Women with Blood Pressure Improvement in the Well-Integrated Screening and Evaluation for Women Across the Nation Program by Race and Ethnicity, 2014-2018.

Background: The Well-Integrated Screening and Evaluation for Women Across the Nation (WISEWOMAN) program aims to improve the cardiovascular health of women aged 40-64 years with low incomes, and who are uninsured or underinsured. The objective is to examine WISEWOMAN participants with hypertension who had high blood pressure (BP) improvement from January 2014 to June 2018, by race and ethnicity. Also examined was participation in WISEWOMAN Healthy Behavior Support Services (HBSS) and adherence to antihypertensive medication. Materials and Methods: WISEWOMAN data from January 2014 to June 2018 were analyzed by race and ethnicity. BP improvement was defined as at least a 5 mm Hg decrease in systolic or diastolic BP values from baseline screening to rescreening. The prevalence of HBSS participation and antihypertensive medication adherence were calculated among hypertensive women with BP improvement. Results: Approximately 64.2% (4,984) of WISEWOMAN participants with hypertension had at least a 5 mm Hg BP improvement. These improvements were consistent across each race and ethnicity (p = 0.56) in the study. Nearly 70% of women who had BP improvement attended at least one HBSS. Hispanic women (80.1%) had the highest HBSS attendance percentage compared to non-Hispanic Black women (64.1%) and non-Hispanic White women (63.8%; p < 0.001). About 80% of women with BP improvement reported being adherent to antihypertensive medication in the previous 7 days. Conclusions: The proportion of women achieving BP improvement in the WISEWOMAN program was consistent across race and ethnicity. In addition, women with BP improvement reported adherence to antihypertensive medication and participation in HBSS.

Medical Follow-Up Received by Women with Blood Pressure Alerts in the WISEWOMAN Program by Race and Ethnicity, 2014-2018.

Background: Hypertension is a preventable risk factor for heart disease and stroke. Immediate reduction in blood pressure (BP) is necessary for a person with dangerously high BP to prevent injuries related to heart disease and stroke. Differences in the prevalence of hypertension and dangerously high BP (BP alerts) and the distribution of medical follow-ups were examined by race and ethnicity among participants in the Well-Integrated Screening and Evaluation for WOMen Across the Nation (WISEWOMAN) program. Materials and Methods: Data (January 2014 through June 2018) were used to identify women, aged 40-64 years, with hypertension at their first WISEWOMAN screening. Women with BP alerts were identified as having an average systolic BP >180 mm Hg or diastolic BP >110 mm Hg at WISEWOMAN baseline screening or rescreening. CDC's WISEWOMAN program is a public health practice program and does not conduct human subject research. Results: Among 65,189 WISEWOMAN participants, 25,098 (38.5%) women had hypertension and 586 (2.3%) of those women had BP alerts. There were significant differences among Hispanic, non-Hispanic black (NHB), and non-Hispanic white (NHW) women in the prevalence of hypertension (26.5%, 67.1%, and 40.2%, respectively, p < 0.001) and BP alerts (1.7%, 3.4%, and 2.1%, respectively, p < 0.001). Among women with BP alerts, 74.7% received a medical follow-up within 7 days and 12.4% received a medical follow-up after 7 days. There were no significant differences in the percentage of women with BP alerts who received a follow-up within 7 days among Hispanic, NHB, and NHW women (71.1%, 77.1%, and 74.4%, respectively, p = 0.085). Conclusions: BP alerts occurred in 2.3% of the WISEWOMAN hypertensive population, and approximately three in four women with BP alerts, regardless of race and ethnicity, received timely follow-up care within 7 days.

Association Between Dispatch Complaint and Critical Prehospital Time Intervals in Suspected Stroke 911 Activations in the National Emergency Medical Services Information System, 2012-2016.

OBJECTIVE: Emergency Medical Services can help improve stroke outcomes by recognizing stroke symptoms, establishing response priority for 911 calls, and minimizing prehospital delays. This study examines 911 stroke events and evaluates associations between events dispatched as stroke and critical EMS time intervals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from the National Emergency Medical Services Information System, 2012 to 2016, were analyzed. Activations from 911 calls with a primary or secondary provider impression of stroke were included for adult patients transported to a hospital destination. Three prehospital time intervals were evaluated: (1) response time (RT) ≤8 min, (2) on-scene time (OST) ≤15 min, and (3) transport time (TT) ≤12 min. Associations between stroke dispatch complaint and prehospital time intervals were assessed using multivariate regression to estimate adjusted risk ratios (ARR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Approximately 37% of stroke dispatch complaints were identified by EMS as a suspected stroke. Compared to stroke events without a stroke dispatch complaint, median OST was shorter for events with a stroke dispatch (16 min vs. 14 min, respectively). In adjusted analyses, events dispatched as stroke were more likely to meet the EMS time benchmark for OST ≤15 min (OST, 1.20 [1.20-1.21]), but not RT or TT (RT, [1.00-1.01]; TT, 0.95 [0.94-0.95]). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that dispatcher recognition of stroke symptoms reduces the time spent on-scene by EMS personnel. These findings can inform future EMS stroke education and quality improvement efforts to emphasize dispatcher recognition of stroke signs and symptoms, as EMS dispatchers play a crucial role in optimizing the prehospital response.

