淋巴水肿对下肢静脉性溃疡治疗的影响。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Phlebology Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-30 DOI:10.1177/02683555231197597
Tina Moon, Thomas F O'Donnell, Derek Weycker, Mark Iafrati
{"title":"淋巴水肿对下肢静脉性溃疡治疗的影响。","authors":"Tina Moon, Thomas F O'Donnell, Derek Weycker, Mark Iafrati","doi":"10.1177/02683555231197597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Lymphedema (LED) in patients with venous leg ulcers (VLU) [VLU+LED] can impair ulcer healing and predispose to cellulitis. There is little data, however, demonstrating how lymphatic dysfunction may impact the clinical course, treatment, and healthcare expenditures for VLU+LED versus VLU-LED patients.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine how lymphatic dysfunction might influence treatment and expenditures among VLU patients in a large deidentified healthcare claims database.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort design and data from the IBM MarketScan Database (April 2013 to March 2019) were employed. Study population comprised VLU patients, and was stratified into two subgroups: VLU+LED (index date = date of first LED diagnosis) and VLU-LED (index dates randomly assigned to match distribution of index dates for VLU+LED). Within each subgroup, patients with <1 year of healthcare claims information before and after their index dates were excluded. Demographics, comorbidities, procedures/treatments, as well as all-cause post-index medical resource utilization and expenditures ($/patient/year) of the two groups were compared. Stabilized inverse probability treatment weights (IPTWs) were employed to adjust for differences between groups in baseline characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 5466 VLU patients were identified (VLU+LED: <i>N</i> = 299; VLU-LED: <i>N</i> = 5167). Overall ambulatory encounters (AMB ENC) and their components were higher in VLU+LED, which were reflected in increased expenditures for this group (Table 1). Treatment with endovenous ablation (EVA) or stenting for venous hypertension as well as for specific measures for LED were higher in the 1-year post-index period for VLU+LED. The use of LED specific therapy was low for both groups, but a greater percentage of VLU+LED patients received therapy, which was predominantly manual lymphatic drainage (17.4%) rather than pneumatic compression (10.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The clinical presence of LED in patients with VLU is a marker for a more complex disease process with more episodes of cellulitis and expenditures, but a surprisingly low specific treatment for LED.</p>","PeriodicalId":20139,"journal":{"name":"Phlebology","volume":" ","pages":"613-621"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of lymphedema in the management of venous leg ulcers.\",\"authors\":\"Tina Moon, Thomas F O'Donnell, Derek Weycker, Mark Iafrati\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02683555231197597\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Lymphedema (LED) in patients with venous leg ulcers (VLU) [VLU+LED] can impair ulcer healing and predispose to cellulitis. There is little data, however, demonstrating how lymphatic dysfunction may impact the clinical course, treatment, and healthcare expenditures for VLU+LED versus VLU-LED patients.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine how lymphatic dysfunction might influence treatment and expenditures among VLU patients in a large deidentified healthcare claims database.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort design and data from the IBM MarketScan Database (April 2013 to March 2019) were employed. Study population comprised VLU patients, and was stratified into two subgroups: VLU+LED (index date = date of first LED diagnosis) and VLU-LED (index dates randomly assigned to match distribution of index dates for VLU+LED). Within each subgroup, patients with <1 year of healthcare claims information before and after their index dates were excluded. Demographics, comorbidities, procedures/treatments, as well as all-cause post-index medical resource utilization and expenditures ($/patient/year) of the two groups were compared. Stabilized inverse probability treatment weights (IPTWs) were employed to adjust for differences between groups in baseline characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 5466 VLU patients were identified (VLU+LED: <i>N</i> = 299; VLU-LED: <i>N</i> = 5167). Overall ambulatory encounters (AMB ENC) and their components were higher in VLU+LED, which were reflected in increased expenditures for this group (Table 1). Treatment with endovenous ablation (EVA) or stenting for venous hypertension as well as for specific measures for LED were higher in the 1-year post-index period for VLU+LED. The use of LED specific therapy was low for both groups, but a greater percentage of VLU+LED patients received therapy, which was predominantly manual lymphatic drainage (17.4%) rather than pneumatic compression (10.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The clinical presence of LED in patients with VLU is a marker for a more complex disease process with more episodes of cellulitis and expenditures, but a surprisingly low specific treatment for LED.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Phlebology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"613-621\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Phlebology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555231197597\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Phlebology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555231197597","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:腿部静脉性溃疡(VLU)患者的淋巴水肿(LED)[VLU+LED]会损害溃疡的愈合并易患蜂窝组织炎。然而,很少有数据表明淋巴功能障碍如何影响VLU+LED与VLU-LED患者的临床病程、治疗和医疗支出。目的:在一个大型未识别的医疗索赔数据库中,确定淋巴功能障碍如何影响VLU患者的治疗和支出。方法:采用回顾性队列设计和IBM MarketScan数据库(2013年4月至2019年3月)的数据。研究人群包括VLU患者,并分为两个亚组:VLU+LED(指标日期=首次诊断LED的日期)和VLU-LED(随机分配指标日期以匹配VLU+ED的指标日期分布)。在每个亚组中,患者的结果:共确定5466名VLU患者(VLU+LED:N=299;VLU-LED:N=5167)。VLU+LED的总体门诊就诊次数(AMB-ENC)及其组成部分较高,这反映在该组支出的增加中(表1)。在VLU+LED指数后1年内,静脉内消融术(EVA)或支架置入治疗静脉性高血压以及LED的特定措施的疗效更高。LED特异性治疗的使用率在两组中都很低,但VLU+LED患者接受治疗的比例更高,主要是手动淋巴引流(17.4%),而不是气压压迫(10.7%)。结论:VLU患者的LED临床存在是一个更复杂的疾病过程的标志,有更多的蜂窝组织炎发作和支出,但是对LED的特异性处理出乎意料地低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of lymphedema in the management of venous leg ulcers.

