Correlation of disease comorbidity with prescribed treatment among insured U.S. lymphedema patients.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to define the current forms of treatment in a contemporary population of lymphedema (LED) patients for LED related to breast cancer, the most prevalently diagnosed LED comorbidity in Western countries, and phlebolymphedema with venous leg ulcer (PLEDU), a sequela of chronic venous disease. The goals of LED therapy are to reduce edema, thereby improving function and related symptoms, and to improve skin integrity to prevent development of infection. Treatment is generally nonsurgical: conservative care, including complex physical therapy, manual lymphatic drainage, and compression bandaging; or pneumatic compression device (PCD) therapy by a simple nonprogrammable device or an advanced programmable device.

METHODS

To determine the frequency of individual types of treatment for LED and their relationship to breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) and PLEDU, we queried claims from a deidentified Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant commercial administrative insurance database with >165 million members. A total of 26,902 patients identified with LED who had been enrolled with continuous medical benefits for 12 months before and after the index date for the complete years 2012 through 2016 were separated into four treatment categories: no treatment, conservative care, simple PCD (SPCD), and advanced PCD. LED treatment was related to the BCRL and PLEDU comorbidities.

RESULTS

BCRL patients, who represented 32.1% of all study patients, made up 41% of all patients receiving conservative care and 24% of patients receiving PCD therapy. By contrast, PLEDU patients (9.6% of study patients) were proportionally under-represented in the conservative care group (7.8%) but composed a disproportionately high share of the PCD therapy group (17.7%). PLEDU patients represented 23.5% of all LED patients prescribed SPCD therapy, whereas BCRL patients composed 10.3% of total LED patient SPCD prescriptions (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis of a large health care administrative database showed clear differences between the way BCRL and PLEDU patients are treated. Compared with BCRL patients, PLEDU patients were less likely to receive conservative care and more likely to be prescribed SPCDs for pneumatic compression therapy. These differences suggest that lymphatic therapy may be undervalued for treatment of chronic venous swelling and prevention and treatment of PLEDU.