Trial of an Intervention to Improve Acute Heart Failure Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute heart failure are frequently or systematically hospitalized, often because the risk of adverse events is uncertain and the options for rapid follow-up are inadequate. Whether the use of a strategy to support clinicians in making decisions about discharging or admitting patients, coupled with rapid follow-up in an outpatient clinic, would affect outcomes remains uncertain. METHODS: In a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial conducted in Ontario, Canada, we randomly assigned 10 hospitals to staggered start dates for one-way crossover from the control phase (usual care) to the intervention phase, which involved the use of a point-of-care algorithm to stratify patients with acute heart failure according to the risk of death. During the intervention phase, low-risk patients were discharged early (in ≤3 days) and received standardized outpatient care, and high-risk patients were admitted to the hospital. The coprimary outcomes were a composite of death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes within 30 days after presentation and the composite outcome within 20 months. RESULTS: A total of 5452 patients were enrolled in the trial (2972 during the control phase and 2480 during the intervention phase). Within 30 days, death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes occurred in 301 patients (12.1%) who were enrolled during the intervention phase and in 430 patients (14.5%) who were enrolled during the control phase (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 0.99; P = 0.04). Within 20 months, the cumulative incidence of primary-outcome events was 54.4% (95% CI, 48.6 to 59.9) among patients who were enrolled during the intervention phase and 56.2% (95% CI, 54.2 to 58.1) among patients who were enrolled during the control phase (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92 to 0.99). Fewer than six deaths or hospitalizations for any cause occurred in low- or intermediate-risk patients before the first outpatient visit within 30 days after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute heart failure who were seeking emergency care, the use of a hospital-based strategy to support clinical decision making and rapid follow-up led to a lower risk of the composite of death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes within 30 days than usual care. (Funded by the Ontario SPOR Support Unit and others; COACH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02674438.).

Achieving Equity in Hospital Performance Assessments Using Composite Race-Specific Measures of Risk-Standardized Readmission and Mortality Rates for Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The contemporary measures of hospital performance for heart failure hospitalization and 30-day risk-standardized readmission rate (RSRR) and risk-standardized mortality rate (RSMR) are estimated using the same risk adjustment model and overall event rate for all patients. Thus, these measures are mainly driven by the care quality and outcomes for the majority racial and ethnic group, and may not adequately represent the hospital performance for patients of Black and other races. METHODS: Fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries from January 2014 to December 2019 hospitalized with heart failure were identified. Hospital-level 30-day RSRR and RSMR were estimated using the traditional race-agnostic models and the race-specific approach. The composite race-specific performance metric was calculated as the average of the RSRR/RMSR measures derived separately for each race and ethnicity group. Correlation and concordance in hospital performance for all patients and patients of Black and other races were assessed using the composite race-specific and race-agnostic metrics. RESULTS: The study included 1 903 232 patients (75.7% White [n=1 439 958]; 14.5% Black [n=276 684]; and 9.8% other races [n=186 590]) with heart failure from 1860 hospitals. There was a modest correlation between hospital-level 30-day performance metrics for patients of White versus Black race (Pearson correlation coefficient: RSRR=0.42; RSMR=0.26). Compared with the race-agnostic RSRR and RSMR, composite race-specific metrics for all patients demonstrated stronger correlation with RSRR (correlation coefficient: 0.60 versus 0.74) and RSMR (correlation coefficient: 0.44 versus 0.51) for Black patients. Concordance in hospital performance for all patients and patients of Black race was also higher with race-specific (versus race-agnostic) metrics (RSRR=64% versus 53% concordantly high-performing; 61% versus 51% concordantly low-performing). Race-specific RSRR and RSMR metrics (versus race-agnostic) led to reclassification in performance ranking of 35.8% and 39.2% of hospitals, respectively, with better 30-day and 1-year outcomes for patients of all race groups at hospitals reclassified as high-performing. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with heart failure, race-specific 30-day RSMR and RSRR are more equitable in representing hospital performance for patients of Black and other races.

