Search

Objective: The aim of the study was to investigate racial/ethnic differences in emergency care for patients with joint dislocation. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of the dislocation component of the National Emergency Department Safety Study. Using a principal diagnosis of dislocation, we identified emergency department (ED) visits for joint dislocations in 53 urban EDs across 19 US states between 2003 and 2005. Quality of care was evaluated based on 9 guideline-concordant care measures. Results: Of the 1945 patients included in this analysis, 1124 (58%) were white; 561 (29%), black, and 260 (13%), Hispanic. One-third of the 53 EDs cared for 51% of minority patients. After multivariable adjustment, black patients were less likely to receive any analgesic treatment (odds ratio [OR], 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51-0.90) or opioid treatment (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.41-0.997), waited longer to receive analgesia (mean difference in time to analgesic treatment, 32 minutes; 95% CI, 16-52 minutes), and were less likely to receive reassessments of pain (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.34-0.70) compared with white patients. There were no ethnic disparities in most of the care measures between Hispanic and white patients. There were no disparities in initial pain assessment, pre- and postprocedural neurovascular assessment, procedural monitoring, or success of joint reduction across the racial/ethnic groups. Conclusions: Black patients presenting to the ED with joint dislocations received lower quality of care in some, but not all, areas compared with white patients. Future interventions should target these areas to eliminate racial disparities in dislocation care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinical trials demonstrated that women treated for breast cancer with anthracycline or trastuzumab are at increased risk for heart failure and/or cardiomyopathy (HF/CM), but the generalizability of these findings is unknown. We estimated real-world adjuvant anthracycline and trastuzumab use and their associations with incident HF/CM.Methods: We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study of 12,500 women diagnosed with incident, invasive breast cancer from January 1, 1999 through December 31, 2007, at eight integrated Cancer Research Network health systems. Using administrative procedure and pharmacy codes, we identified anthracycline, trastuzumab, and other chemotherapy use. We identified incident HF/CM following chemotherapy initiation and assessed risk of HF/CM with time-varying chemotherapy exposures vs no chemotherapy. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with adjustment for age at diagnosis, stage, Cancer Research Network site, year of diagnosis, radiation therapy, and comorbidities.Results: Among 12 500 women (mean age = 60 years, range = 22-99 years), 29.6% received anthracycline alone, 0.9% received trastuzumab alone, 3.5% received anthracycline plus trastuzumab, 19.5% received other chemotherapy, and 46.5% received no chemotherapy. Anthracycline and trastuzumab recipients were younger, with fewer comorbidities than recipients of other chemotherapy or none. Compared with no chemotherapy, the risk of HF/CM was higher in patients treated with anthracycline alone (adjusted HR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.11 to 1.76), although the increased risk was similar to other chemotherapy (adjusted HR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.25 to 1.77); the risk was highly increased in patients treated with trastuzumab alone (adjusted HR = 4.12, 95% CI = 2.30 to 7.42) or anthracycline plus trastuzumab (adjusted HR = 7.19, 95% CI = 5.00 to 10.35).Conclusions: Anthracycline and trastuzumab were primarily used in younger, healthier women and associated with increased HF/CM risk compared with no chemotherapy. This population-based observational study complements findings from clinical trials on cancer treatment safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Limited literature exists on the association between medication adherence and outcomes among patients with heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a retrospective longitudinal cohort study of 557 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (defined by EF <50%) in a large health maintenance organization. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to assess the relationship between adherence (with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, [beta]-blockers, and aldosterone antagonists) and the primary outcome of all-cause mortality plus cardiovascular hospitalizations. Mean follow-up time was 1.1 years. Nonadherence (defined as <80% adherence) was associated with a statistically significant increase in the primary outcome in the cohort overall (hazard ratio 2.07, 95% confidence interval 1.62-2.64; P < .0001). This association remained significant when all 3 classes of heart failure medications and the components of the composite end point were considered separately and when the adherence threshold was varied to 70% or 90%. CONCLUSIONS: Medication nonadherence was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular hospitalizations in a community heart failure population. Further research is needed to define systems of care that optimize adherence among patients with heart failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nonadherence to beta blockers, statins, or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors is common (21%-29%) among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Patients who do not adhere to their medication regimens are at increased risk of mortality, cardiovascular hospitalizations, and revascularization procedures; thus, medication nonadherence should be a target for quality improvement interventions to maximize the outcomes of CAD patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy makers, researchers, clinicians, and the public are frustrated that research in the health sciences has not resulted in a greater improvement in patient