contributors to suboptimal BMD testing rates. Osteoporosis screening guidelines lack uniformity in their development and content. While some patient and physician characteristics were found to be associated with BMD testing, few articles carefully assessed correlates of testing. Almost no interventions to improve BMD testing to screen for osteoporosis have been rigorously evaluated.
    Journal of General Internal Medicine 06/2004; 19(7):783 - 790. · 3.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Evidence exists that many at-risk patients are not screened or receive appropriate therapy for osteoporosis. We reviewed studies of bone mineral density (BMD) testing and osteoporosis therapy to describe predictors associated with screening and treatment of osteoporosis. We performed a structured review, searching MEDLINE and HEALTHStar from 1992 through 2002 using appropriate terms. Two authors examined all retrieved articles, and relevant studies were reviewed with a structured data abstraction form. A total of 277 articles were identified, and 35 met criteria for this review. Of these, 22 described screening patterns and 28 described treatment patterns. Seventy-one percent (25 of 35) of papers examined correlates of either BMD testing or treatment, and half (51%, 18 of 35) used multivariable analyses. Male patient gender and lack of subspecialist care were consistently associated with a higher risk of not receiving BMD testing; male physicians, generalist doctors, and those caring for fewer postmenopausal patients were more likely not to test patients. Younger patients, men, patients without a history of fracture, and those without subspecialist care were at higher risk of not receiving pharmacologic treatments. Six studies that examined treatment frequencies after bone densitometry all found that patients with osteoporosis by bone densitometry were at lower risk of not receiving treatment. Although the current literature is limited by inconsistent inclusion of common covariates and a lack of multivariable analyses, information about patient and physician correlations of osteoporosis management should help inform future quality improvement initiatives.
    The Endocrinologist 02/2004; 14(2):70-75. · 0.12 Impact Factor