Ninety-Day Risk-Standardized Home Time as a Performance Metric for Cardiac Surgery Hospitals in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Assessing hospital performance for cardiac surgery necessitates consistent and valid care quality metrics. The association of hospital-level risk-standardized home time for cardiac surgeries with other performance metrics such as mortality rate, readmission rate, and annual surgical volume has not been evaluated previously. METHODS: The study included Medicare beneficiaries who underwent isolated or concomitant coronary artery bypass graft, aortic valve, or mitral valve surgery from January 1, 2013, to October 1, 2019. Hospital-level performance metrics of annual surgical volume, 90-day risk-standardized mortality rate, 90-day risk-standardized readmission rate, and 90-day risk-standardized home time were estimated starting from the day of surgery using generalized linear mixed models with a random intercept for the hospital. Correlations between the performance metrics were assessed using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Patient-level clinical outcomes were also compared across hospital quartiles by 90-day risk-standardized home time. Last, the temporal stability of performance metrics for each hospital during the study years was also assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 919 698 patients (age 74.2±5.8 years, 32% women) were included from 1179 hospitals. Median 90-day risk-standardized home time was 71.2 days (25th-75th percentile, 66.5-75.6), 90-day risk-standardized readmission rate was 26.0% (19.5%-35.7%), and 90-day risk-standardized mortality rate was 6.0% (4.0%-8.8%). Across 90-day home time quartiles, a graded decline was observed in the rates of in-hospital, 90-day, and 1-year mortality, and 90-day and 1-year readmission. Ninety-day home time had a significant positive correlation with annual surgical volume (r=0.31; P<0.001) and inverse correlation with 90-day risk-standardized readmission rate (r=-0.40; P <0.001) and 90-day risk-standardized mortality rate (r=-0.60; P <0.001). Use of 90-day home time as a performance metric resulted in a meaningful reclassification in performance ranking of 22.8% hospitals compared with annual surgical volume, 11.6% compared with 90-day risk-standardized mortality rate, and 19.9% compared with 90-day risk-standardized readmission rate. Across the 7 years of the study period, 90-day home time demonstrated the most temporal stability of the hospital performance metrics. CONCLUSIONS: Ninety-day risk-standardized home time is a feasible, comprehensive, patient-centered metric to assess hospital-level performance in cardiac surgery with greater temporal stability than mortality and readmission measures.

National trends in osteoporosis medication use among Medicare beneficiaries with and without Alzheimer's disease/related dementias.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporotic fractures  are a leading cause of disability and premature death in the elderly. Patients with Alzheimer's and related dementia (ADRD) have high rates of osteoporosis (OP) and substantial risk of osteoporotic fractures. Yet research is sparse on trends and predictors of OP medication use in ADRD. METHODS: Medicare beneficiaries with OP aged ≥ 67 years have Medicare parts A/B/D without HMO from 2016 to 2018. Our outcome was receipt of OP medications in 2018. A multivariable logistic regression assessed association between ADRD and OP drug prescribing, adjusted for age, sex, race, region, Medicare entitlement, dual Medicaid eligibility, chronic conditions, number of provider visits/hospitalizations, and nursing home (NH) resident status. Age/ADRD and NH residency/ADRD interactions were tested. RESULTS: Our sample consisted of 47,871 people with OP and ADRD and 201,840 with OP without ADRD. OP drug use was 38.6% in ADRD patients vs. 52.7% in non-ADRD. After adjustment for demographics, chronic conditions, and previous hospitalizations/physician visits, the OR for OP drug in ADRD vs. non-ADRD was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.83-0.87). NH residents had lower odds for OP medication (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.58-0.64). There were significant interactions between ADRD and age, and between ADRD and NH residency. The OR for OP drug use associated with ADRD was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.86-0.90) among community-dwelling elders and 0.66 (95% CI: 0.64-0.69) among NH residents. CONCLUSIONS: ADRD patients received OP drugs at a lower rate than their non-ADRD counterparts. More research is needed on when to prescribe or deprescribe OP drugs in the context of different ADRD severity, patient preferences, remaining life expectancy, and time-to-benefit from OP drugs.

Differences in Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction for Low- and High-Income Patients in 6 Countries.

Importance: Differences in the organization and financing of health systems may produce more or less equitable outcomes for advantaged vs disadvantaged populations. We compared treatments and outcomes of older high- and low-income patients across 6 countries. Objective: To determine whether treatment patterns and outcomes for patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction differ for low- vs high-income individuals across 6 countries. Design, Setting, and Participants: Serial cross-sectional cohort study of all adults aged 66 years or older hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction from 2013 through 2018 in the US, Canada, England, the Netherlands, Taiwan, and Israel using population-representative administrative data. Exposures: Being in the top and bottom quintile of income within and across countries. Main Outcomes and Measures: Thirty-day and 1-year mortality; secondary outcomes included rates of cardiac catheterization and revascularization, length of stay, and readmission rates. Results: We studied 289 376 patients hospitalized with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 843 046 hospitalized with non-STEMI (NSTEMI). Adjusted 30-day mortality generally was 1 to 3 percentage points lower for high-income patients. For instance, 30-day mortality among patients admitted with STEMI in the Netherlands was 10.2% for those with high income vs 13.1% for those with low income (difference, -2.8 percentage points [95% CI, -4.1 to -1.5]). One-year mortality differences for STEMI were even larger than 30-day mortality, with the highest difference in Israel (16.2% vs 25.3%; difference, -9.1 percentage points [95% CI, -16.7 to -1.6]). In all countries, rates of cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention were higher among high- vs low-income populations, with absolute differences ranging from 1 to 6 percentage points (eg, 73.6% vs 67.4%; difference, 6.1 percentage points [95% CI, 1.2 to 11.0] for percutaneous intervention in England for STEMI). Rates of coronary artery bypass graft surgery for patients with STEMI in low- vs high-income strata were similar but for NSTEMI were generally 1 to 2 percentage points higher among high-income patients (eg, 12.5% vs 11.0% in the US; difference, 1.5 percentage points [95% CI, 1.3 to 1.8 ]). Thirty-day readmission rates generally also were 1 to 3 percentage points lower and hospital length of stay generally was 0.2 to 0.5 days shorter for high-income patients. Conclusions and Relevance: High-income individuals had substantially better survival and were more likely to receive lifesaving revascularization and had shorter hospital lengths of stay and fewer readmissions across almost all countries. Our results suggest that income-based disparities were present even in countries with universal health insurance and robust social safety net systems.