Introduction: Lymphedema (LED) in patients with venous leg ulcers (VLU) [VLU+LED] can impair ulcer healing and predispose to cellulitis. There is little data, however, demonstrating how lymphatic dysfunction may impact the clinical course, treatment, and healthcare expenditures for VLU+LED versus VLU-LED patients.

Objective: To determine how lymphatic dysfunction might influence treatment and expenditures among VLU patients in a large deidentified healthcare claims database.

Methods: A retrospective cohort design and data from the IBM MarketScan Database (April 2013 to March 2019) were employed. Study population comprised VLU patients, and was stratified into two subgroups: VLU+LED (index date = date of first LED diagnosis) and VLU-LED (index dates randomly assigned to match distribution of index dates for VLU+LED). Within each subgroup, patients with <1 year of healthcare claims information before and after their index dates were excluded. Demographics, comorbidities, procedures/treatments, as well as all-cause post-index medical resource utilization and expenditures ($/patient/year) of the two groups were compared. Stabilized inverse probability treatment weights (IPTWs) were employed to adjust for differences between groups in baseline characteristics.

Results: A total of 5466 VLU patients were identified (VLU+LED: N = 299; VLU-LED: N = 5167). Overall ambulatory encounters (AMB ENC) and their components were higher in VLU+LED, which were reflected in increased expenditures for this group (Table 1). Treatment with endovenous ablation (EVA) or stenting for venous hypertension as well as for specific measures for LED were higher in the 1-year post-index period for VLU+LED. The use of LED specific therapy was low for both groups, but a greater percentage of VLU+LED patients received therapy, which was predominantly manual lymphatic drainage (17.4%) rather than pneumatic compression (10.7%).

Conclusions: The clinical presence of LED in patients with VLU is a marker for a more complex disease process with more episodes of cellulitis and expenditures, but a surprisingly low specific treatment for LED.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Phlebology
Phlebology 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
11.80%
发文量
84
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The leading scientific journal devoted entirely to venous disease, Phlebology is the official journal of several international societies devoted to the subject. It publishes the results of high quality studies and reviews on any factor that may influence the outcome of patients with venous disease. This journal provides authoritative information about all aspects of diseases of the veins including up to the minute reviews, original articles, and short reports on the latest treatment procedures and patient outcomes to help medical practitioners, allied health professionals and scientists stay up-to-date on developments. Print ISSN: 0268-3555
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信