Person:

Katz, Jeffrey

Background: Routine screening for HIV infection leads to early detection and treatment. We examined patient characteristics associated with repeated screening in a high prevalence country. Methods: We analyzed data from a cohort of 5,229 adults presenting for rapid HIV testing in the outpatient departments of 2 South African hospitals from November 2006 to August 2010. Patients were eligible if they were ≥18 years, reported no previous diagnosis with HIV infection, and not pregnant. Before testing, participants completed a questionnaire including gender, age, HIV testing history, health status, and knowledge about HIV and acquaintances with HIV. Enrollment HIV test results and CD4 counts were abstracted from the medical record. We present prevalence of HIV infection and median CD4 counts by HIV testing history (first-time vs. repeat). We estimated adjusted relative risks (ARR’s) for repeat testing by demographics, health status, and knowledge of HIV and others with HIV in a generalized linear model. Results: Of 4,877 participants with HIV test results available, 26% (N = 1258) were repeat testers. Repeat testers were less likely than first-time testers to be HIV-infected (34% vs. 54%, p<0.001). Median CD4 count was higher among repeat than first-time testers (201/uL vs. 147/uL, p<0.001). Among those HIV negative at enrollment (N = 2,499), repeat testing was more common among those with family or friends living with HIV (ARR 1.50, 95% CI: 1.33–1.68), women (ARR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.11–1.40), and those self-reporting very good health (ARR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.12–1.45). Conclusions: In this high prevalence setting, repeat testing was common among those undergoing HIV screening, and was associated with female sex, lower prevalence of HIV infection, and higher CD4 counts at diagnosis.

Background: The growing utilization of total joint replacement will increase the frequency of its complications, including periprosthetic fracture. The prevalence and risk factors of periprosthetic fracture require further study, particularly over the course of long-term follow-up. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence and risk factors for periprosthetic fractures occurring in recipients of total hip replacement. Methods: We identified Medicare beneficiaries who had elective primary total hip replacement (THR) for non-fracture diagnoses between July 1995 and June 1996. We followed them using Medicare Part A claims data through 2008. We used ICD-9 codes to identify periprosthetic femoral fractures occurring from 2006–2008. We used the incidence density method to calculate the annual incidence of these fractures and Cox proportional hazards models to identify risk factors for periprosthetic fracture. We also calculated the risk of hospitalization over the subsequent year. Results: Of 58,521 Medicare beneficiaries who had elective primary THR between July 1995 and June 1996, 32,463 (55%) survived until January 2006. Of these, 215 (0.7%) developed a periprosthetic femoral fracture between 2006 and 2008. The annual incidence of periprosthetic fracture among these individuals was 26 per 10,000 person-years. In the Cox model, a greater risk of periprosthetic fracture was associated with having had a total knee replacement (HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.30, 2.55) or a revision total hip replacement (HR1.40, 95% CI 0.95, 2.07) between the primary THR and 2006. Compared to those without fractures, THR recipients who sustained periprosthetic femoral fracture had three-fold higher risk of hospitalization in the subsequent year (89% vs. 27%, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: A decade after primary THR, periprosthetic fractures occur annually in 26 per 10,000 persons and are especially frequent in those with prior total knee or revision total hip replacements.

Background: Musculoskeletal disorders of the upper extremity are common reasons for patients to seek care and undergo ambulatory surgery. The objective of our study was to assess the overall and age-adjusted utilization rates of rotator cuff repair, shoulder arthroscopy performed for indications other than rotator cuff repair, carpal tunnel release, and wrist arthroscopy performed for indications other than carpal tunnel release in the United States. We also compared demographics, indications, and operating room time for these procedures. Methods: We used the 2006 National Survey of Ambulatory Surgery to estimate the number of procedures of interest performed in the United States in 2006. We combined these data with population size estimates from the 2006 U.S. Census Bureau to calculate rates per 10,000 persons. Results: An estimated 272,148 (95% confidence intervals (CI) = 218,994, 325,302) rotator cuff repairs, 257,541 (95% CI = 185,268, 329,814) shoulder arthroscopies excluding those for cuff repairs, 576,924 (95% CI = 459,239, 694,609) carpal tunnel releases, and 25,250 (95% CI = 17,304, 33,196) wrist arthroscopies excluding those for carpal tunnel release were performed. Overall, carpal tunnel release had the highest utilization rate (37.3 per 10,000 persons in persons of age 45–64 years; 38.7 per 10,000 persons in 65–74 year olds, and; 44.2 per 10,000 persons in the age-group 75 years and older). Among those undergoing rotator cuff repairs, those in the age-group 65–74 had the highest utilization (28.3 per 10,000 persons). The most common indications for non-cuff repair related shoulder arthroscopy were impingement syndrome, periarthritis, bursitis, and instability/SLAP tears. Non-carpal tunnel release related wrist arthroscopy was most commonly performed for ligament sprains and diagnostic arthroscopies for pain and articular cartilage disorders. Conclusions: Our data shows substantial age and demographic differences in the utilization of these commonly performed upper extremity ambulatory procedures. While over one million upper extremity procedures of interest were performed, evidence-based clinical indications for these procedures remain poorly defined.

Background: Studies of the epidemiology and outcomes of avascular necrosis (AVN) require accurate case-finding methods. The aim of this study was to evaluate performance characteristics of a claims-based algorithm designed to identify AVN cases in administrative data. Methods: Using a centralized patient registry from a US academic medical center, we identified all adults aged ≥18 years who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of an upper/lower extremity joint during the 1.5 year study period. A radiologist report confirming AVN on MRI served as the gold standard. We examined the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of four algorithms (A-D) using International Classification of Diseases, 9th edition (ICD-9) codes for AVN. The algorithms ranged from least stringent (Algorithm A, requiring ≥1 ICD-9 code for AVN [733.4X]) to most stringent (Algorithm D, requiring ≥3 ICD-9 codes, each at least 30 days apart). Results: Among 8200 patients who underwent MRI, 83 (1.0% [95% CI 0.78–1.22]) had AVN by gold standard. Algorithm A yielded the highest sensitivity (81.9%, 95% CI 72.0–89.5), with PPV of 66.0% (95% CI 56.0–75.1). The PPV of algorithm D increased to 82.2% (95% CI 67.9–92.0), although sensitivity decreased to 44.6% (95% CI 33.7–55.9). All four algorithms had specificities >99%. Conclusion: An algorithm that uses a single billing code to screen for AVN among those who had MRI has the highest sensitivity and is best suited for studies in which further medical record review confirming AVN is feasible. Algorithms using multiple billing codes are recommended for use in administrative databases when further AVN validation is not feasible.