If you don't remember your password, you can reset it by entering your email address and clicking the Reset Password button. You will then receive an email that contains a secure link for resetting your password
If the address matches a valid account an email will be sent to __email__ with instructions for resetting your password
There is no validated model for identifying diabetic foot ulcer episodes of care.
•
We validated a model to identify diabetic foot ulcer episodes in Medicare data.
•
With this model, we compared morbidity and mortality rates during and after episodes.
•
All-cause mortality was 1.5 times more likely during diabetic foot ulcer episodes.
•
All-cause hospitalization was 2.8 times more likely during diabetic foot ulcer episodes.
Abstract
Aims
Our primary objective was to determine whether all-cause rates of mortality and resource utilization were higher during periods of diabetic foot ulceration. In support of this objective, a secondary objective was to develop and validate an episode-of-care model for diabetic foot ulceration.
Methods
We evaluated data from the Medicare Limited Data Set between 2013 and 2019. We defined episodes-of-care by clustering diabetic foot ulcer related claims such that the longest time interval between consecutive claims in any cluster did not exceed a duration which was adjusted to match two aspects of foot ulcer episodes that are well-established in the literature: healing rate at 12 weeks, and reulceration rate following healing. We compared rates of outcomes during periods of ulceration to rates immediately following healing to estimate incidence ratios.
Results
The episode-of-care model had a minimum mean relative error of 4.2% in the two validation criteria using a clustering duration of seven weeks. Compared to periods after healing, all-cause inpatient admissions were 2.8 times more likely during foot ulcer episodes and death was 1.5 times more likely.
Conclusions
A newly-validated episode-of-care model for diabetic foot ulcers suggests an underappreciated association between foot ulcer episodes and all-cause resource utilization and mortality.
Defining episodes-of-care is an important and evolving part of modern healthcare economics. Traditionally, there have been two approaches for defining episodes-of-care. The first evaluates care included beyond an initial event or procedure to include associated aftercare within a predefined time window. The second approach collects care-related information over a period of time for a specific chronic condition identified by a set of administrative codes.
While these approaches are useful, they are inadequate for more complex chronic conditions where care extends beyond an initial event and may be associated, in part or whole, with a broad set of administrative codes. In such cases, a simple attribution of the resource utilization directly related to the chronic condition is incomplete, limiting the applicability of these approaches. Diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) are a condition for which a more comprehensive approach for estimating episodes-of-care is needed to properly assess and attribute economic burden.
While several methods have been validated to estimate prevalence of DFU from administrative data, we are unaware of any validated method for estimating DFU incidence or episodes-of-care.[
] Furthermore, several studies of DFU and its association with mortality suggest that foot ulceration may not be an innocent bystander of a multi-morbid disease process but instead an accomplice, complicating attribution of resource utilization and costs. A meta-analysis by Saluja and colleagues synthesized data from 11 studies that reported 84,000 all-cause deaths in approximately 450,000 participants with diabetes over 650,000 person-years. These authors found that foot ulcers were associated with a substantial increase in risk for all-cause mortality (pooled RR = 2.45).[
The purpose of the present investigation is two-fold: (1) to validate a claims-based episode-of-care model for DFU; and (2) to apply this model to determine whether the rates of significant healthcare economic outcomes, such as all-cause mortality and all-cause inpatient admissions, are higher during DFU episodes-of-care.
2. Materials and methods
2.1 Study design, approval, and reporting
This was a cohort study of administrative data collected between 2013 and 2019. It was reviewed by the Biomedical Research Alliance of New York (BRANY) Independent Review Board (IRB) and determined to be exempt because the data were previously collected, are deidentified, and are publicly-available. This research was also subject to the Medicare limited data set (LDS) data use agreement (DUA). BRANY IRB granted a waiver of informed consent because contact with beneficiaries is not permitted under the LDS DUA.
This study followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) reporting guideline.[
This was a population-based study. We used inpatient institutional, outpatient institutional, and provider fee-for-service (carrier) claims data from the Medicare LDS sample from 2013 to 2019. The LDS consists of publicly-available and deidentified data on physician-beneficiary and institution-beneficiary interactions within the United States. Our data contained claims spanning 11,638,371 beneficiary-years for 3,982,684 unique Medicare beneficiaries. We analyzed 379,731,127 medical claims, each of which had 2.9 associated diagnosis codes on average.