outcomes. Our experience as clinicians and researchers suggests that this frustration could be reduced if health sciences research were directed by 5 broad principles: (1) the needs of patients and populations determine the research agenda; (2) the research agenda addresses contextual and implementation issues, including the development of delivery and accountability systems; (3) the research agenda determines the research methods rather than methods determines the research agenda; (4) researchers and clinicians collaborate to define the research agenda, allocate resources, and implement findings; and (5) the level of funding for implementation research is commensurate with and proportional to the magnitude of the task. To keep the research agenda focused on the task of improving health and to acknowledge that the effort must be seen as more comprehensive than translating or transferring research into practice (TRIP), we suggest that the task be reframed, using the term optimizing practice through research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study sought to determine whether a computerized tool that alerted pharmacists when pregnant patients were prescribed U.S. Food and Drug Administration pregnancy risk category D or X medications was effective in decreasing dispensings of these medications.Design: Randomized trial. Pharmacy, diagnostic, and laboratory data were linked to identify pregnant patients prescribed targeted medications. Women (n = 11,100) were randomized to intervention or usual care. Physicians and pharmacists collaborated on the intervention.Measurements: The primary outcome was the proportion of pregnant women dispensed a category D or X medication. The secondary outcome was the total number of first dispensings of targeted medications.Results: A total of 2.9% of intervention (n = 177) and 5.5% of usual care (n = 276) patients were dispensed targeted medications (p < 0.001): 1.8% of intervention (n = 108) and 3.9% of usual care (n = 198) patients were dispensed only category D medication(s); 0.9% of intervention (n = 54) and 1.2% of usual care (n = 58) patients were dispensed only category X medication(s); 0.2% of intervention (n = 15) and 0.4% of usual care (n = 20) patients were dispensed both category D and X medications (p = 0.05). This resulted in intervention patients receiving 238 dispensings of unique targeted medications and usual care patients receiving 361 dispensings of unique targeted medications (p = 0.03). The study was stopped primarily due to 2 false-positive alert types: Misidentification of medications as contraindicated in pregnancy by the pharmacy information system and misidentification of pregnancy related to delayed transfer of diagnosis information.Conclusion: Coupling data from information systems with knowledge and skills of physicians and pharmacists resulted in improved prescribing safety. Systems limitations contributed to project discontinuation. Linking ambulatory clinical, laboratory, and pharmacy information to provide safety alerts is not sufficient to ensure project success and sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) measure and report quality process measures for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), but little is known about how these measures are correlated with each other and the degree to which inferences about a hospital's outcomes can be made from its performance on publicly reported processes.Objective: To determine correlations among AMI core process measures and the degree to which they explain the variation in hospital-specific, risk-standardized, 30-day mortality rates.Design, Setting, and Participants: We assessed hospital performance in the CMS/JCAHO AMI core process measures using 2002-2003 data from 962 hospitals participating in the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction (NRMI) and correlated these measures with each other and with hospital-level, risk-standardized, 30-day mortality rates derived from Medicare claims data.Main Outcome Measures: Hospital performance on AMI core measures; hospital-specific, risk-standardized, 30-day mortality rates for AMI patients aged 66 years or older.Results: We found moderately strong correlations (correlation coefficients > or =0.40; P values <.001) for all pairwise comparisons between beta-blocker use at admission and discharge, aspirin use at admission and discharge, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use, and weaker, but statistically significant, correlations between these medication measures and smoking cessation counseling and time to reperfusion therapy measures (correlation coefficients <0.40; P values <.001). Some process measures were significantly correlated with risk-standardized, 30-day mortality rates (P values <.001) but together explained only 6.0% of hospital-level variation in risk-standardized, 30-day mortality rates for patients with AMI.Conclusions: The publicly reported AMI process measures capture a small proportion of the variation in hospitals' risk-standardized short-term mortality rates. Multiple measures that reflect a variety of processes and also outcomes, such as risk-standardized mortality rates, are needed to more fully characterize hospital performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Women who seek medical care following sexual assault are usually evaluated and treated in an emergency department (ED). Therefore, EDs can be an important source of sexual assault surveillance data. The authors compared the incidence of sexual assault presenting for emergency care in a single county during July to November of 1974 and 1991. Participants included all female sexual assault victims aged 14 and older who presented for ED evaluation. Treating physicians prospectively collected data using standardized forms. The z statistic was used to compare sexual assault incidence. There was a 60% increase in the incidence of sexual assault victims presenting for emergency care in 1991 compared to 1974, primarily due to an increase in the incidence of women presenting to the ED after rapes by known assailants. In contrast, the annual