Aims: To examine factors that affect cost-related medication non-adherence (CRN), defined as taking medication less than as prescribed because of cost, among adults with diabetes and to determine their relative contribution in explaining CRN. Methods: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data for 2013–2014 were used to identify individuals with diabetes and their CRN. We modeled CRN as a function of financial factors, regimen complexity, and other contextual factors including diabetes care, lifestyle, and health factors. Dominance analysis was performed to rank these factors by relative importance. Results: CRN among U.S. adults with diabetes was 16.5%. Respondents with annual income <$50,000 and without health insurance were more likely to report CRN, compared to those with income ≥$50,000 and those with insurance, respectively. Insulin users had 1.24 times higher risk of CRN compared to those not on insulin. Contextual factors that significantly affected CRN included diabetes care factors, lifestyle factors, and comorbid depression, arthritis, and COPD/asthma. Dominance analysis showed health insurance was the most important factor for respondents <65 and depression was the most important factor for respondents ≥65. Conclusions: In addition to traditional risk factors of CRN, compliance with annual recommendations for diabetes and healthy lifestyle were associated with lower CRN. Policies and social supports that address these contextual factors may help improve CRN.

No abstract

No abstract

OBJECTIVE We sought to evaluate the role healthcare providers play in carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) acquisition among hospitalized patients. DESIGN A 1:4 case-control study with incidence density sampling. SETTING Academic healthcare center with regular CRE perirectal screening in high-risk units. PATIENTS We included case patients with ≥1 negative CRE test followed by positive culture with a length of stay (LOS) >9 days. For controls, we included patients with ≥2 negative CRE tests and assignment to the same unit set as case patients with a LOS >9 days. METHODS Controls were time-matched to each case patient. Case exposure was evaluated between days 2 and 9 before positive culture and control evaluation was based on maximizing overlap with the case window. Exposure sources were all CRE-colonized or -infected patients. Nonphysician providers were compared between study patients and sources during their evaluation windows. Dichotomous and continuous exposures were developed from the number of source-shared providers and were used in univariate and multivariate regression. RESULTS In total, 121 cases and 484 controls were included. Multivariate analysis showed odds of dichotomous exposure (≥1 source-shared provider) of 2.27 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-4.15; P=.006) for case patients compared to controls. Multivariate continuous exposure showed odds of 1.02 (95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P=.009) for case patients compared to controls. CONCLUSIONS Patients who acquire CRE during hospitalization are more likely to receive care from a provider caring for a patient with CRE than those patients who do not acquire CRE. These data support the importance of hand hygiene and cohorting measures for CRE patients to reduce transmission risk. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1329-1334.