Individuals with SAMCs benefit from integrated medical and substance abuse treatment, and such an approach can be cost-effective. These findings are relevant given the high prevalence and cost of medical conditions among substance abuse patients, new developments in medications for addiction, and recent legislation on parity of substance abuse with other medical benefits.
Background The low influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) observed during the A(H3N2)-dominated 2017–2018 season may be due to vaccine virus adaptation to growth in eggs. We compared the effectiveness of cell-cultured and egg-based vaccines among Medicare beneficiaries. Methods Retrospective cohort study on Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years who received an influenza vaccine (cell-cultured, egg-based quadrivalent; egg-based high-dose, adjuvanted, or standard-dose trivalent) during the 2017–2018 season. We used Poisson regression to evaluate relative VE (RVE) in preventing influenza-related hospital encounters. Results Of >13 million beneficiaries, RVE for cell-cultured vaccines relative to egg-based quadrivalent vaccines was 10% (95% confidence interval [CI], 7%–13%). In a midseason interim analysis, this estimate was 16.5% (95% CI, 10.3%–22.2%). In a 5-way comparison, cell-cultured (RVE, 11%; 95% CI, 8%–14%) and egg-based high-dose (RVE, 9%; 95% CI, 7%–11%) vaccines were more effective than egg-based quadrivalent vaccines. Conclusions The modest VE difference between cell-cultured and egg-based vaccines only partially explains the low overall VE reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, suggesting that egg adaptation was not the main contributor to the low VE found among individuals aged ≥65 years. The midseason interim analysis we performed demonstrates that our methods can be used to evaluate VE actively during the influenza season.
• Create easily accessible tools for investigators to collect study data. These tools should be especially helpful to new investigators and others working with limited budgets.• Encourage focused and simplified data collection to reduce burden on investigators and practice-based clinicians to facilitate their participation in clinical research.• Improve data quality while controlling cost by providing uniform data descriptions and tools across NINDS-funded clinical studies.The anticipated benefits of the CDE Project include accelerating study start up and facilitating data sharing and aggregation. The standard definitions, measures, and templates should help researchers more rapidly assemble their data collection materials. When studies which have used the CDEs are complete, less effort should be required to transform the data into a common format for aggregation and to perform meta-analyses, as much of the data are defined the same way.
Our findings point to the importance of examining comorbid medical conditions and substance abuse in both primary and specialty care. Our findings regarding pain-related diagnoses among patients dependent on narcotic analgesics highlight the need for linkages between primary care and substance abuse treatment. Moreover, optimal treatment of many common medical disorders may require identification, intervention, and treatment of an underlying substance abuse disorder.
Background Around 50,000 influenza-associated deaths occur annually in the U.S., overwhelmingly among individuals ages >65 years. Although vaccination is the primary prevention tool, investigations have shown low vaccine effectiveness (VE) in recent years, particularly among the elderly. We analyzed the relative VE (RVE) of all influenza vaccines among Medicare beneficiaries ages >65 years to prevent influenza hospital encounters during the 2019-20 season. Methods Retrospective cohort study using Poisson regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Exposures included egg-based high-dose trivalent (HD-IIV3), egg-based adjuvanted trivalent (aIIV3), egg-based standard dose (SD) quadrivalent (IIV4), cell-based SD quadrivalent (cIIV4), and recombinant quadrivalent (RIV4) influenza vaccines. Results We studied 12.7 million vaccinated beneficiaries. Following IPTW, cohorts were well balanced for all covariates and health-seeking behavior indicators. In the adjusted analysis, RIV4 (RVE 13.3%, 95% CI 7.4%, 18.9%), aIIV3 (RVE 8.2%, 95% CI 4.2%, 12.0%), and HD-IIV3 (RVE 6.8%, 95% CI 3.3%, 10.1%) were significantly more effective in preventing hospital encounters than the reference egg-based SD IIV4, while cIIV4 was not significantly more effective than IIV4 (RVE 2.8%, 95% CI -2.8%, 8.2%). Our results were consistent across all analyses. Conclusions In this influenza B-Victoria and A(H1N1)-dominated season, RIV4 was moderately more effective than other vaccines, while the HD-IIV3 and aIIV3 were more effective than the IIV4 vaccines, highlighting the contributions of antigen amount and adjuvant use to VE. Egg adaptation likely did not substantially affect our RVE evaluation. Our findings, specific to the 2019-20 season, should be evaluated in other studies using virological case confirmation.
