College of Pharmacy, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Nashville.
College of Graduate Health Sciences, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2021 Apr;27(4):497-506. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2021.27.4.497.
ICD-10-CM codes exist that facilitate provider designation of patients as "nonadherent to therapy"; however, it is unclear whether this label accurately reflects patient behavior according to widely accepted medication adherence metrics using pharmacy claims data. To determine the extent to which patients are accurately coded for and have calculated rates of nonadherence using ICD-10-CM codes and claims, respectively. This was a retrospective cohort study using commercial insurance and Medicare Advantage claims data from 2015 to 2016. The analysis focused on adults aged 18 years and older who had been diagnosed with and were being treated for hypertension and/or diabetes and had been coded as nonadherent by a provider during an outpatient encounter. Adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC]) to oral antihypertensive and/or antidiabetic therapy was calculated 6 months before and after the first nonadherence diagnosis identified in outpatient encounters, using 2 distinct calculation methods. Inferential statistics and multivariable logistic regression were used to determine predictors of coding agreement and changes in adherence after the nonadherence diagnosis controlling for available patient characteristics. A total of 1,142 patients who had been coded as nonadherent were identified, of which between 5.3% and 22.0% (depending on metric and condition) had PDCs before the nonadherence code deeming them adherent according to claims, conflicting with nonadherence diagnosis codes documented by their providers. Mean PDCs increased significantly (20.5%-24.3%, all < 0.001) among both conditions following the nonadherent code, as did the proportion adherent (PDC > 80%), irrespective of disease (all < 0.01). The odds of being correctly labeled nonadherent according to claims decreased with age (diabetes odds ratio [OR]: 0.82, 95% CI = 0.694-0.976; hypertension OR: 0.86, 95% CI = 0.773-0.944) but were higher among those taking more medications (diabetes OR: 2.97, 95% CI = 1.658-5.326; hypertension OR: 3.0, 95% CI = 2.095-4.305). Following the nonadherence coding, the odds of being adherent increased with age in both models (diabetes OR: 1.17, 95% CI = 1.012-1.363; hypertension OR: 1.13, 95% CI = 1.048-1.223) yet decreased with increasing medications (diabetes OR: 0.25, 95% CI = 0.138-0.468; hypertension OR: 0.47, 95% CI = 0.368-0.592) and were lower if the patient was observed to be nonadherent before the index encounter (diabetes OR: 0.33, 95% CI = 0.146-0.760; hypertension OR: 0.25, 95% CI = 0.152-0.423). In general, providers are properly classifying patients as nonadherent using ICD-10-CM codes, but additional assessment is needed to determine the reasons for the remaining mismatch between claims- and diagnosis-based nonadherence. In addition, the correct claims-based metric needs to be established to improve alignment with provider interpretation of patient medication use. No outside funding supported this study. Gatwood reports grants from GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Co., and AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. Kovesdy reports consulting fees from Amgen, Sanofi, Fresenius Medical Care, Keryx, Bayer, Abbott, Abbvie, Dr. Schar, Astra-Zeneca, Takeda, Tricida, and Reata and grants from Shire, outside the submitted work. The other authors have nothing to disclose. Findings described in this article were presented as a poster at the American College of Clinical Pharmacy Annual Meeting in New York City, October 2019.
ICD-10-CM 代码可用于方便地将患者指定为“治疗不依从”;然而,尚不清楚根据使用药房索赔数据的广泛接受的药物依从性指标,该标签是否准确反映了患者的行为。 目的是确定患者使用 ICD-10-CM 代码和索赔被准确编码和计算不依从率的程度。 这是一项回顾性队列研究,使用了 2015 年至 2016 年的商业保险和医疗保险优势索赔数据。该分析重点关注年龄在 18 岁及以上、被诊断患有高血压和/或糖尿病且在门诊就诊时被医生指定为不依从的成年人。使用两种不同的计算方法,在门诊就诊首次确定不依从诊断前 6 个月计算口服抗高血压和/或抗糖尿病治疗的依从性(覆盖天数比例 [PDC])。使用推断统计学和多变量逻辑回归来确定在控制可用患者特征的情况下,编码一致性和不依从诊断后依从性变化的预测因素。 确定了 1142 名被编码为不依从的患者,其中根据指标和疾病的不同,有 5.3%至 22.0%(取决于指标和疾病)的患者在被认定为依从的 PDC 之前有 PDC,与提供者记录的不依从诊断代码相矛盾。在两种情况下,不依从代码后平均 PDC 显著增加(20.5%-24.3%,均<0.001),同时符合疾病的 PDC 比例也有所增加(>80%),无论疾病如何(均<0.01)。根据索赔正确标记为不依从的可能性随着年龄的增长而降低(糖尿病比值比 [OR]:0.82,95%CI=0.694-0.976;高血压 OR:0.86,95%CI=0.773-0.944),但服用更多药物的患者的可能性更高(糖尿病 OR:2.97,95%CI=1.658-5.326;高血压 OR:3.0,95%CI=2.095-4.305)。在不依从编码后,在两个模型中,年龄越大,符合疾病的可能性就越大(糖尿病 OR:1.17,95%CI=1.012-1.363;高血压 OR:1.13,95%CI=1.048-1.223),但随着药物的增加而降低(糖尿病 OR:0.25,95%CI=0.138-0.468;高血压 OR:0.47,95%CI=0.368-0.592),如果在指数就诊前观察到患者不依从,则可能性更低(糖尿病 OR:0.33,95%CI=0.146-0.760;高血压 OR:0.25,95%CI=0.152-0.423)。 一般来说,医生使用 ICD-10-CM 代码正确地将患者归类为不依从,但需要进一步评估以确定索赔和诊断为不依从之间剩余差异的原因。此外,需要确定正确的基于索赔的度量标准,以提高与提供者对患者药物使用的解释的一致性。 这项研究没有外部资金支持。Gatwood 报告了与 GlaxoSmithKline、Merck & Co. 和 AstraZeneca 合作的拨款,这与提交的工作无关。Kovesdy 报告了 Amgen、Sanofi、Fresenius Medical Care、Keryx、Bayer、Abbott、Abbvie、Dr. Schar、Astra-Zeneca、Takeda、Tricida 和 Reata 的咨询费以及 Shire 的拨款,这与提交的工作无关。其他作者没有什么可透露的。本文介绍的研究结果在纽约市举行的美国临床药师协会年会上作为海报展示。