Getting to 100%: Research Priorities and Unanswered Questions to Inform the US Debate on Universal Health Insurance Coverage.

A majority of Americans favor universal health insurance, but there is uncertainty over how best to achieve this goal. Whatever the insurance design that is implemented, additional details that must be considered include breadth of services covered, restrictions and limits on volumes of services, cost-sharing for individuals, and pricing. In the hopes that research can inform this ongoing debate, we review evidence supporting different models for achieving universal coverage in the US and identify areas where additional research and stakeholder input is needed. Key areas in need of further research include how care should be organized, how costs can be reduced, and what healthcare services universal insurance should cover.

No Time to Waste: An Appraisal of Value at the End of Life.

OBJECTIVES: The use of economic evaluations of end-of-life interventions may be limited by an incomplete appreciation of how patients and society perceive value at end of life. The objective of this study was to evaluate how patients, caregivers, and society value gains in quantity of life and quality of life (QOL) at the end of life. The validity of the assumptions underlying the use of the quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) as a measure of preferences at end of life was also examined. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PubMed were searched from inception to February 22, 2021. Original research studies reporting empirical data on healthcare priority setting at end of life were included. There was no restriction on the use of either quantitative or qualitative methods. Two reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data from studies. Narrative synthesis was conducted for all included studies. The primary outcomes were the value of gains in quantity of life and the value of gains in QOL at end of life. RESULTS: A total of 51 studies involving 53 981 participants reported that gains in QOL were generally preferred over quantity of life at the end of life across stakeholder groups. Several violations of the underlying assumptions of the QALY to measure preferences at the end of life were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients, caregivers, and members of the general public prioritize gains in QOL over marginal gains in life prolongation at the end of life. These findings suggest that policy evaluations of end-of-life interventions should favor those that improve QOL. QALYs may be an inadequate measure of preferences for end-of-life care thereby limiting their use in formal economic evaluations of end-of-life interventions.

Surgical Outcomes in Canada and the United States: An Analysis of the ACS-NSQIP Clinical Registry.

BACKGROUND: There has been longstanding uncertainty over whether lower healthcare spending in Canada might be associated with inferior outcomes for hospital-based care. We hypothesized that mortality and surgical complication rates would be higher for patients who underwent four common surgical procedures in Canada as compared to the US. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all adults who underwent hip fracture repair, colectomy, pancreatectomy, or spine surgery in 96 Canadian and 585 US hospitals participating in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. We compared patients with respect to demographic characteristics and comorbidity. We then compared unadjusted and adjusted outcomes within 30-days of surgery for patients in Canada and the US including: (1) Mortality; (2) A composite constituting 1-or-more of the following complications (cardiac arrest; myocardial infarction; pneumonia; renal failure/; return to operating room; surgical site infection; sepsis; unplanned intubation). RESULTS: Our hip fracture cohort consisted of 21,166 patients in Canada (22.3%) and 73,817 in the US (77.7%), for colectomy 21,279 patients in Canada (8.9%) and 218,307 (91.1%), for pancreatectomy 873 (7.8%) in Canada and 12,078 (92.2%) in the US, and for spine surgery 14,088 (5.3%) and 252,029 (94.7%). Patient sociodemographics and comorbidity were clinically similar between jurisdictions. In adjusted analyses odds of death was significantly higher in Canada for two procedures (colectomy (OR 1.22; 95% CI 1.044-1.424; P = .012) and pancreatectomy (OR 2.11; 95% CI 1.26-3.56; P = .005)) and similar for hip fracture and spine surgery. Odds of the composite outcome were significantly higher in Canada for all 4 procedures, largely driven by higher risk of cardiac events and post-operative infections. CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence of higher rates of mortality and surgical complications within 30-days of surgery for patients in Canada as compared to the US.

