Physician responses to apple watch-detected irregular rhythm alerts.

BACKGROUND: While the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has cleared smartwatch software for detecting atrial fibrillation (AF), there is lack of guidance on management by physicians. We sought to evaluate the approach to management of Apple Watch alerts for AF by physicians and assess whether respondent and case characteristics were associated with their approach. METHODS: We conducted a case-based survey of physicians practicing primary care, emergency medicine, and cardiology at 2 large academic centers (Yale and University of California San Francisco) between September and December 2021. Cases described asymptomatic patients receiving Apple Watch AF alerts; cases varied in sex, race, medical history, and notification frequency. We evaluated physician responses among prespecified diagnostic testing, referral, and treatment options. RESULTS: We emailed 636 physicians, of whom 95 (14.9%) completed the survey, including 39 primary care, 25 emergency medicine, and 31 cardiology physicians. Among a total of 192 cases (16 unique scenarios), physicians selected at least one diagnostic test in 191 (99.5%) cases and medications in 48 (25.0%). Physicians in primary care, emergency medicine, and cardiology reported varying preference for patient referral (14%, 30%, and 16%, respectively; P=.048), rhythm monitoring (84%, 46%, and 94%, respectively; P<.001), measurement of BNP (8%, 20%, and 2%; P=.003), and use of antiarrhythmics (16%, 4%, and 23%; P=.023). There were few physician differences in reported practices across patient demographics (sex and race), clinical complexity, and alert frequency of the clinical case. CONCLUSIONS: In hypothetical cases of patients presenting without clinical symptoms, physicians opted for further diagnostic testing and often to medical intervention based on Apple Watch irregular rhythm notifications. There was also considerable variation across physician specialties, suggesting a need for uniform clinical practice guidelines. Additional study is required before irregular rhythm notifications should be used in clinical settings.

Financial burden, distress, and toxicity in cardiovascular disease.

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major source of financial burden and distress, which has 3 main domains: (1) psychological distress; (2) cost-related care non-adherence or medical care deferral, and (3) tradeoffs with basic non-medical needs. We propose 4 ways to reduce financial distress in CVD: (1) policymakers can expand insurance coverage and curtail underinsurance; (2) health systems can limit expenditure on low-benefit, high-cost treatments while developing services for high-risk individuals; (3) physicians can engage in shared-decision-making for high-cost interventions, and (4) community-based initiatives can support patients with system navigation and financial coping. Avenues for research include (1) analysis of how healthcare policies affect financial burden; (2) comparative effectiveness studies examining high and low-cost strategies for CVD management; and (3) studying interventions to reduce financial burden, financial coaching, and community health worker integration.

Variation in hospital use of cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator among eligible patients and association with clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Despite strong guideline recommendations for cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) in select patients, this therapy is underutilized with substantial variation among hospitals, and the association of this variation with outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess whether facility variation in CRT-D utilization is associated with differences in hospital-level outcomes. METHODS: We linked Medicare claims data with the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's ICD Registry from 2010 to 2015. We calculated the intraclass correlation coefficient to quantify the degree of variation in patient-level CRT use that can be explained by interfacility variation on a hospital level. To quantify the degree of hospital variation in patient-level outcomes (all-cause mortality, readmissions, and cardiac readmissions) that can be attributed to variations in CRT-D use, we utilized multilevel modeling. RESULTS: The study included 30,134 patients across 1377 hospitals. The median rate of CRT-D implantation in those meeting guideline indications was 89%, but there was a wide variation across hospitals. After adjustment, most of the variation (74%) in hospital rates of CRT-D utilization was attributable to the hospital in which the patient was treated. Differences in hospital CRT-D utilization was associated with 8.76%, 5.26%, and 4.71% of differences in hospital mortality, readmissions, and cardiac readmission rates, respectively (P < .001 for all outcomes). CONCLUSION: There is a wide variation in the use of CRT-D across hospitals that was not explained by case mix. Hospital-level variation in CRT-D utilization was associated with clinically significant differences in outcomes. A measure of CRT-D utilization in eligible patients may serve as a useful metric for quality improvement efforts.

County-level variation in cardioprotective antihyperglycemic prescribing among medicare beneficiaries.

Background: Cardioprotective antihyperglycemic agents, SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA), improve outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes, but adoption has been limited. Differences across individuals have been noted but area-level variation is unknown. Objectives: Given healthcare access and sociodemographic differences, we evaluated whether SGLT2i and GLP-1RA utilization varies across US counties. Methods: We linked 2019 Medicare Part D national prescription data with county-level demographic measures from the Agency for Health Quality and Research. We compared the number of beneficiaries receiving prescriptions for any cardioprotective antihyperglycemic to the number receiving metformin prescriptions across US counties. In multivariable linear regression with SGLT2i-to-metformin and GLP1RA-to-metformin prescriptions as outcomes, we evaluated county factors associated with use of cardioprotective agents while adjusting for sociodemographic measures, region, and cardiometabolic risk factor prevalence. Results: In 3066 US counties, there were a median 2,416 (IQR, 1681-3190) metformin-receiving beneficiaries per 100,000 population. A median 6.2% of beneficiaries receiving metformin received SGLT2i therapy, varying across counties (IQR, 3.4%-9.2%). A median 9.4% (IQR, 5.0%-13.0%) of beneficiaries receiving metformin received GLP-1RA. In adjusted analyses, higher percentage of Black population was associated with lower use at the county level of people on SGLT2i or GLP-1RA relative to metformin (a SD higher proportion of Black individuals with 0.4% [95% CI, -0.6% to -0.1%] and 0.5% [-0.8% to -0.2%] lower SGLT2i and GLP-1RA prescribing relative to metformin, respectively; P < 0.01). A higher median age of county residents, rural location, and lower prevalence of diabetes were associated with lower SGLT2i prescribing. Similarly, more advanced age of county residents, rural location, proportion of Hispanic individuals, and household income and lower education levels were associated with lower GLP-1RA prescribing. Prescribing was higher in the Northeast and lower in the West as compared with the Midwest for both classes. Conclusion: There was large variation by county in cardioprotective antihyperglycemic prescribing, with a pattern of lower use in Black-predominant and rural counties, highlighting the critical need to investigate equity in uptake of novel therapeutic agents.