incidence of reported stranger assaults was similar in the two study years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We compared six-month health-related quality of life (HRQL) for high-risk patients with medically refractory ischemia randomized to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.Background: Mortality rates after PCI and CABG surgery are similar. Therefore, differences in HRQL outcomes may help in the selection of a revascularization procedure.Methods: Patients were enrolled in a Veterans Affairs multicenter randomized trial comparing PCI versus CABG for patients with medically refractory ischemia and one or more risk factors for adverse outcome; 389 of 423 patients (92%) alive six months after randomization completed an Short Form-36 (SF-36) health status survey. Primary outcomes were the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores from the SF-36. Multivariable analyses were used to evaluate whether PCI or CABG surgery was associated with better PCS or MCS scores after adjusting for over 20 baseline variables.Results: There were no significant differences in either PCS scores (38.7 vs. 37.3 for PCI and CABG, respectively; p = 0.23) or MCS scores (45.5 vs. 46.1, p = 0.58) between the treatment arms. In multivariable models, there remained no difference in HRQL for post-PCI versus post-CABG patients (for PCS, absolute difference = 0.56 +/- standard error of 1.14, p = 0.63; for MCS, absolute difference = -1.23 +/- 1.12, p = 0.27). We had 97% power to detect a four-point difference in scores, where four to seven points is a clinically important difference.Conclusions: High-risk patients with medically refractory ischemia randomized to PCI versus CABG surgery have equivalent six-month HRQL. Therefore, HRQL concerns should not drive decision-making regarding selection of a revascularization procedure for these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are increasingly used for primary prevention after randomized, controlled trials demonstrating that they reduce the risk of death in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The extent to which the clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes of unselected, community-based patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction undergoing primary prevention ICD implantation in a real-world setting compare with those enrolled in the randomized, controlled trials is not well characterized. This study is being conducted to address these questions.Methods and Results: The study cohort includes consecutive patients undergoing primary prevention ICD placement between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2009 in 7 health plans. Baseline clinical characteristics were acquired from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry. Longitudinal data collection is underway, and will include hospitalization, mortality, and resource use from standardized health plan data archives. Data regarding ICD therapies will be obtained through chart abstraction and adjudicated by a panel of experts in device therapy. Compared with the populations of primary prevention ICD therapy randomized, controlled trials, the cohort (n=2621) is on average significantly older (by 2.5-6.5 years), more often female, more often from racial and ethnic minority groups, and has a higher burden of coexisting conditions. The cohort is similar, however, to a national population undergoing primary prevention ICD placement.Conclusions: Patients undergoing primary prevention ICD implantation in this study differ from those enrolled in the randomized, controlled trials that established the efficacy of ICDs. Understanding a broad range of health outcomes, including ICD therapies, will provide patients, clinicians, and policy makers with contemporary data to inform decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To study in myocardial infarction (MI) whether documentation of ischaemic symptoms is associated with quality of care and outcomes, and to compare patient reports of ischaemic symptoms during interviews with chart documentation.Design: Observational acute MI study from 2003 to 2004 (Prospective Registry Evaluating Myocardial Infarction: Event and Recovery).Setting: 19 diverse US hospitals.Patients: 2094 consecutive patients with MI (10 911 patients screened; 3953 patients were eligible and enrolled) with both positive cardiac enzymes and other evidence of infarction (eg, symptoms, electrocardiographic changes). Transferred patients and those with confounding non-cardiac comorbidity were not included (n = 1859).Main Outcome Measures: Quality of care indicators and adjusted in-hospital survival.Results: The records of 10% of all patients with MI (217/2094) contained no documented ischaemic symptoms at presentation. Patients without documented symptoms were less likely (p<0.05) to receive aspirin (89% vs 96%) or beta-blockers (77% vs 90%) within 24 hours, reperfusion therapy for ST-elevation MI (7% vs 58%) or to survive their hospitalisation (adjusted odds ratio = 3.2, 95% CI 1.8 to 5.8). Survivors without documented symptoms were also less likely (p<0.05) to be discharged with aspirin (87% vs 93%), beta-blockers (81% vs 91%), ACE/ARB (67% vs 80%), or smoking cessation counselling (46% vs 66%). In the subset of 1356 (65%) interviewed patients, most of those without documented ischaemic symptoms (75%) reported presenting symptoms consistent with ischaemia.Conclusions: Failure to document patients' presenting MI symptoms is associated with poorer quality of care from admission to discharge, and higher in-hospital mortality. Symptom recognition may represent an important opportunity to improve the quality of MI care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rates of death and myocardial infarction were assessed for a national sample of acute coronary syndrome patients after stopping clopidogrel. In the first 90 days after stopping treatment, patients experienced a nearly twofold increased risk of adverse events compared with subsequent follow-up intervals for patients treated medically without stents and for patients treated with