2.3 Episodes-of-care definition
We defined DFU episodes-of-care by grouping clusters of DFU-related claims such that the longest time interval between consecutive claims in any cluster did not exceed a predefined clustering duration. A claim was judged to be DFU-related if it contained any of the following diagnosis codes (see also eTable 1), irrespective of the order in which the diagnosis code was listed on the claim: ICD-9 (707.10, 707.14, 707.15, 707.19, 707.9), and ICD-10 (E08.621, E09.621, E10.621, E11.621, E13.621). These codes are consistent with those used by Harrington and colleagues,[
] We only included patients with a history of diabetes mellitus, consistent with the Charlson Comorbidity definition. Only those episodes with more than one associated DFU-related claim were considered.
2.4 Model adjustment and validation
We adjusted the episode-of-care clustering duration to match two aspects of DFU episodes that are well-established in the literature.
] reported 12 week DFU healing rates at 30.5% based on data from the U.S. Wound Registry (USWR), a source of real-world data for wound healing. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has designated USWR to be a Qualified Clinical Data Registry (QCDR). We compared percentages of DFU episodes shorter than 12 weeks to this 30.5% benchmark.
We also compared the reulceration rates at one, two, and three years post-healing to rates reported in the literature for those receiving standard diabetic foot care. We referenced a survey by Armstrong and colleagues[
] to identify relevant studies and used data from those observational studies and from control groups of those experimental studies that reported on reulceration indexed from healing. We calculated an average of these rates over the studies[
] weighted by study cohort size. The one, two, and three year target reulceration rates from the literature were found to be 36.1%, 46.8%, and 54.6% respectively. We estimated the reulceration rate from the DFU episode model by performing a Kaplan-Meier analysis on the duration between the healing date of the first DFU and the incident date of second DFU episode identified (or between the healing date of the first DFU and the date of the beneficiary’s last claim, if censored).
We evaluated the agreement between the estimates of these four values from our DFU episode-of-care model to these target values by varying the clustering duration from 2 weeks to 20 weeks in half week increments and evaluating the mean relative error, our secondary outcome of interest.
2.5 Cohort characteristics
We used established methods to identify comorbidities in beneficiaries using administrative data.[
World Health Organization. ICD-10 : International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems : Tenth Revision Vol. I, Vol. I,. WHO; 2004.
] Relevant conditions included risk factors for DFU development such as diabetes, peripheral neuropathy, peripheral vascular disease, lower extremity amputation (LEA), vision impairments, and foot deformity. To summarize the healthcare burden and risk associated with the beneficiaries, we calculated and reported the Charlson Comorbidity Index.[
] Descriptive characteristics for race, ethnicity, and sex were reported consistent with the Medicare LDS definitions. We qualitatively compared descriptive characteristics for periods before the first diabetic foot ulcer episode-of-care to statistics for post-healing and to statistics for the end of followup. We reported the high-to-low amputation ratio, where high-level amputations were defined as more proximal than the ankle.
2.6 Association with resource utilization
We calculated rates of all-cause mortality, rates of inpatient admissions stratified by Major Diagnostic Categories (MDC) and Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Group (MS-DRG), and rates of provider encounters for periods during DFU episodes-of-care, for periods after healing, and for other periods during the beneficiary followup. MDCs and MS-DRGs summarize inpatient stays by illness for purposes of billing, and each MS-DRG is defined by a particular set of beneficiary characteristics, including diagnosis codes, procedure codes, demographics, and discharge status.
We identified periods during DFU episode-of-care using the model previously described. We used periods after DFU healing as a comparator, with each comparator period having a target duration equal to the duration of the preceding DFU. For cases in which a recurrent DFU occurred before the target duration of the after period, we truncated the after period and considered only the DFU-free period as the comparator. We divided the outcome rate during DFU episodes by the rate after healing to calculate incidence ratios, our primary outcome of interest.
We estimated uncertainty about these point-estimates of incidence rates and incidence ratios by bootstrap sampling of the cohort-level data.[
] We sampled until the reported empirical 95% confidence intervals converged to two significant digits to characterize the uncertainty in these estimates.