Trends in Use of Telehealth Among Health Centers During the COVID-19 Pandemic - United States, June 26-November 6, 2020.

Telehealth can facilitate access to care, reduce risk for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]), conserve scarce medical supplies, and reduce strain on health care capacity and facilities while supporting continuity of care. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)-funded health centers* expanded telehealth† services during the COVID-19 pandemic (1). The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services eliminated geographic restrictions and enhanced reimbursement so that telehealth services-enabled health centers could expand telehealth services and continue providing care during the pandemic (2,3). CDC and HRSA analyzed data from 245 health centers that completed a voluntary weekly HRSA Health Center COVID-19 Survey§ for 20 consecutive weeks to describe trends in telehealth use. During the weeks ending June 26-November 6, 2020, the overall percentage of weekly health care visits conducted via telehealth (telehealth visits) decreased by 25%, from 35.8% during the week ending June 26 to 26.9% for the week ending November 6, averaging 30.2% over the study period. Weekly telehealth visits declined when COVID-19 cases were decreasing and plateaued as cases were increasing. Health centers in the South and in rural areas consistently reported the lowest average percentage of weekly telehealth visits over the 20 weeks, compared with health centers in other regions and urban areas. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, maintaining and expanding telehealth services will be critical to ensuring access to care while limiting exposure to SARS-CoV-2.

Telehealth Practice Among Health Centers During the COVID-19 Pandemic - United States, July 11-17, 2020.

Early in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, in-person ambulatory health care visits declined by 60% across the United States, while telehealth* visits increased, accounting for up to 30% of total care provided in some locations (1,2). In March 2020, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released updated regulations and guidance changing telehealth provisions during the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency, including the elimination of geographic barriers and enhanced reimbursement for telehealth services† (3-6). The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) administers a voluntary weekly Health Center COVID-19 Survey§ to track health centers' COVID-19 testing capacity and the impact of COVID-19 on operations, patients, and staff. CDC and HRSA analyzed data from the weekly COVID-19 survey completed by 1,009 HRSA-funded health centers (health centers¶) for the week of July 11-17, 2020, to describe telehealth service use in the United States by U.S. Census region,** urbanicity,†† staffing capacity, change in visit volume, and personal protective equipment (PPE) supply. Among the 1,009 health center respondents, 963 (95.4%) reported providing telehealth services. Health centers in urban areas were more likely to provide >30% of health care visits virtually (i.e., via telehealth) than were health centers in rural areas. Telehealth is a promising approach to promoting access to care and can facilitate public health mitigation strategies and help prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory illnesses, while supporting continuity of care. Although CMS's change of its telehealth provisions enabled health centers to expand telehealth by aligning guidance and leveraging federal resources, sustaining expanded use of telehealth services might require additional policies and resources.

Costs of Chronic Diseases at the State Level: The Chronic Disease Cost Calculator.

INTRODUCTION: Many studies have estimated national chronic disease costs, but state-level estimates are limited. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed the Chronic Disease Cost Calculator (CDCC), which estimates state-level costs for arthritis, asthma, cancer, congestive heart failure, coronary heart disease, hypertension, stroke, other heart diseases, depression, and diabetes. METHODS: Using publicly available and restricted secondary data from multiple national data sets from 2004 through 2008, disease-attributable annual per-person medical and absenteeism costs were estimated. Total state medical and absenteeism costs were derived by multiplying per person costs from regressions by the number of people in the state treated for each disease. Medical costs were estimated for all payers and separately for Medicaid, Medicare, and private insurers. Projected medical costs for all payers (2010 through 2020) were calculated using medical costs and projected state population counts. RESULTS: Median state-specific medical costs ranged from $410 million (asthma) to $1.8 billion (diabetes); median absenteeism costs ranged from $5 million (congestive heart failure) to $217 million (arthritis). CONCLUSION: CDCC provides methodologically rigorous chronic disease cost estimates. These estimates highlight possible areas of cost savings achievable through targeted prevention efforts or research into new interventions and treatments.

Geographic and racial patterns of preventable hospitalizations for hypertension: Medicare beneficiaries, 2004-2009.

