Next Article in Journal
Sex-Specific Association between Fasting Plasma Glucose and Serum Selenium Levels in Adults from Southern Mexico
Next Article in Special Issue
Sulphurous Crenotherapy Is Effective at Reducing Pain and Disability in Overweight/Obese Patients Affected by Chronic Low Back Pain from Spine Osteoarthritis
Previous Article in Journal
Effect of COVID-19-Induced Stress among Males on the Partner Relationship and Sexual Activity during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Healthcare
Volume 10
Issue 9
10.3390/healthcare10091664
healthcare-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

Exploratory Analysis of Outpatient Visits for US Adults Diagnosed with Lupus Erythematosus: Findings from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey 2006–2016

by
Salena Marie Preciado
1,
Khaled A. Elsaid
2,
Souhiela Fawaz
1,
Lawrence Brown
1,
Enrique Seoane-Vazquez
1,
Marc Fleming
1 and
Yun Wang
1,*
1
Department of Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy, School of Pharmacy, Chapman University, Irvine, CA 92618, USA
2
Department of Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, Chapman University, Irvine, CA 92618, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Healthcare 2022, 10(9), 1664; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10091664
Submission received: 25 July 2022 / Revised: 25 August 2022 / Accepted: 27 August 2022 / Published: 31 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rheumatic Diseases and Related Conditions in Healthcare)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The study aims to assess office-based visit trends for lupus patients and evaluate their medication burden, chronic conditions, and comorbidities. This cross-sectional study used data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS), a survey sample weighted to represent national estimates of outpatient visits. Adult patients diagnosed with lupus were included. Medications and comorbidities that were frequently recorded were identified and categorized. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were used to characterize visits by sex, age, race/ethnicity, insurance type, region, and reason for visit. Comorbidities were identified using diagnosis codes documented at each encounter. There were 27,029,228 visits for lupus patients from 2006 to 2016, and 87% them were on or were prescribed medications. Most visits were for female (88%), white (79%), non-Hispanic (88%) patients with private insurance (53%). The majority of patients were seen for a chronic routine problem (75%), and 29% had lupus as the primary diagnosis. Frequent medications prescribed were hydroxychloroquine (30%), prednisone (23%), multivitamins (14%), and furosemide (9%). Common comorbidities observed included arthritis (88%), hypertension (25%), and depression (13%). Prescription patterns are reflective of comorbidities associated with lupus. By assessing medications most frequently prescribed and comorbid conditions among lupus patients, we showcase the complexity of disease management and the need for strategies to improve care.

1. Introduction

Lupus erythematosus is a chronic multisystem autoimmune disease with variable clinical manifestations that include widespread inflammation in multiple organs. The United States (U.S.) has the highest recorded estimate of prevalence of lupus, which was discovered to be 241 per 100,000 persons [1,2]. Mortality rates of lupus have improved over the years [3]. However, reported rates of survival still remain half that of the aged-matched general population, ranging from 50% to 90%. There is a greater increase in risk among younger and ethnically diverse women [4,5], and there are significant geographic variations [6]. Lupus is typically managed with a combination of corticosteroids, anti-malarial agents, immunosuppressants, biologics, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). These medications help prevent disease flare-ups; however, successful lupus care is frequently associated with substantial drug-induced toxicity and treatment-related side effects, often leading to organ damage, infectious complications, and treatment-associated comorbidities [7,8].
With longer disease duration, treatment goals for lupus have changed. Attention is being paid to the reduction in therapy-related side effects and comorbidities [9,10]. The burden of comorbidities has been established in the literature [11,12]. Findings suggest that lupus patients have an increased risk of coexisting conditions, such as cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, malignancies, and pulmonary disorders [13]. Clinical guidelines recommend monitoring these comorbid conditions proactively by starting preventative treatments when necessary [13], although the presence of these other diseases may complicate the disease’s course and treatment plan [14].
The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) have published recommendations for the management of lupus erythematosus over the years [15,16]. These recommendations provide guidance for pharmacological treatment, the management of manifestations, and adjunct therapy. Improvements in research and patient care have modified the current treatment landscape, and therapy typically involves a wide range of drugs, including immunosuppressants, corticosteroids, antimalarials, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and biological agents [10]. The long-term use of these therapies can cause substantial morbidities, including gastrointestinal conditions, infections, pulmonary complications, and cardiovascular disease. Patients are often on multiple therapeutics to manage lupus and its associated comorbidities; thus, polypharmacy is of concern among this population [17]. Additionally, patients’ multiple morbidities may impact optimal treatment selection for the management of lupus and adjunct therapy.
Clinical guidelines have evolved; however, general knowledge of the real-world management of lupus patients is lacking. Limited studies exist on medication utilization. Recent manuscripts have been published on the Asia Pacific Lupus Collaboration cohort [18], German patients, and a U.S. cohort of a specific population of lupus patients from a single center, which was not representative of the national population [19]. Another study from the U.S. from 1993 to 2010 demonstrated the diversity of medications prescribed by physicians to manage lupus but found that first-line treatment of lupus remained consistent over those years [20]. Novel therapeutics, such as biologics, have been approved for the treatment of lupus; thus, updated assessments of treatments prescribed and encountered comorbidities remain necessary. This study aimed to assess trends in visits for patients diagnosed with lupus and characterize the medication burden and the main comorbidities complicating the disease’s course.

