Variability in prescription drug expenditures explained by adjusted clinical groups (ACG) case-mix: A cross-sectional study of patient electronic records in primary care

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In view of rapidly increasing prescription costs, case-mix adjustment should be considered for effective control of costs. We have estimated the variability in pharmacy costs explained by ACG in centers using patient electronic records, profiled centers and physicians and analyzed the correlation between cost and quality of prescription.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We analyzed 65,630 patient records attending five primary care centers in Spain during 2005. Variables explored were age, gender, registered diagnosed episodes of care during 2005, total cost of prescriptions, physician and center. One ACG was assigned to each patient with ACG case-mix software version 7.1. In a two-part model, logistic regression was used to explain the incurrence of drug expenditure at the first stage and a linear mixed model that considered the multilevel structure of data modeled the cost, conditional upon incurring any expense. Risk and efficiency indexes in pharmacy cost adjusted for ACG were obtained for centers and physicians. Spearman rank correlation between physician expenditure, adjusted for ACG, and a prescription quality index was also obtained. Pediatric and adult data were analyzed separately.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>No prescription was recorded for 13% of adults and 39.6% of children. The proportion of variance of the incurrence of expenditure explained by ACGs was 0.29 in adults and 0.21 in children. For adults with prescriptions, the variance of cost explained by ACGs was 35.4%, by physician-center was 1.8% and age 10.5% (residual 52.3%). For children, ACGs explained 22.4% of cost and physician-center 10.9% (residual 66.7%). Center efficiency index for adults ranged 0.58 to 1.22 and for children 0.32 to 2.36.</p> <p>Spearman correlation between expenditure and prescription quality index was -0.36 in family physicians (p = 0.019, N = 41) and -0.52 in pediatricians (p = 0.08, N = 12).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In our setting, ACG is the variable studied that explains more variability in pharmacy cost in adults compared to physician and center. In children there is greater variability among physicians and centers not related to case-mix. In our sites, ACG is useful to profile physicians and centers using electronic records in real practical conditions. Physicians with lower pharmaceutical expenditure have higher scores for a prescription quality index.</p

The cost of large numbers of hypothesis tests on power, effect size and sample size

Advances in high-throughput biology and computer science are driving an exponential increase in the number of hypothesis tests in genomics and other scientific disciplines. Studies using current genotyping platforms frequently include a million or more tests. In addition to the monetary cost, this increase imposes a statistical cost owing to the multiple testing corrections needed to avoid large numbers of false-positive results. To safeguard against the resulting loss of power, some have suggested sample sizes on the order of tens of thousands that can be impractical for many diseases or may lower the quality of phenotypic measurements. This study examines the relationship between the number of tests on the one hand and power, detectable effect size or required sample size on the other. We show that once the number of tests is large, power can be maintained at a constant level, with comparatively small increases in the effect size or sample size. For example at the 0.05 significance level, a 13% increase in sample size is needed to maintain 80% power for ten million tests compared with one million tests, whereas a 70% increase in sample size is needed for 10 tests compared with a single test. Relative costs are less when measured by increases in the detectable effect size. We provide an interactive Excel calculator to compute power, effect size or sample size when comparing study designs or genome platforms involving different numbers of hypothesis tests. The results are reassuring in an era of extreme multiple testing

Factors related to high and low levels of drug adherence according to patients with type 2 diabetes

Objective Adherence to medication in patients with type 2 diabetes varies widely, yet the factors that influence adherence according to patients are not fully known. The aim of this study is to explore both factors related to high and lower levels of adherence that patients with type 2 diabetes experienced in their medication use. Setting Primary care in the Netherlands. Method Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were performed in 20 patients with type 2 diabetes. Interviews were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded and analysed using content analysis and constant comparison. Main outcome measure experiences and opinions of patients concerning factors related to high and lower levels of adherence. Results Comparable aspects influenced drug adherence in more and less adherent patients. Four aspects that influenced adherence to medication emerged from the interviews: (1) information about the prescribed medication, (2) experience with medication and complications with use, (3) social support for medication behaviour and (4) routines in medication behaviour. Experience with medication and social support for medication behaviour were related to high levels of adherence in some patients, and to lower levels of adherence in others. Complicated medication regimens were mainly related to lower adherence, while social support and routines in medication behaviour were related to higher adherence. Conclusions Routines in medication behaviour were related to higher drug adherence. Patient education should not only address information about the disease and medication, but also more practical issues concerning drug intake. Hence, to improve drug adherence in patients with type 2 diabetes, pharmaceutical care might be aimed at the counselling of patients to organise drug use in their daily schedule

Compliance and treatment satisfaction of post menopausal women treated for osteoporosis. Compliance with osteoporosis treatment