Are Income-based Differences in TKA Use and Outcomes Reduced in a Single-payer System? A Large-database Comparison of the United States and Canada.

BACKGROUND: Income-based differences in the use of and outcomes in TKA have been studied; however, it is not known if different healthcare systems affect this relationship. Although Canada's single-payer healthcare system is assumed to attenuate the wealth-based differences in TKA use observed in the United States, empirical cross-border comparisons are lacking. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does TKA use differ between Pennsylvania, USA, and Ontario, Canada? (2) Are income-based disparities in TKA use larger in Pennsylvania or Ontario? (3) Are TKA outcomes (90-day mortality, 90-day readmission, and 1-year revision rates) different between Pennsylvania and Ontario? (4) Are income-based disparities in TKA outcomes larger in Pennsylvania or Ontario? METHODS: We identified all patients hospitalized for primary TKA in this cross-border retrospective analysis, using administrative data for 2012 to 2018, and we found a total of 161,244 primary TKAs in Ontario and 208,016 TKAs in Pennsylvania. We used data from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council, Harrisburg, PA, USA, and the ICES (formally the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences), Toronto, Ontario, Canada. We linked patient-level data to the respective census data to determine community-level income using ZIP Code or postal code of residence and stratified patients into neighborhood income quintiles. We compared TKA use (age and gender, standardized per 10,000 population per year) for patients residing in the highest-income versus the lowest-income quintile neighborhoods. Similarly secondary outcomes 90-day mortality, 90-day readmission, and 1-year revision rates were compared between the two regions and analyzed by income groups. RESULTS: TKA use was higher in Pennsylvania than in Ontario overall and for all income quintiles (lowest income quartile: 31 versus 18 procedures per 10,000 population per year; p < 0.001; highest income quartile: 38 versus 23 procedures per 10,000 population per year; p < 0.001). The relative difference in use between the highest-income and lowest-income quintile was larger in Ontario (28% higher) than in Pennsylvania (23% higher); p < 0.001. Patients receiving TKA in Pennsylvania were more likely to be readmitted within 90 days and were more likely to undergo revision within the first year than patients in Ontario, but there was no difference in mortality at 1 year. When comparing income groups, there were no differences between the countries in 90-day mortality, readmission, or 1-year revision rates (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that universal health insurance through a single-payer may not reduce the income-based differences in TKA access that are known to exist in the United States. Future studies are needed determine if our results are consistent across other geographic regions and other surgical procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Association of Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare With 30-Day Mortality Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Importance: Medicare Advantage health plans covered 37% of beneficiaries in 2018, and coverage increased to 48% in 2022. Whether Medicare Advantage plans provide similar care for patients presenting with specific clinical conditions is unknown. Objective: To compare 30-day mortality and treatment for Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (MI) from 2009 to 2018. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study that included 557 309 participants with ST-segment elevation [acute] MI (STEMI) and 1 670 193 with non-ST-segment elevation [acute] MI (NSTEMI) presenting to US hospitals from 2009-2018 (date of final follow up, December 31, 2019). Exposures: Enrollment in Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was adjusted 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included age- and sex-adjusted rates of procedure use (catheterization, revascularization), postdischarge medication prescriptions and adherence, and measures of health system performance (intensive care unit [ICU] admission and 30-day readmissions). Results: The study included a total of 2 227 502 participants, and the mean age in 2018 ranged from 76.9 years (Medicare Advantage STEMI) to 79.3 years (traditional Medicare NSTEMI), with similar proportions of female patients in Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare (41.4% vs 41.9% for STEMI in 2018). Enrollment in Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare was associated with significantly lower adjusted 30-day mortality rates in 2009 (19.1% vs 20.6% for STEMI; difference, -1.5 percentage points [95% CI, -2.2 to -0.7] and 12.0% vs 12.5% for NSTEMI; difference, -0.5 percentage points [95% CI, -0.9% to -0.1%]). By 2018, mortality had declined in all groups, and there were no longer statically significant differences between Medicare Advantage (17.7%) and traditional Medicare (17.8%) for STEMI (difference, 0.0 percentage points [95% CI, -0.7 to 0.6]) or between Medicare Advantage (10.9%) and traditional Medicare (11.1%) for NSTEMI (difference, -0.2 percentage points [95% CI, -0.4 to 0.1]). By 2018, there was no statistically significant difference in standardized 90-day revascularization rates between Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare. Rates of guideline-recommended medication prescriptions were significantly higher in Medicare Advantage (91.7%) vs traditional Medicare patients (89.0%) who received a statin prescription (difference, 2.7 percentage points [95% CI, 1.2 to 4.2] for 2018 STEMI). Medicare Advantage patients were significantly less likely to be admitted to an ICU than traditional Medicare patients (for 2018 STEMI, 50.3% vs 51.2%; difference, -0.9 percentage points [95% CI, -1.8 to 0.0]) and significantly more likely to be discharged to home rather than to a postacute facility (for 2018 STEMI, 71.5% vs 70.2%; difference, 1.3 percentage points [95% CI, 0.5 to 2.1]). Adjusted 30-day readmission rates were consistently lower in Medicare Advantage than in traditional Medicare (for 2009 STEMI, 13.8% vs 15.2%; difference, -1.3 percentage points [95% CI, -2.0 to -0.6]; and for 2018 STEMI, 11.2% vs 11.9%; difference, 0.6 percentage points [95% CI, -1.5 to 0.0]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among Medicare beneficiaries with acute MI, enrollment in Medicare Advantage, compared with traditional Medicare, was significantly associated with modestly lower rates of 30-day mortality in 2009, and the difference was no longer statistically significant by 2018. These findings, considered with other outcomes, may provide insight into differences in treatment and outcomes by Medicare insurance type.