2. Materials and Methods

Data were obtained from NAMCS from 2006 to 2016. The NAMCS by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) is nationally representative of medical office visits from non-federally employed office-based physicians in the U.S., including specialists and primary care providers [21]. Sample weights were included in the analysis to adjust for the multistage sampling design and survey nonresponse; detailed information is provided on the CDC website [22].
Visits of adult patients (≥18 years) with a diagnosis of lupus erythematosus and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were captured using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revisions, clinical modification codes: ICD-9-CM (710.0, 695.4) and ICD-10-CM (M32, M32.0, M32.1, M32.8, M32.9, M32.10, L93, L93.0, L93.1, and L93.2) [23]. SLE is the most common type of lupus, but codes for lupus erythematosus (discoid and other) were also included for a more comprehensive sample. The study’s outcome variable was the medication prescribed or reported by the physician during the medical visit. Medications were identified using the CDC’s Ambulatory Care Drug Database system, which uses the Cerner Multum Lexicon Plus® database (Cerner Multum Inc., Denver, CO, USA) for identifying medications based on NCHS 5-digit generic codes [24]. The drug categories were determined using Multum’s third level therapeutic categories (Table S3). Information on up to 30 drugs and prescribing status was reported each visit. The dataset has up to five diagnosis codes listed per patient visit. Diagnosis codes were used to identify comorbidities using ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM codes and grouped by Multi-level Clinical Classification Software (CCS) categories provided by the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project [23] (Table S2). Patient demographics and clinical characteristics include age, sex, race, ethnicity, region, insurance type, reason for visit, chronic conditions, comorbidities, and medications prescribed.
National trends in outpatient visits for patients with lupus were assessed in the study period. Descriptive statistics for unweighted and weighted visits were calculated to examine characteristics of visits. Chi-square tests were performed to identify significant differences in visits between two consecutive time periods (2006–2010 and 2011–2016). Medications prescribed were compared to observe changes in therapy after the approval of belimumab, the first FDA approved biologic for treatment of lupus in 2011 [25]. Analyses were performed using R Programming, and significance was set to p < 0.05.

3. Results

During the study period, a total of 969 unweighted ambulatory visits, which corresponded to 27.18 million weighted visits, were identified for patients diagnosed with lupus. Visits varied by year, reaching a peak in 2011 (Figure S1). More visits for women and visits in the South were observed when comparing 2006–2010 to 2011–2016, but this was not significant. Patient visits were greater among women (n = 23.79 million; 88%) (Table 1). Most patients were white (n = 21.31 million; 79%), non-Hispanic (n = 24.02 million; 88%), aged 45–59 (n = 10.62 million; 39%), had private insurance (n = 14.34 million; 53%), and were living in urban metropolitan statistical areas (n = 25.41 million; 93%) in the South (n = 10.36 million; 38%). Less than one-third of visits (n = 7.95 million; 29%) involved a patient with a recorded primary lupus-related diagnosis. Most patients were seen for a chronic problem (n= 20.46 million; 75%). Bivariate analysis showed significant differences in insurance type and the major reason for visit when comparing the two-year periods (p < 0.05). There was an average ± SD of 5 ± 1.3 medications reported per visit.
Arthritis was the most common chronic condition reported among lupus patients (n = 23.82 million, 88%). Other commonly reported chronic conditions included hypertension (n = 6.89 million; 25%), depression (n = 3.47 million; 13%), and hyperlipidemia (n = 2.87 million; 11%). Nearly half of the patients had one reported chronic condition (n = 13.04 million; 48%), and 21% had two (n = 5.78 million) (Table 2). Common comorbidities identified during lupus visits included diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue (n = 14.54 million; 40%), diseases of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue (n = 5.41 million; 15%), and diseases of the circulatory system (n = 4.54 million; 12%) (Table 3).
From 2006 to 2016, the most frequently prescribed medications by drug category were centrally nervous system (CNS) drugs (n = 13.33 million; 15%), hormones (n = 9.92 million; 11%), cardiovascular agents (n = 8.50 million; 10%), and drugs categorized as other (n = 9.64 million; 11%). Significant differences were found in the reported numbers of anti-infectives, nutritional products, and drugs classified as other over the years. There was an increase in those medications from 2006–2010 to 2011–2016 (Figure 1). Biologicals were prescribed minimally (n = 362,170; 0.04%). The top medications prescribed in visits for lupus patients from 2006 to 2010 were prednisone (n = 2.00 million; 19%), hydroxychloroquine (n = 1.91 million; 18%), multivitamins (n = 864,744; 8%), esomeprazole (n = 692,747; 7%), and methotrexate (n = 691,950; 7%) (Table S3). From 2011 to 2016, the top medications prescribed were hydroxychloroquine (n = 6.22 million; 37%), prednisone (n = 4.15 million; 25%), multivitamins (n = 2.89 million; 17%), furosemide (n = 2.21 million; 13%), and folic acid (n = 1.47 million; 9%). Further, a significantly higher number of prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine than for other drugs was identified (p < 0.05).

