20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      International Journal of COPD (submit here)

      This international, peer-reviewed Open Access journal by Dove Medical Press focuses on pathophysiological processes underlying Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) interventions, patient focused education, and self-management protocols. Sign up for email alerts here.

      39,063 Monthly downloads/views I 2.893 Impact Factor I 5.2 CiteScore I 1.16 Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) I 0.804 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Medication management patterns among Medicare beneficiaries with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who initiate nebulized arformoterol treatment

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose: Global evidence-based treatment strategies for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recommend using long-acting bronchodilators (LABDs) as maintenance therapy. However, COPD patients are often undertreated. We examined COPD treatment patterns among Medicare beneficiaries who initiated arformoterol tartrate, a nebulized long-acting beta 2 agonist (LABA), and identified the predictors of initiation.

          Methods: Using a 100% sample of Medicare administrative data, we identified beneficiaries with a COPD diagnosis (ICD-9 490–492.xx, 494.xx, 496.xx) between 2010 and 2014 who had ≥1 year of continuous enrollment in Parts A, B, and D, and ≥2 COPD-related outpatient visits within 30 days or ≥1 hospitalization(s). After applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, three cohorts were identified: (1) study group beneficiaries who received nebulized arformoterol (n=11,886), (2) a subset of the study group with no LABD use 90 days prior to initiating arformoterol (n=5,542), and (3) control group beneficiaries with no nebulized LABA use (n=220,429). Logistic regression was used to evaluate predictors of arformoterol initiation. Odds ratios (ORs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and p values were computed.

          Results: Among arformoterol users, 47% (n=5,542) had received no LABDs 90 days prior to initiating arformoterol. These beneficiaries were being treated with a nebulized (50%) or inhaled (37%) short-acting bronchodilator or a systemic corticosteroid (46%), and many received antibiotics (37%). Compared to controls, beneficiaries who initiated arformoterol were significantly more likely to have had an exacerbation, a COPD-related hospitalization, and a pulmonologist or respiratory therapist visit prior to initiation (all p<0.05). Beneficiaries with moderate/severe psychiatric comorbidity or dual-eligible status were significantly less likely to initiate arformoterol, as compared to controls (all p<0.05).

          Conclusion: Medicare beneficiaries who initiated nebulized arformoterol therapy had more exacerbations and hospitalizations than controls 90 days prior to initiation. Findings revealed inadequate use of maintenance medications, suggesting a lack of compliance with evidence-based treatment guidelines.

          Most cited references65

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Diagnosis and management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a clinical practice guideline update from the American College of Physicians, American College of Chest Physicians, American Thoracic Society, and European Respiratory Society.

          This guideline is an official statement of the American College of Physicians (ACP), American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP), American Thoracic Society (ATS), and European Respiratory Society (ERS). It represents an update of the 2007 ACP clinical practice guideline on diagnosis and management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and is intended for clinicians who manage patients with COPD. This guideline addresses the value of history and physical examination for predicting airflow obstruction; the value of spirometry for screening or diagnosis of COPD; and COPD management strategies, specifically evaluation of various inhaled therapies (anticholinergics, long-acting β-agonists, and corticosteroids), pulmonary rehabilitation programs, and supplemental oxygen therapy. This guideline is based on a targeted literature update from March 2007 to December 2009 to evaluate the evidence and update the 2007 ACP clinical practice guideline on diagnosis and management of stable COPD. RECOMMENDATION 1: ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS recommend that spirometry should be obtained to diagnose airflow obstruction in patients with respiratory symptoms (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). Spirometry should not be used to screen for airflow obstruction in individuals without respiratory symptoms (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2: For stable COPD patients with respiratory symptoms and FEV(1) between 60% and 80% predicted, ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS suggest that treatment with inhaled bronchodilators may be used (Grade: weak recommendation, low-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: For stable COPD patients with respiratory symptoms and FEV(1) 50% predicted. (Grade: weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 7: ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS recommend that clinicians should prescribe continuous oxygen therapy in patients with COPD who have severe resting hypoxemia (Pao(2) ≤55 mm Hg or Spo(2) ≤88%) (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Economic Burden of COPD in the Presence of Comorbidities