coronary stents. This suggests a possible clopidogrel rebound effect, but additional studies are needed to support this hypothesis and to identify strategies to reduce early events after clopidogrel cessation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cardiologists are increasingly moving from independent practice to direct employment by hospitals. Hospital employment has the potential to improve care coordination and delivery, but little is known about its effect on care quality and outcomes., Objectives: In this study, we sought to assess the association between hospital employment of cardiologists and patient outcomes, care quality, and utilization among patients hospitalized with incident acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or heart failure (HF)., Methods: We used a sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized with incident AMI or HF from 2008 to 2019. We identified the accountable cardiologists that cared for these patients and determined their employment status by means of tax identification numbers. We used difference-in-differences methods to compare clinical outcomes, quality measures, and utilization for patients treated by hospital-employed cardiologists after switching from independent to hospital-employed practice, to outcomes for patients treated by cardiologists who remained independent. Models were adjusted for time trends and patient, hospital, and cardiologist characteristics. Patient outcomes were in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and 30-day readmission. Quality measures were receipt of: 1) a guideline-recommended test to assess cardiac function; and 2) a 30-day follow-up clinic visit. Utilization measures were length of stay and, for AMI patients, the proportion receiving coronary revascularization., Results: The proportion of U.S. cardiologists employed by hospitals increased from 26% in 2008 to 63% in 2019. We identified 186,052 AMI and 259,849 HF patients cared for by cardiologists who switched to hospital employment and 168,052 AMI and 245,769 HF patients cared for by independent cardiologists. Patient characteristics were similar (mean age 80.8 years; 47% men). We found no significant differences in outcomes (eg, adjusted difference in 30-day mortality 0.03% [95% CI: -0.39% to 0.45%] for AMI patients and -0.05% [95% CI: -0.37% to 0.27%] for HF patients); no differences in most quality metrics except a small increase in the proportion of HF patients with 30-day follow-up (adjusted difference: 1.04%; 95% CI: 0.46%-1.62%); and no differences in utilization between patients treated by hospital-employed cardiologists (postswitch) vs independent cardiologists., Conclusions: Among U.S. cardiologists, there has been a large shift from independent practice to direct employment by hospitals. We found minimal evidence that cardiologist employment by hospitals improves care quality or outcomes., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was supported by funding from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health (R01HL153154). The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Despite advances in treatment and care quality for patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF), minimal improvement in mortality has been observed after HF hospitalization since 2010., Objective: To evaluate trends in mortality rates across specific intervals after hospitalization., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study evaluated a random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with incident HF hospitalization from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from February 2023 to May 2024., Main Outcomes and Measures: Unadjusted mortality rates were calculated by dividing the number of all-cause deaths by the number of patients with incident HF hospitalization for the following periods: in-hospital, 30 days (0-30 days after hospital discharge), short term (31 days to 1 year after discharge), intermediate term (1-2 years after discharge), and long term (2-3 years after discharge). Each period was considered separately (ie, patients who died during one period were not counted in subsequent periods). Annual unadjusted and risk-adjusted mortality ratios were calculated (using logistic regression to account for differences in patient characteristics), defined as observed mortality divided by expected mortality based on 2008 rates., Results: A total of 1 256 041 patients (mean [SD] age, 83.0 [7.6] years; 56.0% female; 86.0% White) were hospitalized with incident HF. There was a substantial decrease in the mortality ratio for the in-hospital period (unadjusted ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.77; risk-adjusted ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.71-0.76). For subsequent periods, mortality ratios increased through 2013 and then decreased through 2018, resulting in no reductions in unadjusted postdischarge mortality during the full study period (30-day mortality ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.82-1.06; short-term mortality ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87-1.17; intermediate-term mortality ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.79-1.19; and long-term mortality ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.76-1.16) and small reductions in risk-adjusted postdischarge mortality during the full study period (30-day mortality ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.86-0.90; short-term mortality ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.94-0.95; intermediate-term mortality ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.95; and long-term mortality ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93-0.96)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, there was a substantial decrease in in-hospital mortality for patients hospitalized with incident HF from 2008 to 2018, but little to no reduction in mortality for subsequent periods up to 3 years after hospitalization. These results suggest opportunities to improve longitudinal outpatient care for patients with HF after hospital discharge.

