Priyanka Gaitonde1, Laura M Bozzi2, Fadia T Shaya2. 1. Department of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, 220 Arch Street, 12th Floor, Baltimore, MD 21201. Electronic address: priyanka.gaitonde@umaryland.edu. 2. Department of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, 220 Arch Street, 12th Floor, Baltimore, MD 21201.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We examined the treatment patterns among adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and identified factors influencing access to traditional and biological disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). METHODS: We analyzed visits recorded in the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2005 to 2014 with a RA diagnosis. The primary outcome was DMARD use (traditional and/or biological). We included prescriptions of all RA-related treatments such as traditional and biological DMARDs, glucocorticoids, gold preparations, immunosuppressants, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Covariates in the logistic regression models included age, gender, race/ethnicity, type of health care coverage, provider type, geographic region, and number of comorbidities. RESULTS: Among 1405 visits with a RA diagnosis, 60.4% (n = 807) were prescribed DMARDs and 23.8% (n = 334) biological DMARDs. In fully adjusted models, females have 1.57 times higher odds of any DMARD use (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02-2.46). Also, Medicare beneficiaries as compared to privately insured have 2.31 times higher odds of receiving any DMARDs (95% CI: 1.40-3.82), while visits with specialist vs. general physician are 2.38 times more associated with any DMARD use (95% CI: 1.37-4.14). For biological DMARDs, Medicare beneficiaries were at 2.58 times higher odds (95% CI: 1.42-4.70) than privately insured, while visits with specialist are at 3.37 times higher odds than general physician (95% CI: 1.40-8.23). CONCLUSION: Visits with a specialist and Medicare beneficiaries were significantly associated with any DMARD or biological DMARD use. Additionally, contrary to prior evidence, race/ethnicity was not associated with any DMARD or biological DMARD use, which may indicate reduction in disparity of treatment access.
OBJECTIVE: We examined the treatment patterns among adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and identified factors influencing access to traditional and biological disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). METHODS: We analyzed visits recorded in the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2005 to 2014 with a RA diagnosis. The primary outcome was DMARD use (traditional and/or biological). We included prescriptions of all RA-related treatments such as traditional and biological DMARDs, glucocorticoids, gold preparations, immunosuppressants, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Covariates in the logistic regression models included age, gender, race/ethnicity, type of health care coverage, provider type, geographic region, and number of comorbidities. RESULTS: Among 1405 visits with a RA diagnosis, 60.4% (n = 807) were prescribed DMARDs and 23.8% (n = 334) biological DMARDs. In fully adjusted models, females have 1.57 times higher odds of any DMARD use (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02-2.46). Also, Medicare beneficiaries as compared to privately insured have 2.31 times higher odds of receiving any DMARDs (95% CI: 1.40-3.82), while visits with specialist vs. general physician are 2.38 times more associated with any DMARD use (95% CI: 1.37-4.14). For biological DMARDs, Medicare beneficiaries were at 2.58 times higher odds (95% CI: 1.42-4.70) than privately insured, while visits with specialist are at 3.37 times higher odds than general physician (95% CI: 1.40-8.23). CONCLUSION: Visits with a specialist and Medicare beneficiaries were significantly associated with any DMARD or biological DMARD use. Additionally, contrary to prior evidence, race/ethnicity was not associated with any DMARD or biological DMARD use, which may indicate reduction in disparity of treatment access.
Authors: Leslie R Harrold; J Timothy Harrington; Jeffrey R Curtis; Daniel E Furst; Mary Jane Bentley; Ying Shan; George Reed; Joel Kremer; Jeffrey D Greenberg Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2012-03
Authors: Gabriela Schmajuk; Amal N Trivedi; Daniel H Solomon; Edward Yelin; Laura Trupin; Eliza F Chakravarty; Jinoos Yazdany Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-02-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Daniel H Solomon; John Z Ayanian; Ed Yelin; Tamara Shaykevich; M Alan Brookhart; Jeffrey N Katz Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Charles G Helmick; David T Felson; Reva C Lawrence; Sherine Gabriel; Rosemarie Hirsch; C Kent Kwoh; Matthew H Liang; Hilal Maradit Kremers; Maureen D Mayes; Peter A Merkel; Stanley R Pillemer; John D Reveille; John H Stone Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2008-01
Authors: Gabriela Schmajuk; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Jeffrey N Katz; Michael E Weinblatt; Soko Setoguchi; Jerry Avorn; Raisa Levin; Daniel H Solomon Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2007-08-15
Authors: Jie Zhang; Fenglong Xie; Elizabeth Delzell; Lang Chen; Meredith L Kilgore; Huifeng Yun; Kenneth G Saag; James D Lewis; Jeffrey R Curtis Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Jasvinder A Singh; Kenneth G Saag; S Louis Bridges; Elie A Akl; Raveendhara R Bannuru; Matthew C Sullivan; Elizaveta Vaysbrot; Christine McNaughton; Mikala Osani; Robert H Shmerling; Jeffrey R Curtis; Daniel E Furst; Deborah Parks; Arthur Kavanaugh; James O'Dell; Charles King; Amye Leong; Eric L Matteson; John T Schousboe; Barbara Drevlow; Seth Ginsberg; James Grober; E William St Clair; Elizabeth Tindall; Amy S Miller; Timothy McAlindon Journal: Arthritis Rheumatol Date: 2015-11-06 Impact factor: 10.995
Authors: Daniel H Solomon; Edward Yelin; Jeffrey N Katz; Bing Lu; Tamara Shaykevich; John Z Ayanian Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2013-03-18 Impact factor: 5.156