OBJECTIVES: Hypertension as the primary reason for hospitalization is often used to indicate failure of the outpatient health-care system to prevent and control high blood pressure. Investigators have reported increased rates of these preventable hospitalizations for black people compared with white people; however, none have mapped them nationally by race. METHODS: We used Medicare Part A data to estimate preventable hypertension hospitalizations from 2004-2009 using technical specifications published by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Rates per 100,000 beneficiaries were age- and sex-standardized to 2000 U.S. Census data. We mapped county-level rates by race and identified clusters of counties with extreme rates. RESULTS: Black people had higher crude rates of these hospitalizations than white people for every year studied, and the test for an increasing linear time trend for the standardized rates was significant for both black and white people; that is, the gap between the races increased over time. For both races, clusters of high-rate counties occurred primarily in parts of Oklahoma, Texas, Southern Alabama, and Louisiana. High rates for white people were also found in parts of Appalachia. Large differences in rates among black and white people were found in a number of large urban areas and in parts of Florida and Alabama. CONCLUSIONS: Racial disparities in preventable hospitalizations for hypertension persisted through 2009. The gap between black and white people is increasing, and these inequities exist unevenly across the country. Although this study was intended to be purely descriptive, future studies should use multivariate analyses to examine reasons for these unequal distributions.

State-level estimates of cancer-related absenteeism costs.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is one of the top five most costly diseases in the United States and leads to substantial work loss. Nevertheless, limited state-level estimates of cancer absenteeism costs have been published. METHODS: In analyses of data from the 2004-2008 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, the 2004 National Nursing Home Survey, the U.S. Census Bureau for 2008, and the 2009 Current Population Survey, we used regression modeling to estimate annual state-level absenteeism costs attributable to cancer from 2004 to 2008. RESULTS: We estimated that the state-level median number of days of absenteeism per year among employed cancer patients was 6.1 days and that annual state-level cancer absenteeism costs ranged from $14.9 million to $915.9 million (median = $115.9 million) across states in 2010 dollars. Absenteeism costs are approximately 6.5% of the costs of premature cancer mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this study suggest that lost productivity attributable to cancer is a substantial cost to employees and employers and contributes to estimates of the overall impact of cancer in a state population.

State-level cancer treatment costs: how much and who pays?

BACKGROUND: Cancer treatment accounts for approximately 5% of national health expenditures. However, no state-level estimates of cancer treatment costs have been published. METHODS: In analyses of data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, the National Nursing Home Survey, the U.S. Census Bureau, the Current Population Survey, and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, this study used regression modeling to estimate annual state-level cancer care costs during 2004 to 2008 for 4 categories of payers: all payers, Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance. RESULTS: State-level cancer care costs ranged from $227 million to $13.6 billion (median = $2.0 billion) in 2010 dollars. Medicare paid between 25.1% and 36.1% of these costs (median = 32.5%); private insurance paid between 36.0% and 49.6% (median = 43.3%); and Medicaid paid between 2.0% and 8.8% (median = 4.8%). Cancer treatment accounted for 3.8% to 8.7% of all state-level medical expenditures (median = 7.0%), 8.5% to 15.0% of state-level Medicare expenditures (median = 10.6%), 1.0% to 4.9% of state-level Medicaid expenditures (median = 2.2%), and 5.5% to 10.9% of state-level private insurance expenditures (median = 8.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The costs of cancer treatment were substantial in all states and accounted for a sizable fraction of medical expenditures for all payers. The high cost of cancer treatment underscores the importance of preventing and controlling cancer as one approach to manage state-level medical costs.

State-level projections of cancer-related medical care costs: 2010 to 2020.

BACKGROUND: As the population ages, the financial amount spent on cancer care is expected to increase substantially. In this study, we projected cancer-related medical costs by state from 2010 through 2020. METHODS: We used pooled Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data for 2004 to 2008 and US Census Bureau population projections to produce state-level estimates of the number of people treated for cancer and the average cost of their treatment, from a health system perspective, by age group (18-44, 45-64, >65 years) and sex. In the base model, we assumed that the percentage of people in each of the 6 age-by-sex categories who had been treated for cancer would remain constant and that the inflation-adjusted average cancer treatment cost per person would increase at the same rate as Congressional Budget Office projections of overall medical spending. RESULTS: We projected that state-level cancer-related medical costs would increase by 34% to 115% (median = 72%) and that state-level costs in 2020 would range from $347 million to $28.3 billion in 2010 dollars (median = $3.7 billion). CONCLUSIONS: The number of people treated for cancer and the costs of their cancer-related medical care are projected to increase substantially for each state. Effective prevention and early detection strategies are needed to limit the growing burden of cancer.

Geographic variations in heart failure hospitalizations among medicare beneficiaries in the Tennessee catchment area.