Expansion of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Patterns of diffusion of TAVR in the United States (U.S.) and its relation to racial disparities in TAVR utilization remain unknown. METHODS: We identified TAVR hospitals in the continental U.S. from 2012-2017 using Medicare database and mapped them to Hospital Referral Regions (HRR). We calculated driving distance from each residential ZIP code to the nearest TAVR hospital and calculated the proportion of the U.S. population, in general and by race, that lived <100 miles driving distance from the nearest TAVR center. Using a discrete time hazard logistic regression model, we examined the association of hospital and HRR variables with the opening of a TAVR program. RESULTS: The number of TAVR hospitals increased from 230 in 2012 to 540 in 2017. The proportion of the U.S. population living <100 miles from nearest TAVR hospital increased from 89.3% in 2012 to 94.5% in 2017. Geographic access improved for all racial and ethnic subgroups: Whites (84.1%-93.6%), Blacks (90.0%- 97.4%), and Hispanics (84.9%-93.7%). Within a HRR, the odds of opening a new TAVR program were higher among teaching hospitals (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.16-1.88) and hospital bed size (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.37-1.52). Market-level factors associated with new TAVR programs were proportion of Black (per 1%, OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69-0.89) and Hispanic (per 1%, OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.75-0.90) residents, the proportion of hospitals within the HRR that already had a TAVR program (per 10%, OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.03-1.11), P <.01 for all. CONCLUSION: The expansion of TAVR programs in the U.S. has been accompanied by an increase in geographic coverage for all racial subgroups. Further study is needed to determine reasons for TAVR underutilization in Blacks and Hispanics.

Association Between Attending Physicians' Rates of Referral to Palliative Care and Location of Death in Hospitalized Adults With Serious Illness: A Population-based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients who receive palliative care are less likely to die in hospital. OBJECTIVE: To measure the association between physician rates of referral to palliative care and location of death in hospitalized adults with serious illness. RESEARCH DESIGN: Population-based decedent cohort study using linked health administrative data in Ontario, Canada. SUBJECTS: A total of 7866 physicians paired with 130,862 hospitalized adults in their last year of life who died of serious illness between 2010 and 2016. EXPOSURE: Physician annual rate of referral to palliative care (high, average, low). MEASURES: Odds of death in hospital versus home, adjusted for patient characteristics. RESULTS: There was nearly 4-fold variation in the proportion of patients receiving palliative care during follow-up based on attending physician referral rates: high 42.4% (n=24,433), average 24.7% (n=10,772), low 10.7% (n=6721). Referral to palliative care was also associated with being referred by palliative care specialists and in urban teaching hospitals. The proportion of patients who died in hospital according to physician referral rate were 47.7% (high), 50.1% (average), and 52.8% (low). Hospitalized patients cared for by a physician who referred to palliative care at a high rate had lower risk of dying in hospital than at home compared with patients who were referred by a physician with an average rate of referral [adjusted odds ratio 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.95; number needed to treat=57 (interquartile range 41-92)] and by a physician with a low rate of referral [adjusted odds ratio 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.84; number needed to treat =28 patients (interquartile range 23-44)]. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: An attending physicians' rates of referral to palliative care is associated with a lower risk of dying in hospital. Therefore, patients who are cared for by physicians with higher rates of referral to palliative care are less likely to die in hospital and more likely to die at home. Standardizing referral to palliative care may help reduce physician-level variation as a barrier to access.