Objective: To develop an accurate and reproducible measure of vertical integration between physicians and hospitals (defined as hospital or health system employment of physicians), which can be used to assess the impact of integration on healthcare quality and spending., Data Sources and Study Setting: We use multiple data sources including from the Internal Revenue Service, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and others to determine the Tax Identification Numbers (TINs) that hospitals and physicians use to bill Medicare for services, and link physician billing TINs to hospital-related TINs., Study Design: We developed a new measure of vertical integration, based on the TINs that hospitals and physicians use to bill Medicare, using a broad set of sources for hospital-related TINs. We considered physicians as hospital-employed if they bill Medicare primarily or exclusively using hospital-related TINs. We assessed integration status for all physicians who billed Medicare from 1999 to 2019. We compared this measure with others used in the existing literature. We conducted a simulation study which highlights the importance of accurately identifying integrated physicians when study the effects of integration., Data Collection/extraction Methods: We extracted physician and hospital-related TINs from multiple sources, emphasizing specificity (a small proportion of nonintegrated physicians identified as integrated)., Principal Findings: We identified 12,269 hospital-related TINs, used for billing by 546,775 physicians. We estimate that the percentage of integrated physicians rose from 19% in 1999 to 43% in 2019. Our approach identifies many additional physician practices as integrated; a simpler TIN measure, comparable with prior work, identifies only 30% (3877) of the TINs we identify. A service location measure, used in prior work, has both many false positives and false negatives., Conclusion: We developed a new measure of hospital-physician integration. This measure is reproducible and identifies many additional physician practices as integrated., (© 2024 Health Research and Educational Trust.)

Importance: The Million Hearts Model paid health care organizations to assess and reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Model effects on long-term outcomes are unknown., Objective: To estimate model effects on first-time myocardial infarctions (MIs) and strokes and Medicare spending over a period up to 5 years., Design, Setting, and Participants: This pragmatic cluster-randomized trial ran from 2017 to 2021, with organizations assigned to a model intervention group or standard care control group. Randomized organizations included 516 US-based primary care and specialty practices, health centers, and hospital-based outpatient clinics participating voluntarily. Of these organizations, 342 entered patients into the study population, which included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 40 to 79 years with no previous MI or stroke and with high or medium CVD risk (a 10-year predicted probability of MI or stroke [ie, CVD risk score] ≥15%) in 2017-2018., Intervention: Organizations agreed to perform guideline-concordant care, including routine CVD risk assessment and cardiovascular care management for high-risk patients. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services paid organizations to calculate CVD risk scores for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. CMS further rewarded organizations for reducing risk among high-risk beneficiaries (CVD risk score ≥30%)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included first-time CVD events (MIs, strokes, and transient ischemic attacks) identified in Medicare claims, combined first-time CVD events from claims and CVD deaths (coronary heart disease or cerebrovascular disease deaths) identified using the National Death Index, and Medicare Parts A and B spending for CVD events and overall. Outcomes were measured through 2021., Results: High- and medium-risk model intervention beneficiaries (n = 130 578) and standard care control beneficiaries (n = 88 286) were similar in age (median age, 72-73 y), sex (58%-59% men), race (7%-8% Black), and baseline CVD risk score (median, 24%). The probability of a first-time CVD event within 5 years was 0.3 percentage points lower for intervention beneficiaries than control beneficiaries (3.3% relative effect; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.97 [90% CI, 0.93-1.00]; P = .09). The 5-year probability of combined first-time CVD events and CVD deaths was 0.4 percentage points lower in the intervention group (4.2% relative effect; HR, 0.96 [90% CI, 0.93-0.99]; P = .02). Medicare spending for CVD events was similar between the groups (effect estimate, -$1.83 per beneficiary per month [90% CI, -$3.97 to -$0.30]; P = .16), as was overall Medicare spending including model payments (effect estimate, $2.11 per beneficiary per month [90% CI, -$16.66 to $20.89]; P = .85)., Conclusions and Relevance: The Million Hearts Model, which encouraged and paid for CVD risk assessment and reduction, reduced first-time MIs and strokes. Results support guidelines to use risk scores for CVD primary prevention., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04047147.