3. Results
3.1 Model adjustment and validation
The best agreement between the episode-of-care model and the two validation criteria was found with a clustering duration of seven weeks (eTable 2). The mean relative difference among the four comparisons was 4.2%, and the largest relative difference among the four comparisons was 7.5% for the reulceration rate at 3 years (54.6% target vs 50.6% episode-of-care estimate). The healing rate at 12 weeks from the episode-of-care model was found to be 29.2%, which agrees well with the target of 30.5% (relative difference of 4.2%). The mean duration from incident DFU to healing was 12.1 weeks (IQR: 7.1–12.9 weeks). The median duration from healing to reulceration in the Medicare cohort was approximately three years, and by six months 26.7% of DFU have recurred.
3.2 Cohort characteristics
Table 1 shows the descriptive cohort characteristics for the 78,716 beneficiaries we identified with at least one DFU episode, suggesting approximately 2% of all Medicare beneficiaries and 8.3% of those beneficiaries with diabetes mellitus have a history of DFU. Claims data for these 78,716 beneficiaries spanned 383,856 beneficiary-years.
Table 1Descriptive characteristics for Medicare beneficiaries with at least one diabetic foot ulcer episode-of-care (78,716).
Characteristics
At the Beginning of First Diabetic Foot Ulcer Episode
According to the Medicare LDS definitions, approximately 77.5% of the cohort with at least one DFU was White, 14.7% was Black, and 3.3% identified as Hispanic. A majority (56.2%) of the cohort was male, according to the Medicare LDS definition.
The Charlson Comorbidity Index for this cohort increased by 23.6% during the first DFU episode-of-care, with large relative increases in the rates of diagnosis codes for myocardial infarction (24.7%), congestive heart failure (19.4%), and peripheral vascular disease (35.5%). Similarly, rates of LEA more than doubled in the cohort over the first DFU episode-of-care. Approximately 21% of those with DFU history had some level amputation by the end of followup, and the high-to-low amputation ratio was 64%.
3.3 Episode characteristics
A total of 206,203 episodes were identified in the 78,716 beneficiaries with at least one DFU episode, (54 DFU per 100 beneficiary-years), implying an average of 2.6 DFU/beneficiary over followup. Among those beneficiaries with diabetes, the incidence was 4.6 DFU per 100 beneficiary-years. Approximately 50% of the 78,716 beneficiaries in the data with at least one DFU experienced one or more recurrence in the period from 2013 to 2019. Among those beneficiaries with at least one DFU, there were 47,843 DFU-years, implying approximately 12.5% of these beneficiaries’ followup were marked by treatment for a DFU.
During DFU episodes, 10,997 beneficiaries died (5.3%). Approximately 34.8% of DFU episodes (71,834) included at least one inpatient admission, with a total of 120,245 admissions occurring during episodes (2.5 admissions/DFU-year). LEAs were also common during foot ulcer episodes, with 19,358 of DFU episodes (9.4%) having at least one LEA.
3.4 Association with resource utilization
Fig. 1 summarizes the incidence ratios for select resource utilization. During DFU episodes, all-cause mortality was 50% more likely (IR = 1.5; CI: 1.44–1.54), and all-cause inpatient admission was nearly three times more likely (IR = 2.8; CI: 2.77–2.87) compared to periods after healing. Provider (IR = 2.2) and podiatry (IR = 5.2) ambulatory encounters were more common during DFU episodes-of-care. To allow comparison against the case-controlled association between DFU and mortality reported by Saluja and colleagues,[
] we calculated the incidence ratio of the rate of mortality following incidence of the first DFU to the rate of mortality all-time in those with at least one DFU and found it to be 2.2 (CI: 2.15–2.24).
Fig. 1Increased Rates of Mortality and Healthcare Resource Utilization during Diabetic Foot Ulcer Episodes-of-Care Compared to Periods After Healing.
Fig. 2 summarizes the incidence ratios for select MS-DRGs. Compared to periods after healing, we observed higher rates during DFU episodes for admissions commonly associated with DFU (eg, amputation of lower limb for endocrine, nutritional, and metabolic disorders with complication of comorbidity, IR = 30.0, or cellulitis with major complication or comorbidity, IR = 4.1) and for conditions less commonly thought to be associated with DFU (eg, for heart failure and shock with complication or comorbidity, IR = 2.0, and for renal failure with complication or comorbidity, IR = 1.9).