Rural Telemedicine Use Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Repeated Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a notable increase in telemedicine adoption. However, the impact of the pandemic on telemedicine use at a population level in rural and remote settings remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate changes in the rate of telemedicine use among rural populations and identify patient characteristics associated with telemedicine use prior to and during the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a repeated cross-sectional study on all monthly and quarterly rural telemedicine visits from January 2012 to June 2020, using administrative data from Ontario, Canada. We compared the changes in telemedicine use among residents of rural and urban regions of Ontario prior to and during the pandemic. RESULTS: Before the pandemic, telemedicine use was steadily low in 2012-2019 for both rural and urban populations but slightly higher overall for rural patients (11 visits per 1000 patients vs 7 visits per 1000 patients in December 2019, P<.001). The rate of telemedicine visits among rural patients significantly increased to 147 visits per 1000 patients in June 2020. A similar but steeper increase (P=.15) was observed among urban patients (220 visits per 1000 urban patients). Telemedicine use increased across all age groups, with the highest rates reported among older adults aged ≥65 years (77 visits per 100 patients in 2020). The proportions of patients with at least 1 telemedicine visit were similar across the adult age groups (n=82,246/290,401, 28.3% for patients aged 18-49 years, n=79,339/290,401, 27.3% for patients aged 50-64 years, and n=80,833/290,401, 27.8% for patients aged 65-79 years), but lower among younger patients <18 years (n=23,699/290,401, 8.2%) and older patients ≥80 years (n=24,284/290,401, 8.4%) in 2020 (P<.001). There were more female users than male users of telemedicine (n=158,643/290,401, 54.6% vs n=131,758/290,401, 45.4%, respectively, in 2020; P<.001). There was a significantly higher proportion of telemedicine users residing in relatively less rural than in more rural regions (n=261,814/290,401, 90.2% vs n=28,587/290,401, 9.8%, respectively, in 2020; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine adoption increased in rural and remote areas during the COVID-19 pandemic, but its use increased in urban and less rural populations. Future studies should investigate the potential barriers to telemedicine use among rural patients and the impact of rural telemedicine on patient health care utilization and outcomes.

Using Administrative Data to Explore Potentially Aberrant Provision of Virtual Care During COVID-19: Retrospective Cohort Study of Ontario Provincial Data.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a rapid increase in virtual care use across the globe. Many health care systems have responded by creating virtual care billing codes that allow physicians to see their patients over telephone or video. This rapid liberalization of billing requirements, both in Canada and other countries, has led to concerns about potential abuse, but empirical data are limited. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to examine whether there were substantial changes in physicians' ambulatory visit volumes coinciding with the liberalization of virtual care billing rules and to describe the characteristics of physicians who significantly increased their ambulatory visit volumes during this period. We also sought to describe the relationship between visit volume changes in 2020 and the volumes of virtual care use among individual physicians and across specialties. METHODS: We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study using health administrative data from the Ontario Health Insurance Plan, which was linked to the ICES Physician Database. We identified a unique cohort of providers based on physicians' billings and calculated the ratio of total in-person and virtual ambulatory visits over the period from January to June 2020 (virtual predominating) relative to that over the period from January to June 2019 (in-person predominating) for each physician. Based on these ratios, we then stratified physicians into four groups: low-, same-, high-, and very high-use physicians. We then calculated various demographic and practice characteristics of physicians in each group. RESULTS: Among 28,383 eligible physicians in 2020, the mean ratio of ambulatory visits in January to June 2020:2019 was 0.99 (SD 2.53; median 0.81, IQR 0.59-1.0). Out of 28,383 physicians, only 2672 (9.4%) fell into the high-use group and only 291 (1.0%) fell into the very high-use group. High-use physicians were younger, more recent graduates, more likely female, and less likely to be international graduates. They also had, on average, lower-volume practices. There was a significant positive correlation between percent virtual care and the 2020:2019 ratio only in the group of physicians who maintained their practice (R=0.35, P<.001). There was also a significant positive correlation between the 2020:2019 ratio and the percent virtual care per specialty (R=0.59, P<.01). CONCLUSIONS: During the early stages of the pandemic, the introduction of virtual care did not lead to significant increases in visit volume. Our results provide reassuring evidence that relaxation of billing requirements early in the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario were not associated with widespread and aberrant billing behaviors. Furthermore, the strong relationship between the ability to maintain practice volumes and the use of virtual care suggests that the introduction of virtual care allowed for continued access to care for patients.