Starting around 2006, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) progressively reduced Medicare Fee-for-Service (M-FFS) payments for the principal noninvasive cardiac tests, when performed in a cardiologist office (Office), yet kept payments flat to increasing for the same tests, performed in the hospital-based outpatient (HBO) setting. This produced a growing gap between HBO and Office payments for the same tests, and thus an incentive for hospitals to acquire cardiology practices in order to move cardiac tests to the HBO location and capture the HBO/Office payment differential. We use difference-in-differences analysis, in which we compare national M-FFS trends in cardiac test location to those for a control group of several large, integrated Medicare Advantage (M-Adv) health systems over 2005-2015, which were not affected by these reimbursement changes, and provide evidence that these reimbursement changes led to a large shift in testing from Office to HBO. This shift was concurrent with a sharp rise in hospital-cardiologist integration. The rise in integration and the proportion of testing in HBO varied greatly across states. Independent practice remains viable in very large states, but is endangered in many states, and is all but extinct in a growing number of states.

Background Advances in technology and care quality have transformed the care of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), but little is known about trends in mortality rates across separate time periods after hospitalization. Methods and Results We identified all Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized with incident AMI from 2008 to 2018. We calculated unadjusted mortality rates by dividing the number of all-cause deaths by the number of patients with incident AMI for the following time periods: acute (in hospital), post acute (0-30 days after hospital discharge), short term (31 days to 1 year after discharge), intermediate term (1-2 years after discharge), and long term (2-3 years after discharge). Each period was considered separately (ie, patients who died during one period were not counted in subsequent periods). Using logistic regression to account for differences in patient characteristics, we calculated annual risk standardized mortality ratios defined as observed over expected mortality based on 2008 rates. Among 768 084 patients with incident AMI (mean age 81 years, 48% male, 87% White), declines in observed-to-expected mortality ratios were observed for each time period: acute (0.68 [95% CI, 0.66-0.71]), postacute (0.72 [95% CI, 0.71-0.75]), short term (0.77 [95% CI, 0.75-0.78]), intermediate term (0.79 [95% CI, 0.77-0.81]), and long term (0.77 [95% CI, 0.75-0.79]). Declines were observed both for patients with and without ST-segment-elevation AMI. Conclusions For patients with incident AMI, there have been improvements in mortality rates across periods spanning the hospital stay through 3 years after discharge, reflecting advances in AMI care from hospitalization through long-term outpatient follow-up.

Importance: Many physicians believe that most medical malpractice claims are random events. This study assessed the association of prior paid claims (including a single prior claim) with future paid claims; whether public disclosure of prior paid claims affects future paid claims; and whether the association of prior and future paid claims decayed over time., Objective: To examine the association of 1 or more prior paid medical malpractice claims with future paid claims., Design, Setting, and Participants: This study assessed the association between prior paid claims (including a single prior claim) with future claims; whether public disclosure of prior claims affects future paid claims; and whether the association of prior and future paid claims decayed over time. This retrospective case-control study included all 881 876 licensed physicians in the US. All data analysis took place between July, 2018 and January, 2023., Exposure: Paid medical malpractice claims., Main Outcome and Measures: Association between a prior paid medical malpractice claim and likelihood of a paid claim in a future period, compared with simulated results expected if paid claims are random events. Using the same outcomes, we also assessed whether public disclosure of paid claims affects future paid claim rates., Results: This study included all 881 876 physicians licensed to practice in the US at the time of the study. Overall, 3.3% of the 841 961 physicians with 0 paid claims in the prior period had 1 or more claims in the future period vs 12.4% of the 34 512 physicians with 1 paid claim in the prior period; 22.4% of the 4189 physicians with 2 paid claims in the prior period; and 37% of the 1214 physicians with 3 paid claims in the prior period. The association between prior claims and future claims was similar for high-medical-malpractice-risk and lower-risk specialties; 1 prior-period claim was associated with a 3.1 times higher likelihood of a future-period claim for high-risk specialties (95% CI, 2.8-3.4) vs a 4.2 times higher likelihood for lower-risk specialties (95% CI, 3.8-4.6). The predictive power of a prior paid claim for future claims declined gradually as the time since the prior claim increased, for prior or future periods up to 10 years. Public disclosure did not affect the association between prior and future paid claims., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of paid medical malpractice claims for all US physicians, a single prior paid claim was associated with substantial, long-lived higher future claim risk, independent of whether a physician was practicing in a high- or low-risk specialty, or whether a state publicly disclosed paid claims. Timely, noncoercive intervention, including education, has the potential to reduce future claims.