Fig. 2Increased Rates of Admission for Select Medicare-Severity Diagnosis Related Codes during Diabetic Foot Ulcer Episodes-of-Care Compared to Periods After Healing.
Table 2 shows the incidence and incidence ratios for each of the thirty most common MS-DRGs in these 78,716 beneficiaries. All but one of the top thirty admission MS-DRGs had higher rates during DFU episodes than after episodes. The exception was hip and knee joint replacement, which may have had lower incidence during DFU episodes because it is an elective procedure that may be delayed until post-healing. For many of these MS-DRG, such as for heart failure and shock with complication or comorbidity (IR = 2.0; CI: 1.8–2.2), rates are only elevated only during DFU episodes-of-care (3.4 per 100 beneficiary-years) and are nearly equivalent in the period after healing (1.69 per 100 beneficiary-years) and during other periods of followup (1.64 per 100 beneficiary-years).
Table 2Rates of Inpatient Admissions During and After Diabetic Foot Ulcer Episodes-of-Care for the Most Common Major Diagnostic Categories and Medicare-Severity Diagnosis Related Groups.
DRG
Description
Number of Admissions
Admission Rate, per 100 beneficiary-years
During-to-After Incidence Ratio
During DFU Episodes
After DFU Episodes
Other Periods
All-Cause Admissions
389,895
243 (240–245)
86.2 (84.7–87.7)
79.2 (78.4–79.9)
2.82 (2.77–2.87)
Medical Admissions
284,695
149 (147–150)
65.7 (64.4–67.0)
61.8 (61.2–62.4)
2.26 (2.22–2.30)
Surgical Admissions
101,854
93.1 (91.9–94.2)
20.0 (19.4–20.6)
16.7 (16.5–16.9)
4.65 (4.52–4.79)
Diseases and Disorders of the Respiratory System
35,844
13.8 (13.4–14.3)
8.41 (8.03–8.79)
8.46 (8.28–8.64)
1.64 (1.56–1.73)
Diseases and Disorders of the Circulatory System
89,894
59.8 (58.8–60.8)
19.2 (18.6–19.7)
17.8 (17.5–18.0)
3.12 (3.03–3.22)
Diseases and Disorders of the Musculoskeletal System and Connective Tissue
36,863
23.1 (22.5–23.6)
8.81 (8.42–9.21)
7.43 (7.3–7.55)
2.62 (2.50–2.74)
Diseases and Disorders of the Skin, Subcutaneous Tisue and Breast
19,059
15.8 (15.3–16.2)
3.85 (3.61–4.1)
3.35 (3.27–3.44)
4.09 (3.84–4.38)
Diseases and Disorders of the Endocrine, Nutritional and Metabolic System
30,608
35.6 (34.9–36.4)
4.97 (4.67–5.26)
4.0 (3.89–4.12)
7.17 (6.78–7.62)
Diseases and Disorders of the Kidney and Urinary Tract
32,623
13.8 (13.4–14.2)
8.11 (7.73–8.5)
7.52 (7.37–7.67)
1.70 (1.62–1.79)
Infectious and Parasitic Diseases and Disorders
45,631
34.3 (33.6–35.0)
11.3 (10.9–11.7)
8.31 (8.16–8.45)
3.04 (2.92–3.16)
871
Septicemia or Severe Sepsis without MV > 96 Hours with MCC
24,619
14.8 (14.3–15.2)
6.59 (6.3–6.9)
4.99 (4.9–5.1)
2.24 (2.1–2.4)
291
Heart Failure and Shock with MCC or Peripheral Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO)
16,143
7.83 (7.5–8.2)
4.27 (4.0–4.6)
3.55 (3.4–3.7)
1.83 (1.7–2.0)
603
Cellulitis without MCC
9,925
7.74 (7.4–8.0)
1.90 (1.7–2.1)
1.83 (1.8–1.9)
4.07 (3.7–4.5)
638
Diabetes with CC
7,866
9.68 (9.3–10.0)
1.14 (1.0–1.3)
0.97 (0.91–1.0)
8.46 (7.5–9.6)
292
Heart Failure and Shock with CC
7,281
3.41 (3.2–3.6)
1.69 (1.5–1.9)
1.64 (1.6–1.7)
2.02 (1.8–2.2)
