Thomas R Radomski1,2, Xinhua Zhao3, Carolyn T Thorpe3,4, Joshua M Thorpe3,4, Jennifer G Naples3,4,5, Maria K Mor3,6, Chester B Good3,7,4,8, Michael J Fine3,7, Walid F Gellad3,7. 1. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, University Drive, 151C, Pittsburgh, PA, 15240, USA. radomskitr@upmc.edu. 2. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. radomskitr@upmc.edu. 3. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, University Drive, 151C, Pittsburgh, PA, 15240, USA. 4. Department of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, University of Pittsburgh School of Pharmacy, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 5. Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 6. Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 7. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 8. Pharmacy Benefits Management Services, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Hines, IL, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Veterans commonly receive care from both Veterans Health Administration (VA) and non-VA sources (i.e., dual use). A major challenge in comparing health outcomes between dual users and VA-predominant users is applying an accurate method of risk adjustment. OBJECTIVE: To determine how different comorbidity indices affect the association between patterns of dual use and health outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 316,775 community-dwelling Veterans (≥65 years) with type 2 diabetes who were enrolled in VA and fee-for-service Medicare from 2008 to 2010. METHODS: We determined the associations between dual use and death or diabetes-related hospitalization in FY 2010 using multivariable models incorporating claims-based (Elixhauser) or medication-based (RxRisk-V) risk adjustment. Dual use was classified using four previously identified groups of health services users: 1) VA-predominant, 2) VA + Medicare visits and labs, 3) VA + Medicare test strips, and 4) VA + Medicare medications. KEY RESULTS: Controlling for Elixhauser comorbidities, dual-use groups 2-4 had significantly decreased odds of death or hospitalization compared to VA-predominant users. Controlling for RxRisk-V comorbidities, groups 2-4 had increased odds of death compared to VA-predominant users, but variable odds of hospitalization, with group 2 having increased odds (OR 1.06, CI 1.04-1.09), while groups 3 (OR 0.96, CI 0.94-0.99) and 4 (OR 0.93, CI 0.89-0.97) had decreased odds. CONCLUSIONS: The method of risk adjustment drastically influences the direction of effect in health outcomes among dual users of VA and Medicare. These findings underscore the need for standardized and reliable risk adjustment methods that are not susceptible to measurement differences across different health systems.
BACKGROUND: Veterans commonly receive care from both Veterans Health Administration (VA) and non-VA sources (i.e., dual use). A major challenge in comparing health outcomes between dual users and VA-predominant users is applying an accurate method of risk adjustment. OBJECTIVE: To determine how different comorbidity indices affect the association between patterns of dual use and health outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 316,775 community-dwelling Veterans (≥65 years) with type 2 diabetes who were enrolled in VA and fee-for-service Medicare from 2008 to 2010. METHODS: We determined the associations between dual use and death or diabetes-related hospitalization in FY 2010 using multivariable models incorporating claims-based (Elixhauser) or medication-based (RxRisk-V) risk adjustment. Dual use was classified using four previously identified groups of health services users: 1) VA-predominant, 2) VA + Medicare visits and labs, 3) VA + Medicare test strips, and 4) VA + Medicare medications. KEY RESULTS: Controlling for Elixhauser comorbidities, dual-use groups 2-4 had significantly decreased odds of death or hospitalization compared to VA-predominant users. Controlling for RxRisk-V comorbidities, groups 2-4 had increased odds of death compared to VA-predominant users, but variable odds of hospitalization, with group 2 having increased odds (OR 1.06, CI 1.04-1.09), while groups 3 (OR 0.96, CI 0.94-0.99) and 4 (OR 0.93, CI 0.89-0.97) had decreased odds. CONCLUSIONS: The method of risk adjustment drastically influences the direction of effect in health outcomes among dual users of VA and Medicare. These findings underscore the need for standardized and reliable risk adjustment methods that are not susceptible to measurement differences across different health systems.
Entities:
Keywords:
Medicare; Veterans; diabetes; health services research; outcomes
Authors: Joseph Menzin; Jonathan R Korn; Joseph Cohen; Francis Lobo; Bin Zhang; Mark Friedman; Peter J Neumann Journal: J Manag Care Pharm Date: 2010-05
Authors: Huanguang Jia; Yu Zheng; Dean M Reker; Diane C Cowper; Samuel S Wu; W Bruce Vogel; Gail C Young; Pamela W Duncan Journal: Stroke Date: 2006-12-28 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Denise M Hynes; Kristin Koelling; Kevin Stroupe; Noreen Arnold; Katherine Mallin; Min-Woong Sohn; Frances M Weaver; Larry Manheim; Linda Kok Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Chuan-Fen Liu; Cory Bolkan; Domin Chan; Elizabeth M Yano; Lisa V Rubenstein; Edmund F Chaney Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-12-20 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Thomas R Radomski; Xinhua Zhao; Joseph T Hanlon; Joshua M Thorpe; Carolyn T Thorpe; Jennifer G Naples; Florentina E Sileanu; John P Cashy; Jennifer A Hale; Maria K Mor; Leslie R M Hausmann; Julie M Donohue; Katie J Suda; Kevin T Stroupe; Chester B Good; Michael J Fine; Walid F Gellad Journal: Healthc (Amst) Date: 2019-04-26
Authors: Alexis K Barrett; John P Cashy; Carolyn T Thorpe; Jennifer A Hale; Kangho Suh; Bruce L Lambert; William Galanter; Jeffrey A Linder; Gordon D Schiff; Walid F Gellad Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2022-01-06 Impact factor: 6.473
Authors: Andrea L Nevedal; Todd H Wagner; Laura S Ellerbe; Steven M Asch; Christopher J Koenig Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-01-25 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Ron Carico; Xinhua Zhao; Carolyn T Thorpe; Joshua M Thorpe; Florentina E Sileanu; John P Cashy; Jennifer A Hale; Maria K Mor; Thomas R Radomski; Leslie R M Hausmann; Julie M Donohue; Katie J Suda; Kevin Stroupe; Joseph T Hanlon; Chester B Good; Michael J Fine; Walid F Gellad Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2018-10-09 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Thomas R Radomski; Robert Feldman; Yan Huang; Florentina E Sileanu; Carolyn T Thorpe; Joshua M Thorpe; Michael J Fine; Walid F Gellad Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-09-01