Importance: The Million Hearts Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) Risk Reduction Model pays provider organizations for measuring and reducing Medicare patients' cardiovascular risk., Objective: To assess whether the model increases the initiation or intensification of antihypertensive medications or statins among patients with blood pressure or low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels above guideline thresholds for treatment intensification., Design, Setting, and Participants: This prespecified secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized, pragmatic trial included primary care and cardiology practices, health care centers, and hospital-based outpatient departments across the US. Participants included Medicare patients who were enrolled into the model in 2017 by participating organizations and who were at high risk and at medium risk of a myocardial infarction or stroke in 10 years. Patient outcomes were analyzed for 1 year postenrollment (through December 2018) using an intent-to-treat design. Analysis began November 2019., Interventions: US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services paid organizations for risk stratifying Medicare patients and reducing CVD risk among high-risk patients through discussing risk scores, developing individualized risk reduction plans, and following up with patients twice yearly., Main Outcomes and Measures: Initiating or intensifying statin or antihypertensive therapy within 1 year of enrollment, measured in Medicare Part D claims, and LDL cholesterol and systolic blood pressure levels approximately 1 year after enrollment, measured in usual care and reported to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services via a data registry (data complete for 51% of high-risk enrollees). The study's primary outcome (incidence of first-time myocardial infarction and stroke) is not reported because the trial is ongoing., Results: A total of 330 primary care and cardiology practices, health care centers, and hospital-based outpatient departments and 125 436 Medicare patients were included in this analysis. High-risk patients in the intervention group had a mean (SD) age of 74 (4.1), 15 213 (63%) were male, 21 657 (90%) were receiving antihypertensive medication at baseline, and 16 558 (69%) were receiving statins. Almost all (21 791 [91%]) high-risk intervention group patients had above-threshold systolic blood pressure level (>130 mm Hg), LDL cholesterol level (>70 mg/dL), or both. Patients in the intervention group with these risk factors were more likely than control patients (8127 [37.3%] vs 4753 [32.4%]; adjusted difference in percentage points, 4.8; 95% CI, 2.9-6.7; P < .001) to initiate or intensify statins or antihypertensive medication. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services did not pay for CVD risk reduction for medium-risk enrollees, but initiation or intensification rates for these enrollees were also higher in the intervention vs control groups (12 668 [27.9%] vs 7544 [24.8%]; adjusted difference in percentage points, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.9-4.3; P < .001). Among high-risk enrollees with clinical data approximately 1 year after enrollment, LDL cholesterol level was slightly lower in the intervention vs control groups (mean [SD], 89 [31.8] vs 91 [32.1] mg/dL; adjusted difference in percentage points, -1.8; 95% CI, -2.9 to -0.6; P = .002), as was systolic blood pressure (mean [SD], 133 [15.7] vs 135 [16.4] mm Hg; adjusted difference in percentage points, -1.7; 95% CI, -2.8 to -0.6; P = .003)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, a pay-for-performance model led to modest increases in the use of CVD medications in a range of organizations, despite high medication use at baseline.

Background Quality of care incentives and reimbursements for cardiovascular testing differ between insurance providers. We hypothesized that there are differences in the use of guideline-concordant testing between Medicaid versus commercial insurance patients <65 years, and between Medicare Advantage versus Medicare fee-for-service patients ≥65 years. Methods and Results Using data from the Colorado All-Payer Claims Database from 2015 to 2018, we identified patients eligible to receive a high-value test recommended by guidelines: assessment of left ventricular function among patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction or incident heart failure, or a low-value test that provides minimal patient benefit: stress testing prior to low-risk surgery or routine stress testing within 2 years of percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Among 145 616 eligible patients, 37% had fee-for-service Medicare, 18% Medicare Advantage, 22% Medicaid, and 23% commercial insurance. Using multilevel logistic regression models adjusted for patient characteristics, Medicaid patients were less likely to receive high-value testing for acute myocardial infarction (odds ratio [OR], 0.84 [0.73-0.98]; P =0.03) and heart failure (OR, 0.59 [0.51-0.70]; P <0.01) compared with commercially insured patients. Medicare Advantage patients were more likely to receive high-value testing for acute myocardial infarction (OR, 1.35 [1.15-1.59]; P <0.01) and less likely to receive low-value testing after percutaneous coronary intervention/ coronary artery bypass graft (OR, 0.63 [0.55-0.72]; P <0.01) compared with Medicare fee-for-service patients. Conclusions Guideline-concordant testing was less likely to occur among patients with Medicaid compared with commercial insurance, and more likely to occur among patients with Medicare Advantage compared with fee-for-service Medicare. Insurance plan features may provide valuable targets to improve guideline-concordant testing.

