Association of Race and Ethnicity With Prescription of SGLT2 Inhibitors and GLP1 Receptor Agonists Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in the Veterans Health Administration System

Q1Q1Pacientes con Diabetes tipo 2Importance: Novel therapies for type 2 diabetes can reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease and chronic kidney disease progression. The equitability of these agents’ prescription across racial and ethnic groups has not been well-evaluated. Objective : To investigate differences in the prescription of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) among adult patients with type 2 diabetes by racial and ethnic groups. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional analysis of data from the US Veterans Health Administration’s Corporate Data Warehouse. The sample included adult patients with type 2 diabetes and at least 2 primary care clinic visits from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2020. Exposures Self-identified race and self-identified ethnicity: Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcomes were prevalent SGLT2i or GLP-1 RA prescription, defined as any active prescription during the study period. Results: Among 1 197 914 patients (mean age, 68 years; 96% men; 1% American Indian or Alaska Native, 2% Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Other Pacific Islander, 20% Black or African American, 71% White, and 7% of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity), 10.7% and 7.7% were prescribed an SGLT2i or a GLP-1 RA, respectively. Prescription rates for SGLT2i and GLP-1 RA, respectively, were 11% and 8.4% among American Indian or Alaska Native patients; 11.8% and 8% among Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Other Pacific Islander patients; 8.8% and 6.1% among Black or African American patients; and 11.3% and 8.2% among White patients, respectively. Prescription rates for SGLT2i and GLP-1 RA, respectively, were 11% and 7.1% among Hispanic or Latino patients and 10.7% and 7.8% among non-Hispanic or Latino patients. After accounting for patient- and system-level factors, all racial groups had significantly lower odds of SGLT2i and GLP-1 RA prescription compared with White patients. Black patients had the lowest odds of prescription compared with White patients (adjusted odds ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.71-0.74] for SGLT2i and 0.64 [95% CI, 0.63-0.66] for GLP-1 RA). Patients of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity had significantly lower odds of prescription (0.90 [95% CI, 0.88-0.93] for SGLT2i and 0.88 [95% CI, 0.85-0.91] for GLP-1 RA) compared with non-Hispanic or Latino patients. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with type 2 diabetes in the Veterans Health Administration system during 2019 and 2020, prescription rates of SGLT2i and GLP-1 RA medications were low, and individuals of several different racial groups and those of Hispanic ethnicity had statistically significantly lower odds of receiving prescriptions for these medications compared with individuals of White race and non-Hispanic ethnicity. Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms underlying these differences in rates of prescribing and the potential relationship with differences in clinical outcomes.https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9852-749XRevista Internacional - IndexadaA1N

Changes in Preventative Health Care After Medicaid Expansion

BackgroundMedicaid expansion substantially increased health insurance coverage, but its effect on the delivery of preventative health care is unclear.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the impact of Medicaid expansion on the receipt of 15 different measures of preventive care including cancer screening, cardiovascular risk reduction, diabetes care, and other primary care measures.Research designWe performed serial cross-sectional analysis of Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey data from 2012 to 2017. We used a quasi-experimental design with difference-in-differences (DiD) analyses to examine changes in preventative health care delivery over 3 time periods in Medicaid expansion compared with nonexpansion states.SubjectsWe included low-income (<138% federal poverty level) nonelderly (age younger than 65 y) adults residing in 46 US states.MeasuresOur predictor was residing in a Medicaid expansion state (24 states) versus nonexpansion state (19 states). Our primary outcomes were preventative health care services, which we categorized as cancer screening (breast cancer, cervical cancer, and colorectal cancer); cardiovascular risk reduction (serum cholesterol screening in low-risk groups, serum cholesterol monitoring in high-risk groups, and aspirin use); diabetes care (serum cholesterol monitoring, hemoglobin A1c monitoring, foot examination, eye examination, and influenza vaccination, and pneumonia vaccination); and other primary care measures [influenza vaccination, alcohol use screening, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) screening].ResultsSurvey responses from 500,495 low-income nonelderly adults from 2012 to 2017 were included in the analysis, representing 68.2 million US adults per year. Of the 15 outcomes evaluated, we did not detect statistically significant differences in cancer screening (3 outcomes), cholesterol screening or monitoring (2 outcomes), diabetes care (6 outcomes), or alcohol use screening (1 outcome) in expansion compared with nonexpansion states. Aspirin use (DiD 8.8%, P<0.001), influenza vaccination (DiD 1.4%, P=0.016), and HIV screening (DiD 1.9%, P=0.004) increased in expansion states compared with nonexpansion states.ConclusionsMedicaid expansion was associated with an increase in aspirin use, influenza vaccination, and HIV screening in expansion states. Despite improvements in access to care, including health insurance, having a primary care doctor, and routine visits, Medicaid expansion was not associated with improvements in cancer screening, cholesterol monitoring, diabetes care, or alcohol use screening. Our findings highlight implementation challenges in delivering high-quality primary care to low-income populations

