While quality lupus care is associated with lower lupus-related damage, the impact of access and process quality measures on other lupus outcomes remains unclear. Given high acute care in young adults, our objective was to evaluate two process quality measures, visit-based retention in lupus care and receipt of lupus-specific serologic testing, and associations with subsequent acute care use.
Methods
This cohort study used a 20% national sample of young adult (ages 18–35) Medicare beneficiaries with lupus to first measure visit-based retention in rheumatology care and receipt of ≥1 complement or dsDNA test over 1 year. Acute care use (Emergency Department visits and hospitalizations) was then assessed in the subsequent 6 months. Associations of visit-based retention and serologic testing with acute care were evaluated with Cox regressions.
Results
Among 1036 young adults with lupus, acute care use was very high – nearly 60% at 6 months. Observed acute care-free survival time was longer in patients who had visit-based retention (154 vs 104 days, p = 0.02) or serologic testing (166 vs 101 days, p = 0.002). Only 28% of beneficiaries had serologic testing, but this was associated with 21% lower incidence of acute care (aHR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65, 0.97) after adjustment; visit-based retention was not associated with acute care after adjustment.
Conclusion
Receipt of complement or dsDNA antibody testing, a lupus-specific care quality indicator, was associated with reduced acute care use in young adults. Improving lupus care quality measures, like complement or dsDNA testing, may improve lupus outcomes including reduced acute care use.
KernderARichterJGFischer-BetzR, et al.Quality of care predicts outcome in systemic lupus erythematosus: a cross-sectional analysis of a German long-term study (LuLa cohort). Lupus2020; 29: 136–143.
2.
YazdanyJTrupinLSchmajukG, et al.Quality of care in systemic lupus erythematosus: the association between process and outcome measures in the Lupus Outcomes Study. BMJ Qual Saf2014; 23: 659–666.
3.
DemasKLCostenbaderKH. Disparities in lupus care and outcomes. Curr Opin Rheumatol2009; 21: 102–109.
GardnerEMMcLeesMPSteinerJF, et al.The spectrum of engagement in HIV care and its relevance to test-and-treat strategies for prevention of HIV infection. Clin Infect Dis2011; 52: 793–800.
6.
BartelsCMRosenthalAWangX, et al.Investigating lupus retention in care to inform interventions for disparities reduction: an observational cohort study. Arthritis Res Ther2020; 22: 35.
7.
SchletzbaumMPowellWRGargS, et al.Retention in rheumatology care and receipt of lupus-specific serologic testing among young adults with systemic lupus erythematosus: a medicare retention in care cohort study. Arthritis Rheumatol2022; 74, [abstract].
8.
YazdanyJPanopalisPGillisJZ, et al.A quality indicator set for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum2009; 61: 370–377.
9.
AroraSYazdanyJ. Use of quality measures to identify disparities in health care for systemic lupus erythematosus. Rheum Dis Clin N Am2020; 46: 623–638.
10.
MoscaMBombardieriS. Disease-specific quality indicators, guidelines, and outcome measures in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Clin Exp Rheumatol2007; 25: 107–113.
11.
HollanderMCSageJMGreenlerAJ, et al.International consensus for provisions of quality-driven care in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Care Res2013; 65: 1416–1423.
12.
ChakravartyEFBushTMManziS, et al.Prevalence of adult systemic lupus erythematosus in California and Pennsylvania in 2000: estimates obtained using hospitalization data. Arthritis Rheum2007; 56: 2092–2094.
13.
BartelsCMChodaraAChenY, et al.One quarter of Medicare hospitalizations in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus readmitted within thirty days. Semin Arthritis Rheum2021; 51: 477–485.
14.
PanopalisPGillisJZYazdanyJ, et al.Frequent use of the emergency department among persons with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Care Res2010; 62: 401–408.
15.
TonnerCTrupinLYazdanyJ, et al.Role of community and individual characteristics in physician visits for persons with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Care Res2010; 62: 888–895.
16.
AmbroseNMorganTAGallowayJ, et al.Differences in disease phenotype and severity in SLE across age groups. Lupus2016; 25: 1542–1550.
17.
HershAOvon SchevenEYazdanyJ, et al.Differences in long-term disease activity and treatment of adult patients with childhood- and adult-onset systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum2009; 61: 13–20.
18.
TuckerLBUribeAGFernandezM, et al.Adolescent onset of lupus results in more aggressive disease and worse outcomes: results of a nested matched case-control study within LUMINA, a multiethnic US cohort (LUMINA LVII). Lupus2008; 17: 314–322.
19.
NajjarRAlexanderSAHughesGC, et al.Predictors of thirty-day hospital readmissions in systemic lupus erythematosus in the United States: a nationwide study. Arthritis Care Res2023; 75: 989–997.
20.
HanlyJGThompsonKSkedgelC. Identification of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus in administrative healthcare databases. Lupus2014; 23: 1377–1382.
21.
JarrinOFNyandegeANGrafovaIB, et al.Validity of race and ethnicity codes in medicare administrative data compared with gold-standard self-reported race collected during routine home health care visits. Med Care2020; 58: e1–e8.
KindAJHJencksSBrockJ, et al.Neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage and 30-day rehospitalization: a retrospective cohort study. Ann Intern Med2014; 161: 765–774.
25.
KindAJHBuckinghamWR. Making neighborhood-disadvantage metrics accessible - the neighborhood atlas. N Engl J Med2018; 378: 2456–2458.
26.
PopeGCKautterJEllisRP, et al.Risk adjustment of Medicare capitation payments using the CMS-HCC model. Health Care Financ Rev2004; 25: 119–141.
27.
ElixhauserASteinerCHarrisDR, et al.Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care1998; 36: 8–27.
ChibnikLBMassarottiEMCostenbaderKH. Identification and validation of lupus nephritis cases using administrative data. Lupus2010; 19: 741–743.
30.
JoyceATIacovielloJMNagS, et al.End-stage renal disease-associated managed care costs among patients with and without diabetes. Diabetes Care2004; 27: 2829–2835.
31.
RebholzCMCoreshJBallewSH, et al.Kidney failure and ESRD in the atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC) study: comparing ascertainment of treated and untreated kidney failure in a cohort study. Am J Kidney Dis2015; 66: 231–239.
32.
HahnBHMcMahonMAWilkinsonA, et al.American College of Rheumatology guidelines for screening, treatment, and management of lupus nephritis. Arthritis Care Res2012; 64: 797–808.
33.
National Uniform Claim Committee (NUCC). Health care provider taxonomy code set, Version 22.0. https://taxonomy.nucc.org/ (accessed 5 February 2022).
PowellWRKaiksowFAKindAJH, et al.What is an observation stay? Evaluating the use of hospital observation stays in Medicare. J Am Geriatr Soc2020; 68: 1568–1572.
Lapointe-ShawLBouckZHowellNA, et al.Mediation analysis with a time-to-event outcome: a review of use and reporting in healthcare research. BMC Med Res Methodol2018; 18: 118.
38.
ValeriLVanderWeeleTJ. SAS macro for causal mediation analysis with survival data. Epidemiology2015; 26, pp: e23–e24.
39.
MugaveroMJLinHYAllisonJJ, et al.Racial disparities in HIV virologic failure: do missed visits matter?J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr2009; 50: 100–108.
40.
YajimaNTsujimotoYFukumaS, et al.The development of quality indicators for systemic lupus erythematosus using electronic health data: a modified RAND appropriateness method. Mod Rheumatol2020; 30: 525–532.