            BACKGROUND: The morbidity and mortality associated with COPD exacts a considerable economic burden. Comorbidities in COPD are associated with poor health outcomes and increased costs. Our objective was to assess the impact of comorbidities on COPD-associated costs in a large administrative claims dataset. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of data from the Truven Health MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and the MarketScan Medicare Supplemental Databases from January 1, 2009, to September 30, 2012. Resource consumption was measured from the index date (date of first occurrence of non-rule-out COPD diagnosis) to 360 days after the index date. Resource use (all-cause and disease-specific [ie, COPD- or asthma-related] ED visits, hospitalizations, office visits, other outpatient visits, and total length of hospital stay) and health-care costs (all-cause and disease-specific costs for ED visits, hospitalizations, office visits, and other outpatient visits and medical, prescription, and total health-care costs) were assessed. Generalized linear models were used to evaluate the impact of comorbidities on total health-care costs, adjusting for age, sex, geographic location, baseline health-care use, employment status, and index COPD medication. RESULTS: Among 183,681 patients with COPD, the most common comorbidities were cardiovascular disease (34.8%), diabetes (22.8%), asthma (14.7%), and anemia (14.2%). Most patients (52.8%) had one or two comorbidities of interest. The average all-cause total health-care costs from the index date to 360 days after the index date were highest for patients with chronic kidney disease ($41,288) and anemia ($38,870). The impact on total health-care costs was greatest for anemia ($10,762 more, on average, than a patient with COPD without anemia). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis demonstrated that high resource use and costs were associated with COPD and multiple comorbidities.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A review of national guidelines for management of COPD in Europe

              The quality of care can be improved by the development and implementation of evidence-based treatment guidelines. Different national guidelines for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exist in Europe and relevant differences may exist among them. This was an evaluation of COPD treatment guidelines published in Europe and Russia in the past 7 years. Each guideline was reviewed in detail and information about the most important aspects of patient diagnosis, risk stratification and pharmacotherapy was extracted following a standardised process. Guidelines were available from the Czech Republic, England and Wales, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Spain and Sweden. The treatment goals, criteria for COPD diagnosis, consideration of comorbidities in treatment selection and support for use of long-acting bronchodilators, were similar across treatment guidelines. There were differences in measures used for stratification of disease severity, consideration of patient phenotypes, criteria for the use of inhaled corticosteroids and recommendations for other medications (e.g. theophylline and mucolytics) in addition to bronchodilators. There is generally good agreement on treatment goals, criteria for diagnosis of COPD and use of long-acting bronchodilators as the cornerstone of treatment among guidelines for COPD management in Europe and Russia. However, there are differences in the definitions of patient subgroups and other recommended treatments.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                COPD
                copd
                International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
                Dove
                1176-9106
                1178-2005
                15 May 2019
                2019
                : 14
                : 1019-1031
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Center, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women’s Hospital , Boston, MA, USA
                [2 ]Global Strategy, Advance Health Solutions, LLC , New York, NY, USA
                [3 ]School of Professional Studies, Columbia University , New York, NY, USA
                [4 ]Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California San Diego , La Jolla, CA, USA
                [5 ]Global Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc , Marlborough, MA, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Maryam NavaieGlobal Strategy Advance Health Solutions, LLC , 5 Penn Plaza, Floor 23, New York, NY, USATel +1 212 835 1510Fax +1 212 849 6901Email mnavaie@ 123456advancehealthsolutions.com
                Article
                199251
                10.2147/COPD.S199251
                6526678
                da7627bd-5463-4592-99ae-b8d1d67e4c73
                © 2019 Celli et al.

                This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms ( https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).

                History
                : 22 December 2018
                : 25 April 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 4, References: 78, Pages: 13
                Categories
                Original Research

                Respiratory medicine
                long-acting beta2-agonists,arformoterol,nebulized therapy,copd,medicare,treatment patterns

                Comments

                Comment on this article