4. Discussion

Lupus is predominantly seen among women, with a ratio of 9:1 compared to men. Our findings were consistent with this; however, the onset of lupus is commonly reported in women of childbearing age, whereas this analysis found that the majority of visits were among older patients aged 45–59 years. Although status of an initial diagnosis was not captured in this study, it is possible that it largely included women who were diagnosed at an earlier time, when the onset of the disease typically occurs. Another important finding was a significant increase in visits for women 45–59 years old in the study period. Although an older population likely with more comorbidities may be conducive to a greater number of medical visits, it only partially explains the increase observed in 2011–2016. Previous literature has reported late-onset lupus in women, which may be triggered by menopause or age-related changes to the immune system that impact cellular functions and may contribute to the development of lupus in older women [26,27].
The increase in visits seen after 2010 could also be related to other factors, such as the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010, which has had a substantial impact on access to healthcare [28]. The percentage of people without health insurance reached 16% in 2010 and declined to nearly 10% in 2016 [29]. The present study observed a much lower number of patients using self-pay as a form of payment in the second period: 5% in 2006–2010 decreased to 2% in 2011–2016. The introduction of ACA has made health care more accessible, particularly to low-income minorities, and may explain the significant association we observed between insurance type and time period [30].
Patients with lupus are three times more likely to suffer from multimorbidity [31], and our analysis showed that lupus patients experience a spectrum of comorbidities, including hypertension, arthritis, and diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue. A genetic link between arthritis and lupus has been found, and skin disorders such as systemic scleroderma are common [32]. These findings further confirm the increased disease burden among patients with lupus and the need for systematic screening for a range of comorbidities at diagnosis and throughout management of lupus. Significant differences were seen in the prescribing of medications during the study period, specifically among anti-infectives and drugs classified as other. Patients are often immunocompromised due to the treatment of their underlying disease, and this dysfunction of the immune system increases risk for infection in lupus patients, including bacterial, viral, and fungal infections [33]. Drugs classified as other largely consisted of antirheumatic drugs. This may be explained by the fact that the majority of patients had a chronic condition of arthritis, and there was an increase seen in 2011–2016 compared to 2006–2010.
The most widely prescribed medications for patients with lupus changed from prednisone (19%) in 2006–2010 to hydroxychloroquine (37%) in 2011–2016. This may be explained by the fact that hydroxychloroquine is now recommended in clinical guidelines for all lupus patients due to its ability to reduce flares [15] and because long-term corticosteroid use can result in progressive organ damage and increased disease burden [8]. Corticosteroids have been reported in earlier studies to be the most commonly used lupus-related medications, particularly in hospitals [34]. With the approval of biologics in 2011, it was expected to see a greater number of visits with biologics prescribed (0.04%). This study supports previous evidence of low biologics use since biologics were not among the top medications prescribed [34]. Generally, the uptake of newer medications takes some time in clinical practice, which may explain the limited biologics prescribing observed. Pharmacists can play a significant role in patient-care teams in chronic disease management, promoting the physician prescribing of appropriate medications if biologics are warranted. Additionally, medications associated with high costs (such as biologics) are often limited by tiered insurance coverage, thereby impacting patient access [35]. Due to the nature of survey data, it is less possible to link each patient’s insurance type to the coverage for each drug. We expect other national claims databases could help us better understand the biologics and insurance tier coverage. However, most claims databases only capture patients with commercial insurance or Medicare/Medicaid. Our study offers a concrete overview of all insurance types.
Medications taken by patients with lupus were also representative of their comorbid conditions. The most common drugs prescribed were hormones, CNS drugs, and cardiovascular agents. Drugs classified as hormones consist of steroids, specifically corticosteroids, which are one of the common classes of drugs used for lupus disease inflammation and immune response. While cardiovascular agents are relatively common due to the way lupus affects the cardiovascular system, by increasing the risk of hypertension, atherosclerosis, pericarditis, myocarditis, and endocarditis [36]. CNS drugs are frequently prescribed because of the neuropsychiatric manifestations that are secondary to the disease and the pain associated with disease flares [37]. A study among German patients reported the mean number of prescriptions increased to 9.5 in 2018, which is much higher than the number in this study [12]. However, it is important to recognize the vast differences between the two countries. The U.S. multi-payer healthcare system likely limits lupus patients’ access to treatment and certain therapies due to high costs. Patients with lupus often take several medications (an average of five reported in this study), increasing the risk of polypharmacy, which can lead to greater risks of serious adverse events and drug–drug interactions. Polypharmacy has also been found to be associated with treatment response in other rheumatic diseases [38]. Future research should evaluate the effects of polypharmacy on the risks of adverse events, hospitalization, and mortality in lupus. This may also be an opportunity for pharmacists to become integrated into lupus care by engaging in areas of drug monitoring, treatment-related adverse effects, and identifying appropriate medications.
There is currently no cure for lupus, although applying the correct treatment strategy can help. More drugs are being used off-label to manage the disease, and recent approvals have expanded the therapies available for lupus, which now include anifrolumab and voclosporin [39,40]. Future studies are necessary to determine how this may impact future medication utilization among lupus patients and their adherence to these medications whose route of administration is intravenous. While advances in treatment are being made, there continues to be demand for research to assess their impacts on patients’ lives and well-being.
The use of secondary data led to the typical inherent limitations of weighted, multilevel sampled national surveys. First, NAMCS is not a longitudinal study following individuals across each year of the survey. The unit of analysis for this study was patient visit associated with a lupus diagnosis. Patients who frequently visited their physicians were more likely to appear in the analysis. NAMCS did not provide disease severity and did not match each medication with a specific current diagnosis, which made it difficult to assert the reason for the use of each medication. Over-the-counter products purchased by the patient were not captured (i.e., NSAIDS), only medications ordered by the provider during the visit. Additionally, NAMCS does not provide detailed information on medication orders, such as dosage, quantity, or strength. Lastly, more recent data from NAMCS were not available to include for analysis due to delays brought on by the coronavirus pandemic. Despite these limitations, unbiased national estimates of office-based visits for patients with lupus were provided, which were not limited to commercially insured or Medicare/Medicaid patients.