Association of Receipt of Palliative Care Interventions With Health Care Use, Quality of Life, and Symptom Burden Among Adults With Chronic Noncancer Illness: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: The evidence for palliative care exists predominantly for patients with cancer. The effect of palliative care on important end-of-life outcomes in patients with noncancer illness is unclear. Objective: To measure the association between palliative care and acute health care use, quality of life (QOL), and symptom burden in adults with chronic noncancer illnesses. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PubMed from inception to April 18, 2020. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials of palliative care interventions in adults with chronic noncancer illness. Studies involving at least 50% of patients with cancer were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data from studies. Narrative synthesis was conducted for all trials. All outcomes were analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Acute health care use (hospitalizations and emergency department use), disease-generic and disease-specific quality of life (QOL), and symptoms, with estimates of QOL translated to units of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative Care scale (range, 0 [worst] to 184 [best]; minimal clinically important difference, 9 points) and symptoms translated to units of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale global distress score (range, 0 [best] to 90 [worst]; minimal clinically important difference, 5.7 points). Results: Twenty-eight trials provided data on 13 664 patients (mean age, 74 years; 46% were women). Ten trials were of heart failure (n = 4068 patients), 11 of mixed disease (n = 8119), 4 of dementia (n = 1036), and 3 of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (n = 441). Palliative care, compared with usual care, was statistically significantly associated with less emergency department use (9 trials [n = 2712]; 20% vs 24%; odds ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68-1.00]; I2 = 3%), less hospitalization (14 trials [n = 3706]; 38% vs 42%; odds ratio, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.65-0.99]; I2 = 41%), and modestly lower symptom burden (11 trials [n = 2598]; pooled standardized mean difference (SMD), -0.12; [95% CI, -0.20 to -0.03]; I2 = 0%; Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale score mean difference, -1.6 [95% CI, -2.6 to -0.4]). Palliative care was not significantly associated with disease-generic QOL (6 trials [n = 1334]; SMD, 0.18 [95% CI, -0.24 to 0.61]; I2 = 87%; Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative Care score mean difference, 4.7 [95% CI, -6.3 to 15.9]) or disease-specific measures of QOL (11 trials [n = 2204]; SMD, 0.07 [95% CI, -0.09 to 0.23]; I2 = 68%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of patients with primarily noncancer illness, palliative care, compared with usual care, was statistically significantly associated with less acute health care use and modestly lower symptom burden, but there was no significant difference in quality of life. Analyses for some outcomes were based predominantly on studies of patients with heart failure, which may limit generalizability to other chronic illnesses.

Screening and Treatment for Osteoporosis After Stroke.

Background and Purpose- Stroke is a risk factor for subsequent osteoporosis and fractures. We sought to understand current rates and predictors of screening and treatment for bone loss after stroke. Methods- Using the Ontario Stroke Registry from July 1, 2003 to March 31, 2013, we identified patients ≥65 years who were seen in the emergency department or hospitalized with stroke at 11 regional stroke centers in Ontario, Canada and discharged alive. We calculated the cumulative incidence of (1) screening with bone mineral density testing and (2) treatment with medications for fracture prevention, within 1 year after the index stroke, accounting for the competing risk of death. We then used cause-specific hazard models to estimate the effect of various covariates on the cause-specific hazard of bone mineral density testing and osteoporosis pharmacotherapy. Results- In the sample of 16 581 patients, 5.1% overall and 2.9% of those without prior testing underwent screening bone mineral density testing, and 15.5% overall and 3.2% of those not previously on treatment were prescribed medications for fracture prevention within 1 year after stroke. Results were similar in all subgroups of patients. Female sex, prestroke osteoporosis, and poststroke falls and fractures were associated with increased rates of osteoporosis pharmacotherapy. Conclusions- Patients with recent stroke are infrequently screened and treated for osteoporosis, which may increase the risk of fractures. Future work should focus on identifying and treating patients who are at increased risk of fractures after stroke.

Disparities in Receipt of Bariatric Surgery in Canada: An Analysis of Data From an Ontario Bariatric Surgery Referral Center.

BACKGROUND: Patients with lower socioeconomic status (SES) in the United States have reduced access to many health services including bariatric surgery. It is unclear whether disparities in bariatric surgery exist in countries with government-sponsored universal health benefits. The authors used data from a large regional Canadian bariatric surgery referral center to examine the relationship between SES and receipt of bariatric surgery. METHODS: The Toronto Western Hospital bariatric surgery registry was used to identify all adults referred for bariatric surgery assessment from 2010 to 2017. The authors compared demographics, SES measures, and clinical measures among patients who did not and did undergo bariatric surgery (Roux-en-Y or sleeve gastrectomy). Multiple logistic regression was used to examine differences in receipt of bariatric surgery according to patient demographic characteristics and SES factors. RESULTS: Among 2417 patients included in the study, 646 (26.7%) did not receive surgery and 1771 patients (73.2%) did. Patients who did not undergo surgery were more likely to be male individual (29.1% vs. 19.3%; P<0.001), black (12.1% vs. 8.3%; P=0.005), South Asian/Middle Eastern (8.2% vs. 4.5%; P<0.001), and less likely to be white (68.9% vs. 76.7%; P<0.001). In multiple logistic regression, factors associated with not receiving surgery were male sex, Black and South Asian/Middle Eastern ethnicity, being single, lack of employment, and history of psychiatric illness. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients referred for bariatric surgery, those who were male individuals, nonwhite, single, and unemployed were less likely to undergo surgery. Our results suggest that even with equal insurance, there are disparities in receipt of bariatric surgery.