853
Infectious and Parasitic Diseases with O.R. Procedure with MCC
7,116
8.29 (8.0–8.6)
1.48 (1.3–1.6)
0.90 (0.86–0.94)
5.59 (5.1–6.2)
683
Renal Failure with CC
6,720
3.16 (3.0–3.3)
1.63 (1.5–1.8)
1.51 (1.5–1.6)
1.94 (1.7–2.1)
872
Septicemia or Severe Sepsis without MV > 96 Hours without MCC
6,639
4.35 (4.1–4.6)
1.53 (1.4–1.7)
1.31 (1.3–1.4)
2.84 (2.6–3.2)
682
Renal Failure with MCC
6,431
3.16 (3.0–3.3)
1.69 (1.5–1.8)
1.41 (1.4–1.5)
1.87 (1.7–2.1)
885
Psychoses
5,779
1.56 (1.4–1.7)
1.03 (0.9–1.2)
1.48 (1.3–1.6)
1.50 (1.3–1.7)
945
Rehabilitation with CC/MCC
5,530
3.66 (3.5–3.9)
1.12 (1.0–1.2)
1.11 (1.1–1.1)
3.27 (2.9–3.7)
690
Kidney and Urinary Tract Infections without MCC
5,415
1.70 (1.6–1.8)
1.18 (1.1–1.3)
1.35 (1.3–1.4)
1.44 (1.3–1.6)
193
Simple Pneumonia and Pleurisy with MCC
5,140
2.09 (2.0–2.2)
1.30 (1.2–1.4)
1.19 (1.2–1.2)
1.61 (1.4–1.8)
189
Pulmonary Edema and Respiratory Failure
4,919
2.12 (2.0–2.3)
1.19 (1.1–1.3)
1.11 (1.1–1.2)
1.78 (1.6–2.0)
252
Other Vascular Procedures with MCC
4,584
4.52 (4.3–4.7)
0.93 (0.82–1.1)
0.70 (0.67–0.74)
4.84 (4.3–5.6)
470
Major Hip and Knee Joint Replacement or Reattachment of Lower Extremity without MCC
4,551
0.75 (0.67–0.83)
0.80 (0.70–0.90)
1.25 (1.2–1.3)
0.94 (0.8–1.1)
617
Amputation of Lower Limb for Endocrine, Nutritional and Metabolic Disorders with CC
4,231
8.34 (8.1–8.6)
0.28 (0.22–0.34)
0.096 (0.085–0.11)
30.0 (24.5–38.1)
640
Miscellaneous Disorders of Nutrition, Metabolism, Fluids and Electrolytes with MCC
4,191
1.89 (1.7–2.1)
1.16 (1.0–1.3)
0.94 (0.89–0.99)
1.62 (1.4–1.9)
280
Acute Myocardial Infarction, Discharged Alive with MCC
3,971
1.88 (1.7–2.0)
0.90 (0.79–1.0)
0.90 (0.85–0.93)
2.08 (1.8–2.4)
253
Other Vascular Procedures with CC
3,928
5.44 (5.2–5.7)
0.50 (0.42–0.58)
0.40 (0.38–0.43)
10.9 (9.3–13.0)
194
Simple Pneumonia and Pleurisy with CC
3,731
1.28 (1.2–1.4)
0.81 (0.71–0.92)
0.91 (0.88–0.95)
1.58 (1.4–1.8)
190
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases with MCC
3,728
1.18 (1.1–1.3)
0.69 (0.59–0.79)
0.94 (0.89–0.99)
1.71 (1.4–2.0)
637
Diabetes with MCC
3,685
3.10 (2.9–3.3)
0.81 (0.7–0.93)
0.64 (0.59–0.68)
3.83 (3.3–4.4)
392
Esophagitis, Gastroenteritis and Miscellaneous Digestive Disorders without MCC
3,644
1.15 (1.0–1.3)
0.70 (0.6–0.8)
0.92 (0.88–0.96)
1.65 (1.4–2.0)
689
Kidney and Urinary Tract Infections with MCC
3,639
1.43 (1.3–1.5)
0.97 (0.86–1.1)
0.85 (0.81–0.89)
1.47 (1.3–1.7)
378
G.I. Hemorrhage with CC
3,521
1.38 (1.3–1.5)
0.71 (0.61–0.81)
0.84 (0.8–0.88)
1.96 (1.7–2.3)
698
Other Kidney and Urinary Tract Diagnoses with MCC
3,513
1.54 (1.4–1.7)
0.97 (0.85–1.1)
0.79 (0.74–0.84)
1.59 (1.4–1.8)
602
Cellulitis with MCC
3,349
2.80 (2.6–3.0)
0.70 (0.61–0.8)
0.58 (0.55–0.61)
4.01 (3.5–4.6)
314
Other Circulatory System Diagnoses with MCC
3,292
1.72 (1.6–1.9)
0.91 (0.79–1.0)
0.70 (0.66–0.74)
1.90 (1.6–2.2)
300
Peripheral Vascular Disorders with CC
2,963
3.48 (3.3–3.7)
0.43 (0.36–0.51)
0.39 (0.37–0.41)
8.12 (6.9–9.9)
Parenthesized values 95% confidence intervals; CC: complication or comorbidity; MCC: major complication or comorbidity; MV: mechanical ventilation.