International audienceBackgroundAdherence to anti-osteoporosis treatments is poor, exposing treated women to increased fracture risk. Determinants of poor adherence are poorly understood. The study aims to determine physician- and patient- rated treatment compliance with osteoporosis treatments and to evaluate factors influencing compliance.MethodsThis was an observational, cross-sectional pharmacoepidemiological study with a randomly-selected sample of 420 GPs, 154 rheumatologists and 110 gynaecologists practicing in France. Investigators included post-menopausal women with a diagnosis of osteoporosis and a treatment initiated in the previous six months. Investigators completed a questionnaire on clinical features, treatments and medical history, and on patient compliance. Patients completed a questionnaire on sociodemographic features, lifestyle, attitudes and knowledge about osteoporosis, treatment compliance, treatment satisfaction and quality of life. Treatment compliance was evaluated with the Morisky Medication-taking Adherence Scale. Variables collected in the questionnaires were evaluated for association with compliance using multivariate logistic regression analysis.Results785 women were evaluated. Physicians considered 95.4% of the sample to be compliant, but only 65.5% of women considered themselves compliant. The correlation between patient and physician perceptions of compliance was low (κ: 0.11 [95% CI: 0.06 to 0.16]). Patient-rated compliance was highest for monthly bisphosphonates (79.7%) and lowest for hormone substitution therapy (50.0%). Six variables were associated with compliance: treatment administration frequency, perceptions of long-term treatment acceptability, perceptions of health consequences of osteoporosis, perceptions of knowledge about osteoporosis, exercise and mental quality of life.ConclusionCompliance to anti-osteoporosis treatments is poor. Reduction of dosing regimen frequency and patient education may be useful ways of improving compliance

Ambulatory oxygen: why do COPD patients not use their portable systems as prescribed? A qualitative study

Background: patients with COPD on long term oxygen therapy frequently do not adhere to their prescription, and they frequently do not use their ambulatory oxygen systems as intended. Reasons for this lack of adherence are not known. The aim of this study was to obtain in-depth information about perceptions and use of prescribed ambulatory oxygen systems from patients with COPD to inform ambulatory oxygen design, prescription and management.Methods: a qualitative design was used, involving semi-structured face-to-face interviews informed by a grounded theory approach. Twenty-seven UK community-dwelling COPD patients using NHS prescribed ambulatory systems were recruited. Ambulatory oxygen systems comprised cylinders weighing 3.4 kg, a shoulder bag and nasal cannulae.Results: participants reported that they: received no instruction on how to use ambulatory oxygen; were uncertain of the benefits; were afraid the system would run out while they were using it (due to lack of confidence in the cylinder gauge); were embarrassed at being seen with the system in public; and were unable to carry the system because of the cylinder weight. The essential role of carers was also highlighted, as participants with no immediate carers did not use ambulatory oxygen outside the house.Conclusions: these participants highlighted previously unreported problems that prevented them from using ambulatory oxygen as prescribed. Our novel findings point to: concerns with the lack of specific information provision; the perceived unreliability of the oxygen system; important carer issues surrounding managing and using ambulatory oxygen equipment. All of these issues, as well as previously reported problems with system weight and patient embarrassment, should be addressed to improve adherence to ambulatory oxygen prescription and enhance the physical and social benefits of maintaining mobility in this patient group. Increased user involvement in both system development and service provision planning, could have avoided many of the difficulties highlighted by this stud

ALMA, a new tool for the management of asthma patients in clinical practice: development, validation and initial clinical findings

BACKGROUND: Several instruments have been developed for measuring asthma control, but there is still a need to provide a structure for primary care asthma reviews. AIMS: The Active Life with Asthma (ALMA) tool was developed with the aim of structuring patient visits and assessing asthma treatment in primary care. The ability of ALMA to map out the care of asthma patients was evaluated and validated. METHODS: ALMA was developed with patient and clinical expert input. Questions were generated in focus groups and the resulting tool was subsequently validated by factor analysis in 1779 patients (1116 females) of mean age 51 years (range 18-89) in primary care. RESULTS: The ALMA tool includes 19 questions, 14 of which belong to a subset assessing asthma control. In this subset, factor analysis revealed three domains (factors): physical, psychological, and environmental triggers. Correlation with the Asthma Control Questionnaire was 0.72 and the Cronbach's alpha was 0.88. The test-retest reliability was 0.93. Of the 1779 patients tested with ALMA in primary care, 62% reported chest tightness, 30% nightly awakenings and 45% asthma breakthrough despite medication. CONCLUSIONS: The ALMA tool is useful as a follow-up instrument in clinical practice to structure patient visits and assess asthma treatment in primary care. The breadth of the questions and the pragmatic use in clinical practice also make it useful as an outcome measure