5. Conclusions

In this nationally representative study, comorbidities, chronic conditions, and medications associated with lupus were identified. These findings helped us characterize the medication and disease burdens among lupus patients to better understand how to develop strategies to improve disease management. The data further highlighted the complex care needs of patients with lupus and the pressing need for the improved management of conditions secondary to lupus through preventative measures. Identifying trends in medication utilization and understanding the burden of co-morbid conditions on the outcomes and management of this disease can inform future recommendations for clinical practice and the treatment of lupus.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/healthcare10091664/s1. Table S1: A list of all diagnosis codes used for comorbidities classifications (ICD-9 and ICD-10 CM codes). Table S2: The top 10 most frequently mentioned medications for visits of lupus patients over time. Table S3: A list of the NCHS generic drug codes (a five-digit code assigned to each official generic name assigned to every drug entity by the United States Pharmacopeia). Figure S1: National trends in ambulatory visits for lupus patients in the U.S. from 2006 to 2016.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.M.P., K.A.E., S.F., E.S.-V., L.B. and Y.W.; methodology, S.M.P., K.A.E., S.F., E.S.-V., L.B., Y.W. and M.F.; formal Analysis, S.M.P. and Y.W.; investigation, S.M.P. and Y.W.; data interpretation, S.M.P., Y.W., M.F. and K.A.E.; writing—original draft preparation, S.M.P.; and writing—review and editing, S.M.P., K.A.E., S.F., E.S.-V., L.B., Y.W. and M.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The study was supported by the School of Pharmacy, Chapman University. None of the authors received any financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The ethics review board of the NCHS approves of the NAMCS annually, and all data were de-identified prior to being made available by the CDC. Thus, this study was exempt from the institutional review board. This study was IRB exempt because of the secondary use of open-access de-identifiable national survey data. The manuscript does not contain any clinical studies.

Informed Consent Statement

The participants provided informed consent for the collection of their data and their use in a de-identified manner for national surveys provided by the National Center for Health Statistics.

Data Availability Statement

Data for national health surveys are publicly available on the CDC website and can be found at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/ahcd/index.htm (accessed on 24 July 2022).

Acknowledgments

Thank you to Joni Ricks-Oddie from the UCI Center for Statistical Consulting for assistance and guidance on the analyses.

Conflicts of Interest

S.F. is currently an employee of AstraZeneca. The authors have no other conflicts to report in regard to this work. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors.