Background: Major gaps exist in the routine initiation and dose up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Without novel approaches to improve prescribing, the cumulative benefits of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction treatment will be largely unrealized. Direct-to-consumer marketing and shared decision making reflect a culture where patients are increasingly involved in treatment choices, creating opportunities for prescribing interventions that engage patients., Methods: The EPIC-HF (Electronically Delivered, Patient-Activation Tool for Intensification of Medications for Chronic Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction) trial randomized patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction from a diverse health system to usual care versus patient activation tools-a 3-minute video and 1-page checklist-delivered electronically 1 week before, 3 days before, and 24 hours before a cardiology clinic visit. The tools encouraged patients to work collaboratively with their clinicians to "make one positive change" in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction prescribing. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with GDMT medication initiations and dose intensifications from immediately preceding the cardiology clinic visit to 30 days after, compared with usual care during the same period., Results: EPIC-HF enrolled 306 patients, 290 of whom attended a clinic visit during the study period: 145 were sent the patient activation tools and 145 were controls. The median age of patients was 65 years; 29% were female, 11% were Black, 7% were Hispanic, and the median ejection fraction was 32%. Preclinic data revealed significant GDMT opportunities, with no patients on target doses of β-blocker, sacubitril/valsartan, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. From immediately preceding the cardiology clinic visit to 30 days after, 49.0% in the intervention and 29.7% in the control experienced an initiation or intensification of their GDMT ( P =0.001). The majority of these changes were made at the clinician encounter itself and involved dose uptitrations. There were no deaths and no significant differences in hospitalization or emergency department visits at 30 days between groups., Conclusions: A patient activation tool delivered electronically before a cardiology clinic visit improved clinician intensification of GDMT. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03334188.

Telemedicine allows the remote exchange of medical data between patients and healthcare professionals. It is used to increase patients' access to care and provide effective healthcare services at a distance. During the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, telemedicine has thrived and emerged worldwide as an indispensable resource to improve the management of isolated patients due to lockdown or shielding, including those with hypertension. The best proposed healthcare model for telemedicine in hypertension management should include remote monitoring and transmission of vital signs (notably blood pressure) and medication adherence plus education on lifestyle and risk factors, with video consultation as an option. The use of mixed automated feedback services with supervision of a multidisciplinary clinical team (physician, nurse, or pharmacist) is the ideal approach. The indications include screening for suspected hypertension, management of older adults, medically underserved people, high-risk hypertensive patients, patients with multiple diseases, and those isolated due to pandemics or national emergencies.

Background: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) benefits from initiation and intensification of multiple pharmacotherapies. Unfortunately, there are major gaps in the routine use of these drugs. Without novel approaches to improve prescribing, the cumulative benefits of HFrEF treatment will be largely unrealized. Direct-to-consumer marketing and shared decision making reflect a culture where patients are increasingly involved in treatment choices, creating opportunities for prescribing interventions that engage patients., Hypothesis: Encouraging patients to engage providers in HFrEF prescribing decisions will improve the use of guideline-directed medical therapies., Design: The Electronically delivered, Patient-activation tool for Intensification of Chronic medications for Heart Failure with reduced ejection fraction (EPIC-HF) trial randomizes patients with HFrEF to usual care versus patient-activation tools-a 3-minute video and 1-page checklist-delivered prior to cardiology clinic visits that encourage patients to work collaboratively with their clinicians to intensify HFrEF prescribing. The study assesses the effectiveness of the EPIC-HF intervention to improve guideline-directed medical therapy in the month after its delivery while using an implementation design to also understand the reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance of this approach within the context of real-world care delivery. Study enrollment was completed in January 2020, with a total 305 patients. Baseline data revealed significant opportunities, with <1% of patients on optimal HFrEF medical therapy., Summary: The EPIC-HF trial assesses the implementation, effectiveness, and safety of patient engagement in HFrEF prescribing decisions. If successful, the tool can be easily disseminated and may inform similar interventions for other chronic conditions., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)