This study is the first of its kind to identify incident episodes-of-care for DFU from administrative data and use these to estimate associations between ulceration and all-cause rates of mortality and resource utilization. Beneficiaries with history of at least one DFU experienced high incidence (54 DFU per 100 beneficiary-years) and recurrence (median duration to recurrence of approximately three years, with 35.7% recidivism in the first year after healing). During foot ulcer episodes-of-care, all-cause inpatient admission was 2.8 times more likely and death was 1.5 times more likely compared to periods following healing in the same beneficiaries.
In many ways, our results are consistent with previous literature characterizing DFU. The most comparable mortality incidence ratio we reported (IR = 2.2) is well within the 95% confidence interval reported by Saljua and colleagues (CI: 1.85–2.85).[
Margolis DJ, Malay DS, Hoffstad OJ, et al. Prevalence of diabetes, diabetic foot ulcer, and lower extremity amputation among Medicare beneficiaries, 2006 to 2008: Data Points #1. In: Data Points Publication Series. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2011.
] reported an annual prevalence of DFU among Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes of approximately 8%, consistent with our estimate of 8.3%. Unsurprisingly, our results also agree well with data on DFU healing rates and recurrence after healing because we tuned our episode-of-care model to match these parameters. Our work also extends that of Mehta and colleagues,[
] who presented an unvalidated episode-of-care model for DFU and used this model to estimate attributable costs for several DFU-related codes.
We observed that DFU episodes-of-care had a broad association with all-cause mortality and inpatient admissions, including for conditions not commonly thought to be associated with DFU such as heart failure (IR = 2.0), renal failure (IR = 1.9), myocardial infarction (IR = 2.1), and pulmonary edema (IR = 1.8). Brownrigg and colleagues,[
] who reported similar findings for diabetic foot ulceration and its independent association with all-cause mortality, hypothesized several possible physiological mechanisms for such findings, including near-term consequences of DFU such as severe sepsis (IR = 2.2) and its sequelae, such as multiorgan failure, and long-term consequences to the cardiovascular and renal systems from chronic inflammation associated with DFU.
Our results suggest that provision of comprehensive preventive care to arrest development of DFU in high-risk populations may impact healthcare outcomes beyond those traditionally associated with diabetic foot syndrome. Evidence-based and recommended preventive care includes[
] routine foot exam by a specialist provider, use of appropriate therapeutic footwear to be worn by the patient at all times, structured education for the patient on self-care, daily self-exams by the patient, aggressive and prompt treatment of pre-ulcerative lesions such as callus and blister, and once-daily foot temperature monitoring to identify inflammation preceding DFU. Many of these recommended practices were recently incorporated into a study of real-world practice conducted by Isaac and colleagues, who reported large reductions in all-cause inpatient admissions (RRR = 52%).[
Lower resource utilization for patients with healed diabetic foot ulcers during participation in a prevention program with foot temperature monitoring.