Receipt of preventive health services and current cannabis users

Substance use is associated with greater barriers and reduced access to care. Little research, however, has examined the relationship between cannabis use and receipt of preventive health services. Using data from the 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we examined the association between current cannabis use and receipt of 12 preventive health services, adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and access to care. In analyses that adjusted for sociodemographic factors and access to care, participants with current cannabis use had lower odds of being vaccinated for influenza (AOR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.54-0.83) and higher odds of ever receiving HPV vaccination (AOR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.06-2.96) and HIV screening (AOR = 2.34, 95% CI = 1.88-2.92) compared with those without cannabis use. Among the 12 preventive services examined, we found three differences in receipt of preventive services by cannabis use status. Cannabis use does not appear to be associated with significant underuse of preventive services

Preventive Care Delivery After the Veterans Choice Program

IntroductionThe Veterans Choice Program expanded Veteran access to community care. The Veterans Choice Program may negatively impact the receipt of preventive care services owing to care fragmentation. This study assesses 10 measures of preventive care in Veterans with the Department of Veterans Affairs coverage before and after the Veterans Choice Program.MethodsThe study population included Veterans who responded to the National Health Interview Survey during the 2 time periods before and after Veterans Choice Program implementation: January 2011-October 2014 and November 2015-December 2018. Outcomes were preventive care services categorized as cardiovascular risk reduction (cholesterol monitoring, blood pressure monitoring, aspirin use), infectious disease prevention (influenza vaccination and HIV testing), and diabetes care (fasting blood glucose monitoring, podiatry visits, ophthalmology visits, influenza vaccination, and pneumonia vaccination). Two different analyses were conducted: (1) unadjusted and multivariable-adjusted pre-post analysis and (2) difference-in-differences analyses. Analyses were conducted in 2019.ResultsMeasures of cardiovascular risk reduction and influenza vaccination were not statistically different before and after Veterans Choice Program implementation using the 2 different analytic approaches. In unadjusted pre-post analysis, after Veterans Choice Program implementation, Veterans with Veterans Affairs coverage had increased HIV testing (66.1%‒75.4%, p=0.008), podiatry visits (22.4%‒38.3%, p=0.01), and ophthalmology visits (62.2%‒77.2%, p=0.02). Using multivariable adjustment for participant sociodemographic factors, Veterans Choice Program implementation was associated with higher odds of podiatry visits (AOR=2.28, 95% CI=1.24, 4.20, p=0.009) and ophthalmology visits (AOR=2.11, 95% CI=1.13, 3.94, p=0.02) among Veterans with diabetes. In difference-in-differences analyses, Veterans Choice Program implementation was associated with increased podiatry visits (AOR=2.95, 95% CI=1.49, 5.83, p=0.002) among Veterans with diabetes and Veterans Affairs coverage compared with that among those with other coverage types, but no statistically significant effect was observed for ophthalmology visits.ConclusionsVeterans with Veterans Affairs coverage and diabetes had an increase in podiatry visits after Veterans Choice Program implementation. There was no evidence that Veterans Choice Program implementation had a negative impact on the receipt of preventive care services among Veterans with Veterans Affairs coverage