INTRODUCTION: Although differences in heart failure (HF) hospitalization rates by race and sex are well documented, little is known about geographic variations in hospitalizations for HF, the most common discharge diagnosis for Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: Using exploratory spatial data analysis techniques, the authors examined hospitalization rates for HF as the first-listed discharge diagnosis among Medicare beneficiaries in a 10-state Tennessee catchment area, based on the resident states reported by Tennessee hospitals from 2000 to 2004. RESULTS: The age-adjusted HF hospitalization rate (per 1000) among Medicare beneficiaries was 23.3 [95% confidence interval (CI), 23.3-23.4] for the Tennessee catchment area, 21.4 (95% CI, 21.4-21.5) outside the catchment area and 21.9 (95% CI, 21.9-22.0) for the overall United States. The age-adjusted HF hospitalization rates were also significantly higher in the catchment area than outside the catchment area and overall, among men, women and whites, whereas rates among the blacks were higher outside the catchment area. Beneficiaries in the catchment area also had higher age-specific HF hospitalization rates. Among states in the catchment area, the highest mean county-level rates were in Mississippi (30.6 ± 7.6) and Kentucky (29.2 ± 11.5), and the lowest were in North Carolina (21.7 ± 5.7) and Virginia (21.8 ± 6.6). CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of these geographic differences in HF hospitalization rates can be useful in identifying needs of healthcare providers, allocating resources, developing comprehensive HF outreach programs and formulating policies to reduce these differences.

Geographic disparities in heart failure hospitalization rates among Medicare beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to document local-level geographic disparities in heart failure (HF) hospitalization rates among Medicare beneficiaries. BACKGROUND: Although the burden of HF is well documented at the national level, little is known about the geographic disparities in HF. METHODS: The study population consisted of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries >or=65 years of age who resided in the U.S., Puerto Rico, or the U.S. Virgin Islands during the years 2000 to 2006. Using hospital claims data for Medicare beneficiaries, we calculated spatially smoothed and age-adjusted average annual county-level HF hospitalization rates per 1,000 Medicare beneficiaries for the total population and by racial/ethnic group (blacks, Hispanics, and whites) for the years 2000 to 2006. A HF hospitalization was defined as a short-stay hospital claim with a principal (first-listed) discharge diagnosis of HF using the International Classification of Diseases-9th Revision-Clinical Modification code 428. RESULTS: The average annual age-adjusted HF hospitalization rate per 1,000 Medicare beneficiaries was 21.5 per 1,000, and ranged from 7 to 61 per 1,000 among counties in the U.S. For the total study population, a clear East-West gradient was evident, with the highest rates located primarily along the lower Mississippi River Valley and the Ohio River Valley, including the Appalachian region. Similar patterns were observed for blacks and whites, although the pattern for Hispanics differed. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence of substantial geographic disparities in HF hospitalizations among Medicare beneficiaries is important information for health professionals to incorporate as they design prevention and treatment policies and programs tailored to the needs of their communities.

Is there an association between quality of in-hospital cardiac care and proportion of low-income patients?

BACKGROUND: Process measures have been developed and implemented to evaluate the quality of care patients receive in the hospital. This study examines whether there is an association between the quality of in-hospital cardiac care and a hospital's proportion of low-income patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective analysis of 1979 hospitals submitting information on 12 quality of care (QoC) process measures for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and congestive heart failure (CHF) patients to the Hospital Quality Alliance during 2005 and 2006 and meeting all study inclusion criteria. Mean hospital performance ranged from 84.2% (ACE inhibitor for left ventricular systolic dysfunction) to 95.9% (aspirin on arrival) for AMI QoC process measures and from 64.4% (discharge instructions) to 92.4% (left ventricular function assessment) for CHF QoC process measures. Regression analyses indicated a statistically significant negative association between the proportion of low-income patients and hospital performance for 10 of the 12 cardiac QoC process measures, after controlling for selected hospital characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital adherence to QoC process measures for AMI and CHF patients declined as the proportion of low-income patients increased. Future research is needed to examine the role of community characteristics and market forces on the ability of hospitals with a disproportionate share of low-income patients to maintain the staffing, equipment, and policies necessary to provide the recommended standards of care for AMI and CHF patients.

The economic burden of chronic cardiovascular disease for major insurers.

Accounting models provide less precise estimates of disease burden than do econometric models. The authors seek to improve these estimates for cardiovascular disease using a nationally representative survey and econometric modeling to isolate the proportion of medical expenditures attributable to four chronic cardiovascular diseases: stroke, hypertension, congestive heart failure, and other heart diseases. Approximately 17% of all medical expenditures, or $149 billion annually, and nearly 30% of Medicare expenditures are attributable to these diseases. Of the four diseases, hypertension accounts for the largest share of prescription expenditures across payers and the largest share of all Medicaid expenditures. The large number of people with cardiovascular disease who are eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid could lead to large shifts in the burden to these payers as prescription drug coverage is included in Medicare. A societal perspective is important when describing the economic burden of cardiovascular disease.