Joel H Rubenstein1,2,3, Heiko Pohl4,5, Megan A Adams1,2,3, Eve Kerr1,2,3, Robert Holleman1, Sandeep Vijan1,2,3, Jason A Dominitz6,7, John M Inadomi7, Dawn Provenzale8,9, Joseph Francis10, Sameer D Saini1,2,3. 1. Center for Clinical Management Research, Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 3. Institute of Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 4. White River Junction Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont, USA. 5. Division of Gastroenterology, Dartmouth Medical School, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA. 6. VA Puget Sound Healthcare System, Seattle, Washington, USA. 7. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Washing Medical School, Seattle, Washington, USA. 8. Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 9. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Duke University Medical School, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 10. Veterans Health Administration, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Americans undergo ∼7 million esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs) annually, and one-third of Medicare beneficiaries undergo a repeat EGD within 3 years. As many as 43% of these repeat EGDs are inappropriate. We aimed to determine the rate of repeat inappropriate EGD within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), and identify factors associated with repeat EGD. METHODS: We conducted retrospective analyses of Veterans undergoing an index EGD at 159 VHA facilities between 1 January 2003 and 30 June 2007. We excluded Veterans without regular use of VHA for health care or 5 years of follow-up. Appropriateness of repeat EGDs was classified based on diagnostic and procedure codes into three categories: Likely Appropriate, Possible Overuse, and Probable Overuse. The proportion of repeat EGDs in each category was tabulated. Multilevel logistic regression was performed to estimate the impact of patient-level and site-level factors on the odds of repeat EGD. RESULTS: Of the 235,855 included Veterans, 85,690 (36.3%) underwent a repeat EGD within 5 years. Of the repeat EGDs, 42,412 (49.5%) were Likely Appropriate, 35,503 (41.4%) represented Possible Overuse, and 7,756 (9.1%) represented Probable Overuse. Patients with more frequent encounters with primary care providers and access to facilities performing EGD and with greater complexity of services were more likely to receive repeat EGD, regardless of whether the repeat EGD was appropriate or overuse. Women were slightly more likely to undergo repeat EGD in Probable Overuse situations. CONCLUSIONS: Overuse of repeat EGD is common in VHA despite the absence of financial incentives that promote overuse. Efforts are needed to better understand the motivations for overuse and barriers to appropriate use, and to promote appropriate use of repeat EGD.
OBJECTIVES: Americans undergo ∼7 million esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs) annually, and one-third of Medicare beneficiaries undergo a repeat EGD within 3 years. As many as 43% of these repeat EGDs are inappropriate. We aimed to determine the rate of repeat inappropriate EGD within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), and identify factors associated with repeat EGD. METHODS: We conducted retrospective analyses of Veterans undergoing an index EGD at 159 VHA facilities between 1 January 2003 and 30 June 2007. We excluded Veterans without regular use of VHA for health care or 5 years of follow-up. Appropriateness of repeat EGDs was classified based on diagnostic and procedure codes into three categories: Likely Appropriate, Possible Overuse, and Probable Overuse. The proportion of repeat EGDs in each category was tabulated. Multilevel logistic regression was performed to estimate the impact of patient-level and site-level factors on the odds of repeat EGD. RESULTS: Of the 235,855 included Veterans, 85,690 (36.3%) underwent a repeat EGD within 5 years. Of the repeat EGDs, 42,412 (49.5%) were Likely Appropriate, 35,503 (41.4%) represented Possible Overuse, and 7,756 (9.1%) represented Probable Overuse. Patients with more frequent encounters with primary care providers and access to facilities performing EGD and with greater complexity of services were more likely to receive repeat EGD, regardless of whether the repeat EGD was appropriate or overuse. Women were slightly more likely to undergo repeat EGD in Probable Overuse situations. CONCLUSIONS: Overuse of repeat EGD is common in VHA despite the absence of financial incentives that promote overuse. Efforts are needed to better understand the motivations for overuse and barriers to appropriate use, and to promote appropriate use of repeat EGD.
Authors: M R Chassin; J Kosecoff; R E Park; C M Winslow; K L Kahn; N J Merrick; J Keesey; A Fink; D H Solomon; R H Brook Journal: JAMA Date: 1987-11-13 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Aaron L Schwartz; Bruce E Landon; Adam G Elshaug; Michael E Chernew; J Michael McWilliams Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Nastazja Dagny Pilonis; Sarah Killcoyne; W Keith Tan; Maria O'Donovan; Shalini Malhotra; Monika Tripathi; Ahmad Miremadi; Irene Debiram-Beecham; Tara Evans; Rosemary Phillips; Danielle L Morris; Craig Vickery; Jon Harrison; Massimiliano di Pietro; Jacobo Ortiz-Fernandez-Sordo; Rehan Haidry; Abigail Kerridge; Peter D Sasieni; Rebecca C Fitzgerald Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Elissa M Ozanne; Elisabeth R Silver; Sameer D Saini; Joel H Rubenstein; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Nicole Bowers; Sarah Xinhui Tan; John M Inadomi; Chin Hur Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 12.045
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