References

  1. Ward, M.M. Prevalence of Physician-Diagnosed Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in the United States: Results from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. J. Women’s Health 2004, 13, 713–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Rees, F.; Doherty, M.; Grainge, M.; Lanyon, P.; Zhang, W. The worldwide incidence and prevalence of systemic lupus erythematosus: A systematic review of epidemiological studies. Rheumatology 2017, 56, 1945–1961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Yen, E.Y.; Shaheen, M.; Woo, J.; Mercer, N.; Li, N.; McCurdy, D.K.; Karlamangla, A.; Singh, R.R. 46-Year Trends in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Mortality in the United States, 1968 to 2013. Ann. Intern. Med. 2017, 167, 777–785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Bultink, I.E.M.; de Vries, F.; van Vollenhoven, R.F.; Lalmohamed, A. Mortality, causes of death and influence of medication use in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus vs matched controls. Rheumatology 2020, 60, 207–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Jorge, A.M.; Lu, N.; Zhang, Y.; Rai, S.K.; Choi, H.K. Unchanging premature mortality trends in systemic lupus erythematosus: A general population-based study (1999–2014). Rheumatology 2017, 57, 337–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Stojan, G.; Petri, M. Epidemiology of systemic lupus erythematosus: An update. Curr. Opin. Rheumatol. 2018, 30, 144–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Radner, H.; Yoshida, K.; Smolen, J.S.; Solomon, D.H. Multimorbidity and rheumatic conditions—Enhancing the concept of comorbidity. Nat. Rev. Rheumatol. 2014, 10, 252–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Taraborelli, M.; Cavazzana, I.; Martinazzi, N.; Lazzaroni, M.G.; Fredi, M.; Andreoli, L.; Franceschini, F.; Tincani, A. Organ damage accrual and distribution in systemic lupus erythematosus patients followed-up for more than 10 years. Lupus 2017, 26, 1197–1204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Fanouriakis, A.; Bertsias, G. Changing paradigms in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus Sci. Med. 2019, 6, e000310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Gatto, M.; Zen, M.; Iaccarino, L.; Doria, A. New therapeutic strategies in systemic lupus erythematosus management. Nat. Rev. Rheumatol. 2018, 15, 30–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kuo, C.-F.; Chou, I.-J.; Rees, F.; Grainge, M.; Lanyon, P.; Davenport, G.; Mallen, C.; Chung, T.-T.; Chen, J.-S.; Zhang, W.; et al. Temporal relationships between systemic lupus erythematosus and comorbidities. Rheumatology 2018, 58, 840–848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Albrecht, K.; Redeker, I.; Aringer, M.; Marschall, U.; Strangfeld, A.; Callhoff, J. Comorbidity and healthcare utilisation in persons with incident systemic lupus erythematosus followed for 3 years after diagnosis: Analysis of a claims data cohort. Lupus Sci. Med. 2021, 8, e000526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Rees, F.; Doherty, M.; Grainge, M.; Lanyon, P.; Davenport, G.; Zhang, W. Burden of Comorbidity in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in the UK, 1999–2012. Arthritis Care Res. 2016, 68, 819–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Basta, F.; Fasola, F.; Triantafyllias, K.; Schwarting, A. Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Therapy: The Old and the New. Rheumatol. Ther. 2020, 7, 433–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Fanouriakis, A.; Kostopoulou, M.; Alunno, A.; Aringer, M.; Bajema, I.; Boletis, J.N.; Cervera, R.; Doria, A.; Gordon, C.; Govoni, M.; et al. 2019 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2019, 78, 736–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Aringer, M.; Costenbader, K.; Daikh, D.; Brinks, R.; Mosca, M.; Ramsey-Goldman, R.; Smolen, J.S.; Wofsy, D.; Boumpas, D.T.; Kamen, D.L.; et al. 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2019, 78, 1151–1159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Séguin, D.J.; Peschken, C.A.; Dolovich, C.; Grymonpre, R.E.; John, P.D.S.; Tisseverasinghe, A. Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Care Res. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kandane-Rathnayake, R.; Louthrenoo, W.; Luo, S.; Wu, Y.J.; Chen, Y.; Golder, V.; Lateef, A.; Cho, J.; Navarra, S.V.; Zamora, L.; et al. Patterns of Medication Use in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Multicenter Cohort Study. Arthritis Care Res. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Bello, N.; Birt, J.A.; Workman, J.; Zhou, X.; Ross-Terres, J.A.; Petri, M. Treatment Patterns and Clinical Characteristics of Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Musculoskeletal Symptoms: A Retrospective, Observational Study. Adv. Ther. 2022, 39, 3131–3145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Sugai, D.Y.; Gustafson, C.J.; De Luca, J.F.; Davis, S.A.; Jorizzo, J.L.; O’Rourke, K.S.; Feldman, S.R. Trends in the outpatient medication management of lupus erythematosus in the United States. J. Drugs Dermatol. 2014, 13, 545–552. [Google Scholar]