Test Result Management Practices of Canadian Internal Medicine Physicians and Trainees.

BACKGROUND: Missed test results are a cause of medical error. Few studies have explored test result management in the inpatient setting. OBJECTIVE: To examine test result management practices of general internal medicine providers in the inpatient setting, examine satisfaction with practices, and quantify self-reported delays in result follow-up. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: General internal medicine attending physicians and trainees (residents and medical students) at three Canadian teaching hospitals. MAIN MEASURES: Methods used to track test results; satisfaction with these methods; personal encounters with results respondents "wish they had known about sooner." KEY RESULTS: We received surveys from 33/51 attendings and 99/108 trainees (response rate 83%). Only 40.9% of respondents kept a record of all tests they order, and 50.0% had a system to ensure ordered tests were completed. Methods for tracking test results included typed team sign-out lists (40.7%), electronic health record (EHR) functionality (e.g., the electronic "inbox") (38.9%), and personal written or typed lists (14.8%). Almost all trainees (97.9%) and attendings (81.2%) reported encountering at least one test result they "wish they had known about sooner" in the past 2 months (p = 0.001). A higher percentage of attendings kept a record of tests pending at hospital discharge compared to trainees (75.0% vs. 35.7%, p < 0.001), used EHR functionality to track tests (71.4% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.004), and reported higher satisfaction with result management (42.4% vs. 12.1% satisfied or very satisfied, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Canadian physicians report an array of problems managing test results in the inpatient setting. In the context of prior studies from the outpatient setting, our study suggests a need to develop interventions to prevent missed results and avoid potential patient harms.

The risk of death within 5 years of first hospital admission in older adults.

BACKGROUND: The risk of death in people after their first admission to hospital or first presentation to the emergency department for any reason is not known. The objective of this study was to estimate the risk of death among older adults who had had no admissions to hospital or emergency department visits in the preceding 5 years. METHODS: We used administrative data from Ontario, Canada, from 2007 to 2017 to measure the 5-year risk of death in community-dwelling adults aged 66 years and older after their first planned or unplanned hospital admission or emergency department visit, and among those who were neither admitted to hospital nor presented to the emergency department. We describe how this risk varied by age. RESULTS: Among 922 074 community-dwelling older adults, 12.7% died (116 940 deaths) over a follow-up of 3 112 528 person-years (standardized mortality rate 53.8 per 1000 person-years). After the first unplanned hospital admission, 39.7% died (59 234 deaths, standardized mortality rate 127.6 per 1000 person-years). After the first planned hospital admission, 13.0% died (10 775 deaths, standardized mortality rate 44.6 per 1000 person-years). After the first visit to the emergency department, 10.9% died (35 663 deaths, standardized mortality rate 36.2 per 1000 person-years). Among those with neither an emergency department visit nor hospital admission during follow-up, 3.1% died (11 268 deaths, standardized mortality rate 29.6 per 1000 person-years). Slightly more than half of all deaths were in those with first unplanned hospital admission (50.7%). INTERPRETATION: Death within 5 years of first unplanned hospital admission for older adults is frequent and common. Knowledge of this risk may influence counselling and patient preferences and may be useful in research and analyses for health system planning.

Self-reported test ordering practices among Canadian internal medicine physicians and trainees: a multicenter cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Over-testing is a recognized problem, but clinicians usually lack information about their personal test ordering volumes. In the absence of data, clinicians rely on self-perception to inform their test ordering practices. In this study we explore clinician self-perception of diagnostic test ordering intensity. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of inpatient General Internal Medicine (GIM) attending physicians and trainees at three Canadian teaching hospitals. We collected information about: self-reported test ordering intensity, perception of colleagues test ordering intensity, and importance of clinical utility, patient comfort, and cost when ordering tests. We compared responses of clinicians who self-identified as high vs low utilizers of diagnostic tests, and attending physicians vs trainees. RESULTS: Only 15% of inpatient GIM clinicians self-identified as high utilizers of diagnostic tests, while 73% felt that GIM clinicians in aggregate ("others") order too many tests. Survey respondents identified clinical utility as important when choosing to order tests (selected by 94%), followed by patient comfort (48%) and cost (23%). Self-identified low/average utilizers of diagnostic tests were more likely to report considering cost compared to high utilizers (27% vs 5%, P = 0.04). Attending physicians were more likely to consider patient comfort (70% vs 41%, p = 0.01) and cost (42% vs 17%, p = 0.003) than trainees. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of data, providers seem to recognize that over investigation is a problem, but few self-identify as being high test utilizers. Moreover, a significant percentage of respondents did not consider cost or patient discomfort when ordering tests. Our findings highlight challenges in reducing over-testing in the current era.