Background: Telehealth can be defined as using remote technologies to provide health care. It may increase access to care among people with sickle cell disease (SCD). This study examined (1) telehealth use, (2) characteristics of telehealth use, and (3) differences between telehealth users and nonusers among people with SCD during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of Medicaid claims among four states [California (CA), Georgia (GA), Michigan (MI), Tennessee (TN)] participating in the Sickle Cell Data Collection program. Study participants were individuals ≥1 year old with SCD enrolled in Medicaid September 2019-December 2020. Telehealth encounters during the pandemic were characterized by provider specialty. Health care utilization was compared between those who did (users) and did not (nonusers) use telehealth, stratified by before and during the pandemic. Results: A total of 8,681 individuals with SCD (1,638 CA; 3,612 GA; 1,880 MI; and 1,551 TN) were included. The proportion of individuals with SCD that accessed telehealth during the pandemic varied across states from 29% in TN to 80% in CA. During the pandemic, there was a total of 21,632 telehealth encounters across 3,647 users. In two states (MI and GA), over a third of telehealth encounters were with behavioral health providers. Telehealth users had a higher average number of health care encounters during the pandemic: emergency department (pooled mean = 2.6 for users vs. 1.5 for nonusers), inpatient (1.2 for users vs. 0.6 for nonusers), and outpatient encounters (6.0 for users vs. 3.3 for nonusers). Conclusions: Telehealth was frequently used at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic by people with SCD. Future research should focus on the context, facilitators, and barriers of its implementation in this population.

OBJECTIVE: The 2014 US National Strategy for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria (CARB) aimed to reduce inappropriate inpatient antibiotic use by 20% for monitored conditions, such as community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), by 2020. We evaluated annual trends in length of therapy (LOT) in adults hospitalized with uncomplicated CAP from 2013 through 2020. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among adults with a primary diagnosis of bacterial or unspecified pneumonia using International Classification of Diseases Ninth and Tenth Revision codes in MarketScan and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services databases. We included patients with length of stay (LOS) of 2-10 days, discharged home with self-care, and not rehospitalized in the 3 days following discharge. We estimated inpatient LOT based on LOS from the PINC AI Healthcare Database. The total LOT was calculated by summing estimated inpatient LOT and actual postdischarge LOT. We examined trends from 2013 to 2020 in patients with total LOT >7 days, which was considered an indicator of likely excessive LOT. RESULTS: There were 44,976 and 400,928 uncomplicated CAP hospitalizations among patients aged 18-64 years and ≥65 years, respectively. From 2013 to 2020, the proportion of patients with total LOT >7 days decreased by 25% (68% to 51%) among patients aged 18-64 years and by 27% (68%-50%) among patients aged ≥65 years. CONCLUSIONS: Although likely excessive LOT for uncomplicated CAP patients decreased since 2013, the proportion of patients treated with LOT >7 days still exceeded 50% in 2020. Antibiotic stewardship programs should continue to pursue interventions to reduce likely excessive LOT for common infections.