  21. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Ambulatory Health Care Data: NAMCS and NHAMCS Description. NCHS Research Data Center. 2018. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/ahcd/ahcd_questionnaires.htm (accessed on 8 February 2020).
  22. Center for Disease Control and Prevention NAMCS/NHAMCS—Scope and Sample Design. National Center for Health Statistics. 2018. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/ahcd/ahcd_scope.htm (accessed on 14 March 2020).
  23. Elixhauser, A.; Steiner, C.; Palmer, L. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Clinical Classifications Software (CCS): Rockville, MD, USA, 2019. Available online: http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/toolssoftware/ccs/ccs.jsp (accessed on 12 August 2021).
  24. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Health Statistics. The Ambulatory Care Drug Database System. 2018. Available online: https://www2.cdc.gov/drugs/applicationnav1.asp (accessed on 22 August 2021).
  25. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Drug Approval Package: Benlysta (Belimumab). 2011. Available online: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2011/125370Orig1s000TOC.cfm (accessed on 18 April 2021).
  26. Gompel, A. Systemic lupus erythematosus and menopause. Climacteric 2019, 23, 109–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Shah, L.; Elshaikh, A.O.; Lee, R.; Mathew, C.J.; Jose, M.T.; Cancarevic, I. Do Menopause and Aging Affect the Onset and Progression of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus? Cureus 2020, 12, e10944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Blumenthal, D.; Collins, S.R. Health Care Coverage under the Affordable Care Act—A Progress Report. New Engl. J. Med. 2014, 371, 275–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Tolbert, J.; Orgera, K. Key facts about the uninsured population. Kaiser Family Foundation. 2020. Available online: https://www.kff.org/uninsured/issue-brief/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/ (accessed on 22 January 2022).
  30. Garris, C.; Jhingran, P.; Bass, D.; Engel-Nitz, N.M.; Riedel, A.; Dennis, G. Healthcare utilization and cost of systemic lupus erythematosus in a US managed care health plan. J. Med. Econ. 2013, 16, 667–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Duarte-García, A.; Pham, M.M.; Crowson, C.S.; Amin, S.; Moder, K.G.; Pruthi, R.K.; Warrington, K.; Matteson, E.L. The Epidemiology of Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Population-Based Study. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019, 71, 1545–1552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Remmers, E.F.; Plenge, R.M.; Lee, A.T.; Graham, R.R.; Hom, G.; Behrens, T.W.; de Bakker, P.I.; Le, J.M.; Lee, H.-S.; Batliwalla, F.; et al. STAT4 and the Risk of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. N. Engl. J. Med. 2007, 357, 977–986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Doaty, S.; Agrawal, H.; Bauer, E.; Furst, D.E. Infection and Lupus: Which Causes Which? Curr. Rheumatol. Rep. 2016, 18, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Murimi-Worstell, I.B.; Lin, D.H.; Kan, H.; Tierce, J.; Wang, X.; Nab, H.; Desta, B.; Alexander, G.C.; Hammond, E.R. Healthcare Utilization and Costs of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus by Disease Severity in the United States. J. Rheumatol. 2020, 48, 385–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Anonymous. Biologics and the Principles of Health Insurance: What is the purpose of health insurance? This review of basic insurance concepts provides a context for discussions about coverage of biologics. Biotechnol. Healthc. 2012, 9, 14–18. [Google Scholar]