Summary Background A high-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine was licensed in 2009 by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on the basis of serological criteria. We sought to establish whether high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine was more effective for prevention of influenza-related visits and hospital admissions in US Medicare beneficiaries than was standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, we identified Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older who received high-dose or standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccines from community pharmacies that offered both vaccines during the 2012–13 influenza season. Outcomes were defined with billing codes on Medicare claims. The primary outcome was probable influenza infection, defined by receipt of a rapid influenza test followed by dispensing of the neuraminidase inhibitor oseltamivir. The secondary outcome was a hospital or emergency department visit, listing a Medicare billing code for influenza. We estimated relative vaccine effectiveness by comparing outcome rates in Medicare beneficiaries during periods of high influenza circulation. Univariate and multivariate Poisson regression models were used for analyses. Findings Between Aug 1, 2012 and Jan 31, 2013, we studied 929 730 recipients of high-dose vaccine and 1 615 545 recipients of standard-dose vaccine. Participants enrolled in each cohort were well balanced with respect to age and presence of underlying medical disorders. The high-dose vaccine (1·30 outcomes per 10 000 person-weeks) was 22% (95% CI 15–29) more effective than the standard-dose vaccine (1·01 outcomes per 10 000 person-weeks) for prevention of probable influenza infections (rapid influenza test followed by oseltamivir treatment) and 22% (95% CI 16–27%) more effective for prevention of influenza hospital admissions (0·86 outcomes per 10 000 person-weeks in the high-dose cohort vs 1·10 outcomes per 10 000 person-weeks in the standard-dose cohort). Interpretation Our retrospective cohort study in US Medicare beneficiaries shows that, in people 65 years of age and older, high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine was significantly more effective than standard-dose vaccine in prevention of influenza-related medical encounters. Additionally, the large population in our study enabled us to show, for the first time, a significant reduction in influenza-related hospital admissions in high-dose compared to standard-dose vaccine recipients, an outcome not shown in randomised studies. These results provide important new information to be considered by policy makers recommending influenza vaccinations for elderly people. Funding FDA and the office of the Assistant Secretary of Planning and Evaluation.
Background Studies among individuals ages ≥65 years have found a moderately higher relative vaccine effectiveness (RVE) for the high-dose (HD) influenza vaccine compared with standard-dose (SD) products for most seasons. Studies during the A(H3N2)-dominated 2017–2018 season showed slightly higher RVE for the cell-cultured vaccine compared with SD egg-based vaccines. We investigated the RVE of influenza vaccines among Medicare beneficiaries ages ≥65 years during the 2018–2019 season. Methods This is a retrospective cohort study using inverse probability of treatment weighting and Poisson regression to evaluate RVE in preventing influenza hospital encounters. Results Among 12 777 214 beneficiaries, the egg-based adjuvanted (RVE, 7.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.9%–11.4%) and HD (RVE, 4.9%; 95% CI, 1.7%–8.1%) vaccines were marginally more effective than the egg-based quadrivalent vaccines. The cell-cultured quadrivalent vaccine was not significantly more effective than the egg-based quadrivalent vaccine (RVE, 2.5%; 95% CI, −2.4% to 7.3%). Conclusions We did not find major effectiveness differences between licensed vaccines used among the elderly during the 2018–2019 season. Consistent with prior research, we found that the egg-based adjuvanted and HD vaccines were slightly more effective than the egg-based quadrivalent vaccines.
BackgroundUnhealthy alcohol use is a major contributor to the global burden of disease and injury. The US Preventive Services Task Force has recommended alcohol screening and intervention in general medical settings since 2004. Yet less than one in six US adults report health care professionals discussing alcohol with them. Little is known about methods for increasing implementation; different staffing models may be related to implementation effectiveness. This implementation trial compared delivery of alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to specialty treatment (SBIRT) by physicians versus non-physician providers receiving training, technical assistance, and feedback reports.MethodsThe study was a cluster randomized implementation trial (ADVISe [Alcohol Drinking as a Vital Sign]). Within a private, integrated health care system, 54 adult primary care clinics were stratified by medical center and randomly assigned in blocked groups of three to SBIRT by physicians (PCP arm) versus non-physician providers and medical assistants (NPP and MA arm), versus usual care (Control arm). NIH-recommended screening questions were added to the electronic health record (EHR) to facilitate SBIRT. We examined screening and brief intervention and referral rates by arm. We also examined patient-, physician-, and system-level factors affecting screening rates and, among those who screened positive, rates of brief intervention and referral to treatment.ResultsScreening rates were highest in the NPP and MA arm (51 %); followed by the PCP arm (9 %) and the Control arm (3.5 %). Screening increased over the 12 months after training in the NPP and MA arm but remained stable in the PCP arm. The PCP arm had higher brief intervention and referral rates (44 %) among patients screening positive than either the NPP and MA arm (3.4 %) or the Control arm (2.7 %). Higher ratio of MAs to physicians was related to higher screening rates in the NPP and MA arm and longer appointment times to screening and intervention rates in the PCP arm.ConclusionFindings suggest that time frames longer than 12 months may be required for full SBIRT implementation. Screening by MAs with intervention and referral by physicians as needed can be a feasible model for increasing the implementation of this critical and under-utilized preventive health service within currently predominant primary care models.Trial registration: Clinical Trials NCT01135654
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.