Insertable cardiac monitoring results in higher rates of atrial fibrillation diagnosis and oral anticoagulation prescription after ischaemic stroke.

AIMS: After an ischaemic stroke, atrial fibrillation (AF) detection allows for improved secondary prevention strategies. This study aimed to compare AF detection and oral anticoagulant (OAC) initiation in patients with an insertable cardiac monitor (ICM) vs. external cardiac monitor (ECM) after ischaemic stroke. METHODS AND RESULTS: Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) insurance claims and Abbott Labs device registration data were used to identify patients hospitalized with an ischaemic stroke in 2017-2019 who received an ICM or ECM within 3 months. Patients with continuous Medicare FFS insurance and prescription drug enrolment in the prior year were included. Patients with prior AF, atrial flutter, cardiac devices, or OAC were excluded. Insertable cardiac monitor and ECM patients were propensity score matched 1:4 on demographics, comorbidities, and stroke hospitalization characteristics. The outcomes of interest were AF detection and OAC initiation evaluated with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard regression analyses. A total of 5702 Medicare beneficiaries (ICM, n = 444; ECM, n = 5258) met inclusion criteria. The matched cohort consisted of 2210 Medicare beneficiaries (ICM, n = 442; ECM, n = 1768) with 53% female, mean age 75 years, and mean CHA2DS2-VASc score 4.6 (1.6). Insertable cardiac monitor use was associated with a higher probability of AF detection [(hazard ratio (HR) 2.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) (2.31, 3.59)] and OAC initiation [HR 2.91, CI (2.28, 3.72)] compared to patients monitored only with ECM. CONCLUSION: Patients with an ischaemic stroke monitored with an ICM were almost three times more likely to be diagnosed with AF and to be prescribed OAC compared to patients who received ECM only.

Gaps in standardized postoperative pain management quality measures: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was an assessment of availability postoperative pain management quality measures and National Quality Forum-endorsed measures. Postoperative pain is an important clinical timepoint because poor pain control can lead to patient suffering, chronic opiate use, and/or chronic pain. Quality measures can guide best practices, but it is unclear whether there are measures for managing pain after surgery. METHODS: The National Quality Forum Quality Positioning System, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Indicators, and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Measures Inventory Tool databases were searched in November 2019. We conducted a systematic literature review to further identify quality measures in research publications, clinical practice guidelines, and gray literature for the period between March 11, 2015 and March 11, 2020. RESULTS: Our systematic review yielded 1,328 publications, of which 206 were pertinent. Nineteen pain management quality measures were identified from the quality measure databases, and 5 were endorsed by National Quality Forum. The National Quality Forum measures were not specific to postoperative pain management. Three of the non-endorsed measures were specific to postoperative pain. CONCLUSION: The dearth of published postoperative pain management quality measures, especially National Quality Forum-endorsed measures, highlights the need for more rigorous evidence and widely endorsed postoperative pain quality measures to guide best practices.

Assessing Diabetes Care Disparities with Ambulatory Care Quality Measures.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and describe racial/ethnic disparities in overall diabetes management. DATA SOURCE/STUDY SETTING: Electronic health record data from calendar year 2010 were obtained from all primary care clinics at one large health system in Minnesota (n = 22,633). STUDY DESIGN: We used multivariate logistic regression to estimate the odds of achieving the following diabetes management goals: A1C <8 percent, LDL cholesterol <100 mg/dl, blood pressure <140/90 mmHg, tobacco-free, and daily aspirin. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Blacks and American Indians have higher odds of not achieving all goals compared to whites. Disparities in specific goals were also found. CONCLUSIONS: Although this health system has above-average diabetes care quality, significant disparities by race/ethnicity were identified. This underscores the importance of stratifying quality measures to improve care and outcomes for all.