] Another study found that patients with a preventative foot exam in the last year had lower odds (OR = 0.67, CI: 0.46–0.96) of being hospitalized for any cause within that year.[
One strength of our study is that we estimated attributable resource utilization without identifying a matched cohort. While a case-control approach is most commonly used to quantify association between risk factors and outcomes, we used our episode-of-care model to compare intervals during and after DFU healing for each beneficiary, implicitly accounting for overall trends in resource utilization and mortality rates that may exist with aging and disease progression. We adopted this approach for two reasons. First, other researchers[
] have reported challenges identifying propensity-matched controls for patients at-risk for DFU. Second, our approach allows us to better isolate the impact of DFU temporally on specific outcomes of interest because we are comparing periods with and without DFU in the same cases instead of comparing cases with DFU to cases without DFU, which is less temporally-specific to the episode-of-care.
5. Limitations
Several aspects of our work warrant additional consideration. First, we validated our episode-of-care model against aggregate results from the literature. Another approach would be to prospectively validate the episodes-of-care model against clinical data in the medical records. For a suitably large and representative cohort, such an approach would represent the gold-standard for validating our model.
Second, a major limitation of our episodes-of-care model is that we are unable to distinguish between multiple concurrent DFU. While ICD-10 diagnosis codes partially address this limitation by allowing coders to specify laterality and location, our seven-year data set spans usage of both ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes. Furthermore, use of laterality in ICD-10 codes can be inconsistent, limiting utility of these indicators.
Finally, we inherited all limitations traditionally associated with use of Medicare LDS data. These include under-diagnosis of chronic conditions in real-world practice, the disparity between care received and care needed, lack of clinical context related to diagnosis and procedure codes reported on claims, inaccuracies related to financial incentives because claims are tied to potential reimbursement, and limited generalizability because the LDS cohort is comprised predominantly of white Americans older than 65 years of age.
6. Conclusions
A newly-validated episode-of-care model for diabetic foot ulceration suggests an underappreciated association between diabetic foot ulcer prevalence, all-cause mortality (IR = 1.5), and all-cause inpatient admissions (IR = 2.8). Diabetic foot ulceration increases the likelihood of inpatient admission for cardiovascular, renal, and pulmonary complications, with DFU potentially triggering a sinister cascade of excess acute-on-chronic complications. Our results suggest that a renewed focus on prevention of diabetic foot complications may be warranted and that such efforts may have broader than anticipated impact on health outcomes.
Contributions
Mr. Petersen had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the results and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Concept and design: Petersen, Linde-Zwirble, Tan, Salgado, Bloom, and Armstrong.
Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Petersen, Zwirble, Tan, and Salgado.
Drafting of the manuscript: Petersen and Linde-Zwirble.
Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
Statistical analysis: Petersen and Linde-Zwirble.
Obtained funding: Not applicable.
Supervision: Armstrong and Bloom.
Data availability
The data underlying this study belong to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Data are available to all researchers following a standard application process and signing of a data use agreement. The authors paid a fee to access the CMS data used in this study, with a fee schedule in accordance with CMS policies. Further instructions for submitting an application to purchase access to the Medicare Limited Data Set can be found at:
Petersen, Salgado, and Bloom disclose partial funding from Podimetrics, Inc. for the analysis of data and preparation of the manuscript.
Declaration of Competing Interest
Petersen, Salgado, and Bloom are employees and shareholders of Podimetrics Inc. Linde-Zwirble has previously consulted for Podimetrics Inc. Rothenberg is a consulting medical director for Podimetrics Inc. Armstrong is on the scientific advisory board of Podimetrics Inc. Armstrong and Tan disclose funding from the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive Kidney Diseases (Armstrong under 1R01124789-01A1, and Tan under 1K23DK122126-03).
References
Sohn M.-W.
Budiman-Mak E.
Stuck R.M.
Siddiqui F.
Lee T.A.
Diagnostic accuracy of existing methods for identifying diabetic foot ulcers from inpatient and outpatient datasets.
World Health Organization. ICD-10 : International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems : Tenth Revision Vol. I, Vol. I,. WHO; 2004.
Margolis DJ, Malay DS, Hoffstad OJ, et al. Prevalence of diabetes, diabetic foot ulcer, and lower extremity amputation among Medicare beneficiaries, 2006 to 2008: Data Points #1. In: Data Points Publication Series. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2011.
Lower resource utilization for patients with healed diabetic foot ulcers during participation in a prevention program with foot temperature monitoring.
00542-8&id=gr1.jpg){kind=link}
00542-8&id=gr2.jpg){kind=link}