  36. Piranavan, P.; Perl, A. Management of cardiovascular disease in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Expert Opin. Pharmacother. 2020, 21, 1617–1628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Hanly, J.G.; Kozora, E.; Beyea, S.D.; Birnbaum, J. Nervous System Disease in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Current Status and Future Directions. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018, 71, 33–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Bechman, K.; Clarke, B.D.; Rutherford, A.I.; Yates, M.; Nikiphorou, E.; Molokhia, M.; Norton, S.; Cope, A.P.; Hyrich, K.L.; Galloway, J. Polypharmacy is associated with treatment response and serious adverse events: Results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register for Rheumatoid Arthritis. Rheumatology 2019, 58, 1767–1776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Drug Approval Package: Lupkynis. 2021. Available online: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2021/213716Orig1s000TOC.cfm (accessed on 1 December 2021).
  40. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Drug Approval Package: Saphnelo. 2021. Available online: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2021/761123Orig1s000TOC.cfm (accessed on 1 December 2021).
Healthcare 10 01664 g001 550
Figure 1. Frequency of medications prescribed for patients diagnosed with lupus by drug category. Drug categories were identified using the Cerner Multum Lexicon third level therapeutic category codes. Each p-value compares 2006–2010 and 2011–2016 and significance was set to <0.05. Abbreviations: CNS = central nervous system. Another drug category includes alternative medications, medical gases, miscellaneous agents, pharmaceutical aids, radiological agents, and plasma expanders.
Figure 1. Frequency of medications prescribed for patients diagnosed with lupus by drug category. Drug categories were identified using the Cerner Multum Lexicon third level therapeutic category codes. Each p-value compares 2006–2010 and 2011–2016 and significance was set to <0.05. Abbreviations: CNS = central nervous system. Another drug category includes alternative medications, medical gases, miscellaneous agents, pharmaceutical aids, radiological agents, and plasma expanders.
Healthcare 10 01664 g001
Table
Table 1. Patient and visit characteristics of all patients diagnosed with lupus erythematosus.
Table 1. Patient and visit characteristics of all patients diagnosed with lupus erythematosus.
Total
(n = 27,183,195)		2006–2010
(n = 10,378,266)		2011–2016
(n = 16,804,929)
Unweighted VisitsWeighted Visits
(%)		Weighted Visits
(%)		Weighted Visits
(%)		p-Value e
Sex 0.12
Male1403,389,897 (12%)1,760,617(17%)1,629,280(10%)
Female82923,793,298(88%)8,617,649(83%)15,175,649(90%)
Age 0.11
18–29772,182,239(8%)939,221(9%)1,243,018(7%)
30–442135,458,507(20%)2,533,925(24%)2,924,582(17%)
45–5933310,619,135(39%)3,158,078(30%)7,461,057(44%)
60+3468,923,314(33%)3,747,0423 (36%)5,176,272(31%)
Race 0.10
White77021,381,927(79%)8,433,533(81%)12,948,394(77%)
Black1474,324,579(16%)1,134,157(11%)3,190,422(19%)
Other a521,476,689(5%)810,576(8%)666,113(4%)
Ethnicity 0.13
Hispanic923,159,206(12%)822,696(8%)2,336,510(14%)
Non-Hispanic87724,023,989(88%)9,555,570(92%)14,468,419(86%)
Insurance <0.05 *
Private50114,339,049(53%)5,222,761(50%)9,116,288(54%)
Medicare2726,991,175(26%)2,612,216(25%)4,378,959(26%)
Medicaid842,352,709(9%)1,110,878(11%)1,241,831(7%)
Self-pay31732,993(3%)472,657(5%)260,336(2%)
N/A or blank c582,187,151(8%)484,884(5%)1,702,267(10%)
Other b30580,118(2%)474,870(5%)105,248(1%)
Region 0.42
Northeast1485,013,587(18%)2,083,870(20%)2,929,717(17%)
Midwest2294,566,433(17%)2,314,255(22%)2,252,178(13%)
South34810,362,270(38%)3,320,615(32%)7,041,655(42%)
West2447,240,905(27%)2,659,526(26%)4,581,379(27%)
MSA Setting c 0.26
Urban88625,405,771(93%)9,451,528(91%)15,954,243(95%)
Rural831,777,424(7%)926,738(9%)850,686(5%)
Primary Diagnosis d 0.57
Lupus related2487,945,471(29%)3,092,785(30%)4,852,686(29%)
Non-lupus related44819,237,724(71%)7,285,481(70%)11,952,243(71%)
Reported Any Medication 0.22
Yes82323,774,397(87%)8,795,251(85%)14,979,146(89%)
No1463,408,798(13%)1,583,015(15%)1,825,783(11%)
Major Reason for Visit <0.05 *
Chronic problem70020,460,610(75%)7,787,237(75%)12,673,373(75%)
Acute or new problem1573,745,659(16%)1,477,435(14%)2,738,152(16%)
Preventative care761,650,061(6%)686,467(7%)963,594(6%)
Other36856,937(3%)427,127(4%)429,810(3%)
a Other race includes: Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaskan Native, and more than one race reported. b Other insurance includes no charge/charity, and worker’s compensation; other major reasons for visit included pre- and post-surgery, and blank. c Abbreviations: N/A = not applicable; MSA setting = metropolitan statistical area. d Primary diagnosis refers to the provider’s primary diagnosis for this visit. e p-values obtained from Rao–Scott chi-square test of independence with second order adjustment; p-value compares 2006–2010 and 2011–2016. * Significance < 0.05.
Table
Table 2. Chronic conditions reported for lupus patient visits from 2006 to 2016.
Table 2. Chronic conditions reported for lupus patient visits from 2006 to 2016.
