Underutilization of Needle Biopsy Before Breast Surgery: A Measure of Low-Value Care.

BACKGROUND: Breast core needle biopsy (CNB) can obviate the need for breast surgery in patients with an unknown breast lesion; however, variation in compliance with this guideline may represent a disparity in health care and a surrogate measure of unnecessary surgery. We evaluated variation in breast CNB rates prior to initial breast cancer surgery. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis using Medicare claims from 2015 to 2017 to evaluate the proportion of patients who received a CNB within 6 months prior to initial breast cancer surgery. Outlier practice pattern was defined as a preoperative CNB rate ≤ 70%. Logistic regression was used to evaluate surgeon characteristics associated with outlier practice pattern. RESULTS: We identified 108,935 female patients who underwent initial breast cancer surgery performed by 3229 surgeons from July 2015 to June 2017. The mean CNB rate was 86.7%. A total of 7.7% of surgeons had a CNB performed prior to initial breast surgery ≤ 70% of the time, and 2.0% had a CNB performed ≤ 50% of the time. Outlier breast surgeons were associated with practicing in a micropolitan area (odds ratio [OR] 1.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-2.73), in the South (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.20-2.84) or West region (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.11-2.86), > 20 years in practice (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.09-2.11), and low breast cancer surgery volume (< 30 cases in the study period; OR 4.03, 95% CI 2.75-5.90). CONCLUSIONS: Marked variation exists in whether a breast core biopsy is performed prior to initial breast surgery, which may represent unnecessary surgery on individual patients. Providing surgeon-specific feedback on guideline compliance may reduce unwarranted variation.

Resistant hypertension and cardiovascular disease mortality in the US: results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES).

BACKGROUND: Apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH) is a common condition associated with risk of cardiovascular events. However, the risk of cardiovascular mortality associated with aTRH in the US population is unknown. We aimed to assess the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality associated with aTRH in the US population. METHODS: We analyzed data from 6357 adult hypertensive participants of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1988-1994 and 1999-2010) linked to the National Death Index. Based on presence of uncontrolled hypertension [blood pressure (BP) ≥140/90 mmHg] and the number of antihypertensives prescribed, we classified participants into the following groups: non-aTRH (BP < 140/90 mmHg and ≤ 3 antihypertensives); controlled aTRH (BP < 140/90 mmHg and ≥ 4 antihypertensives); and uncontrolled aTRH (BP ≥140/90 mmHg and ≥ 3 antihypertensives). RESULTS: Of the 6357 participants, 1522 had aTRH, representing a US prevalence of 7.6 million. Of the participants with aTRH, 432 had controlled aTRH and 1090 had uncontrolled aTRH. During follow-up (median 6 years), there were 550 CVD deaths. The cumulative incidence of CVD mortality was significantly higher in the aTRH group compared with non-aTRH group (log-rank p < 0.001). In fully adjusted models, aTRH was associated with a 47% higher risk of CVD mortality compared with the non-aTRH group [1.47 (1.1-1.96)]. Similar increase in risk of CVD mortality was noted across aTRH subgroups compared with the non-aTRH group: controlled aTRH [1.66 (1.03-2.68)] and uncontrolled aTRH [1.43 (1.05-1.94)]. Among non-aTRH subgroups, those on 3 antihypertensive medications had a 35% increased risk of CVD mortality than those on < 3 medications [1.35 (0.98-1.86)]. CONCLUSIONS: aTRH is a common condition, affecting approximately 7.6 million Americans. Regardless of BP control, people with aTRH remain at a higher risk of cardiovascular outcomes. The risk of cardiovascular disease mortality remains high among those with controlled BP on 3 medications (non-aTRH) or ≥ 4 medications (controlled aTRH), groups not generally considered at high risk. Future risk reduction interventions should consider focusing on these high-risk groups.

Surgeon Re-Excision Rates after Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Measure of Low-Value Care.

BACKGROUND: To better understand re-excision practice patterns after breast-conserving therapy (BCT), we evaluated variation in surgeon-specific re-excision rates and associated factors. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective analysis using Medicare claims from 2012 to 2018 to identify patients undergoing BCT and subsequent breast resection procedures within 12 months. We compared rates before and after the 2014 "no tumor on ink" consensus guideline. A hierarchical logistic regression model was also used to evaluate patient and physician characteristics associated with re-excision. RESULTS: We identified 291,065 female Medicare beneficiaries who underwent an initial BCT procedure, of which 19.0% had a re-excision. The overall re-excision rate was 22.1% in the pre-guideline period and 17.2% in the post-guideline period. For the 5,337 physicians that performed more than 10 initial BCT procedures during the study period, their physician-level re-excision rate ranged from 0% to 91.7% (median 18.2%). In total, 17.5% of the physicians had a re-excision rate greater than the expert consensus cutoff of 30%. The percentage of outlier physicians decreased from 22.2% in 2012 to 8.8% in 2017. High surgeon volume of BCT was associated with a lower re-excision odds (≥51 cases vs ≤20 cases: adjusted odds ratio 0.78; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.82; 21 to 50 cases vs ≤20 cases: adjusted odds ratio 0.92; 95% CI 0.88 to 0.96). Patient factors associated with decreased odds of re-excision were age older than 75 years and Northeast region of the US (adjusted odds ratio 0.93; 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Marked variation exists in surgeon re-excision rates among patients undergoing BCT, which might represent unnecessary operations for patients and a financial burden to the healthcare system. Formalizing a re-excision frequency metric could have implications for quality improvement and data-driven surgeon feedback aimed at reducing unwarranted variation.