Total
(n = 271,83,195)		2006–2010
(n = 10,378,266)		2011–2016
(n = 16,804,929)
UnweightedWeighted (%) cFrequency (%)Frequency (%)p-Value d
Chronic condition
Arthritis86223,815,893(88%)8,971,767(38%)14,844,126(62%)0.68
Asthma661,845,517(7%)642,601(35%)1,202,916(65%)0.77
Cancer541,319,893(5%)238,165(18%)1,081,728(82%)<0.05 *
Cardiovascular Disease351,038,823(4%)328,453(32%)710,370(68%)0.53
COPD a411,259,167(5%)650,490(52%)608,677(48%)0.27
Depression1373,473,664(13%)1,151,609(33%)2,322,055(67%)0.56
Diabetes802,233,577(8%)975,686(44%)1,257,891(56%)0.53
Hyperlipidemia1042,871,639(11%)1,181,502(41%)1,690,137(59%)0.52
Hypertension2506,889,116(25%)2,270,024(33%)4,619,092(67%)0.47
Kidney disease29941,197(3%)477,509(51%)463,688(49%)0.34
Obesity591,884,787(7%)490,665(26%)1,394,122(74%)0.27
Osteoporosis622,183,236(8%)885,360(41%)1,297,876(59%)0.79
Other b30594,703(2%)155,840(26%)438,863(74%)0.45
Total chronic conditions 0.39
0541,474,049(5%)861,956(58%)612,093(42%)
142313,043,442(48%)4,986,769(38%)8,056,673(62%)
22425,784,626(21%)2,090,053(36%)3,694,573(64%)
31403,516,536(13%)1,244,555(35%)2,271,981(65%)
4742,050,399(8%)432,016(21%)1,618,383(79%)
5 or more331,210,239(4%)664,996(55%)545,244(45%)
a Abbreviations: COPD—chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. b Other chronic conditions include obstructive sleep apnea, HIV, cerebrovascular disease, and substance abuse. c Total chronic conditions may not add up to 100% due to N/As or missing values. d p-values obtained from Rao–Scott chi-square test of independence with second order adjustment; p-value compares 2006–2010 and 2011–2016. * Significance < 0.05.
Table
Table 3. Common comorbidities observed in lupus patient visits from 2006 to 2016 (identified by ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes).
Table 3. Common comorbidities observed in lupus patient visits from 2006 to 2016 (identified by ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes).
Total2006–20102011–2016
Comorbid Condition CategoriesUnweightedWeightedFrequency (% b)Frequency (% b)p-Value c
Infectious And Parasitic Diseases772,431,9972,062,607(85%)369,390(15%)<0.05 *
Neoplasms34949,063329,488(35%)619,575(65%)0.88
Mental, Behavioral and Neurodevelopmental Disorders751,603,369881,809(55%)721,560(45%)0.18
Diseases of the Nervous System and Sense Organs56984,724646,998(66%)337,726(34%)<0.05 *
Diseases Of the Circulatory System1394,539,9251,718,098(38%)2,821,827(62%)0.87
Diseases Of the Respiratory System511,876,549489,284(26%)1,387,265(74%)0.34
Diseases of the Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue49614,538,0325,462,559(38%)9,075,473(62%)0.78
Diseases Of the Musculoskeletal System and Connective Tissue1775,405,8442,987,647(55%)2,418,197(45%)<0.05 *
Other Diseases a441,851,505999,753(54%)851,752(46%)0.05
Symptoms, Signs, and Abnormal Clinical and Laboratory Findings, Not Elsewhere Classified752,354,082854,807(36%)1,499,275(64%)0.95
a Other diseases include: endocrine, nutritional, metabolic diseases, immunity disorders, diseases of the blood and blood-forming organs, certain disorders involving the immune mechanisms, diseases of the digestive and genitourinary system, injury, poisoning, and certain other consequences of external causes. b Denominator for proportions is total visits for lupus patients for that category. c p-values obtained from Rao–Scott chi-square test of independence with second order adjustment; p-value compares 2006–2010 and 2011–2016. * Significance < 0.05.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Preciado, S.M.; Elsaid, K.A.; Fawaz, S.; Brown, L.; Seoane-Vazquez, E.; Fleming, M.; Wang, Y. Exploratory Analysis of Outpatient Visits for US Adults Diagnosed with Lupus Erythematosus: Findings from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey 2006–2016. Healthcare 2022, 10, 1664. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10091664

AMA Style

Preciado SM, Elsaid KA, Fawaz S, Brown L, Seoane-Vazquez E, Fleming M, Wang Y. Exploratory Analysis of Outpatient Visits for US Adults Diagnosed with Lupus Erythematosus: Findings from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey 2006–2016. Healthcare. 2022; 10(9):1664. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10091664

Chicago/Turabian Style

Preciado, Salena Marie, Khaled A. Elsaid, Souhiela Fawaz, Lawrence Brown, Enrique Seoane-Vazquez, Marc Fleming, and Yun Wang. 2022. "Exploratory Analysis of Outpatient Visits for US Adults Diagnosed with Lupus Erythematosus: Findings from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey 2006–2016" Healthcare 10, no. 9: 1664. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10091664

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop