Understanding racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 mortality using a novel metric: COVID excess mortality percentage.

Prior research on racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 mortality has often not considered to what extent they reflect COVID-19-specific factors, versus preexisting health differences. This study examines how racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 mortality vary with age, sex, and time period over April-December 2020 in the United States, using mortality from other natural causes as a proxy for underlying health. We study a novel measure, the COVID excess mortality percentage (CEMP), defined as the COVID-19 mortality rate divided by the non-COVID natural mortality rate, converted to a percentage, where the CEMP denominator controls (albeit imperfectly) for differences in population health. Disparities measured using CEMP deviate substantially from those in prior research. In particular, we find very high disparities (up to 12:1) in CEMP rates for Hispanics versus Whites, particularly for nonelderly men. Asians also have elevated CEMP rates versus Whites, which were obscured in prior work by lower overall Asian mortality. Native Americans and Blacks have significant disparities compared with White populations, but CEMP ratios to Whites are lower than ratios reported in other work. This is because the higher COVID-19 mortality for Blacks and Native Americans comes partly from higher general mortality risk and partly from COVID-specific risk.

Comparative Effectiveness of Aspirin Dosing in Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate dose of aspirin to lower the risk of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke and to minimize major bleeding in patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is a subject of controversy. METHODS: Using an open-label, pragmatic design, we randomly assigned patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease to a strategy of 81 mg or 325 mg of aspirin per day. The primary effectiveness outcome was a composite of death from any cause, hospitalization for myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for stroke, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. The primary safety outcome was hospitalization for major bleeding, also assessed in a time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: A total of 15,076 patients were followed for a median of 26.2 months (interquartile range [IQR], 19.0 to 34.9). Before randomization, 13,537 (96.0% of those with available information on previous aspirin use) were already taking aspirin, and 85.3% of these patients were previously taking 81 mg of daily aspirin. Death, hospitalization for myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for stroke occurred in 590 patients (estimated percentage, 7.28%) in the 81-mg group and 569 patients (estimated percentage, 7.51%) in the 325-mg group (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91 to 1.14). Hospitalization for major bleeding occurred in 53 patients (estimated percentage, 0.63%) in the 81-mg group and 44 patients (estimated percentage, 0.60%) in the 325-mg group (hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.77). Patients assigned to 325 mg had a higher incidence of dose switching than those assigned to 81 mg (41.6% vs. 7.1%) and fewer median days of exposure to the assigned dose (434 days [IQR, 139 to 737] vs. 650 days [IQR, 415 to 922]). CONCLUSIONS: In this pragmatic trial involving patients with established cardiovascular disease, there was substantial dose switching to 81 mg of daily aspirin and no significant differences in cardiovascular events or major bleeding between patients assigned to 81 mg and those assigned to 325 mg of aspirin daily. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; ADAPTABLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02697916.).

Comparison of the effectiveness and safety of 2 aspirin doses in secondary prevention of cardiovascular outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease: A subgroup analysis of ADAPTABLE.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with established cardiovascular disease, the ADAPTABLE trial found no significant differences in cardiovascular events and bleeding rates between 81 mg and 325 mg of aspirin (ASA) daily. In this secondary analysis from the ADAPTABLE trial, we studied the effectiveness and safety of ASA dosing in patients with a history of chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: ADAPTABLE participants were stratified based on the presence or absence of CKD, defined using ICD-9/10-CM codes. Within the CKD group, we compared outcomes between patients taking ASA 81 mg and 325 mg. The primary effectiveness outcome was defined as a composite of all cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke and the primary safety outcome was hospitalization for major bleeding. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard models were utilized to report differences between the groups. RESULTS: After excluding 414 (2.7%) patients due to missing medical history, a total of 14,662 patients were included from the ADAPTABLE cohort, of whom 2,648 (18%) patients had CKD. Patients with CKD were older (median age 69.4 vs 67.1 years; P < .0001) and less likely to be white (71.5% vs 81.7%; P < .0001) when compared to those without CKD. At a median follow-up of 26.2 months, CKD was associated with an increased risk of both the primary effectiveness outcome (adjusted HR 1.79 [1.57, 2.05] P < .001 and the primary safety outcome (adjusted HR 4.64 (2.98, 7.21), P < .001 and P < .05, respectively) regardless of ASA dose. There was no significant difference in effectiveness (adjusted HR 1.01 95% CI 0.82, 1.23; P = .95) or safety (adjusted HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.52, 1.64; P = .79) between ASA groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CKD were more likely than those without CKD to have adverse cardiovascular events or death and were also more likely to have major bleeding requiring hospitalization. However, there was no association between ASA dose and study outcomes among these patients with CKD.

Outcomes among patients with peripheral artery disease in the Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-Centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness (ADAPTABLE) study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to understand the effects of aspirin dose on outcomes in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) as well as their participation in a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. METHODS: In a subanalysis of the Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-Centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness (ADAPTABLE) study, we compared aspirin doses (81 vs 325 mg) among participants with PAD and study participation metrics in patients with and without PAD. The primary outcome composite was all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke. RESULTS: Among 14,662 participants enrolled in ADAPTABLE with PAD status available, 3493 (23.8%) had PAD. Participants with PAD were more likely to experience the primary composite (13.76% vs 5.31%, p < 0.001), all-cause mortality (7.55% vs 3.01%, p < 0.001), myocardial infarction (5.71% vs 2.09%, p < 0.001), stroke (2.45% vs 0.86%, p < 0.001), and major bleeding (1.19% vs 0.44%, p < 0.001). A higher aspirin dose did not reduce the primary outcome in patients with PAD (13.68% vs 13.84% in 81 mg and 325 mg groups; OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88-1.25). Participants with PAD were less likely to enroll via email (33.0% vs 41.9%, p < 0.0001), less likely to choose internet follow-up (79.2% vs 89.5%, p < 0.0001), and were more likely to change their aspirin doses (39.7% vs 30.7%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: ADAPTABLE participants with PAD did not benefit from a higher dose of aspirin and participated in the study differently from those without PAD. These results reinforce the need for additional PAD-specific research and suggest that different trial strategies may be needed for optimal engagement of patients with PAD. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02697916).

Veteran Engagement in Health Services Research: a Conceptual Model.

With 20 million living veterans and millions more immediate family members, and approximately 9 million veterans enrolled in the nationally networked VA healthcare system, representing the interests and needs of veterans in this complex community is a substantial endeavor. Based on the importance of engaging Veterans in research, the VA Health Services Research and Development (HSR&D) Service convened a Working Group of VA researchers and Veterans to conduct a review of patient engagement models and develop recommendations for an approach to engage Veterans in health research that would incorporate their unique lived experiences and interests, and their perspectives on research priorities. The Working Group considered the specific context for Veteran engagement in research that includes other VA stakeholders from the operational and clinical leadership of the VA Health Administration (VHA). The resulting model identifies the range of potential stakeholders and three domains of relevant constructs-processes expected to facilitate Veteran engagement in research with other stakeholders, individual stakeholder and external factors, and outcomes. The expectation is that Veteran engagement will benefit research to policy and practice translation, including increasing the transparency of research and producing knowledge that is readily accepted and implemented in healthcare.

Engaging veteran stakeholders to identify patient-centred research priorities for optimizing implementation of lung cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Patient engagement in research agenda setting is increasingly being seen as a strategy to improve the responsiveness of healthcare to patient priorities. Implementation of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer is suboptimal, suggesting that research is needed. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe an approach by which a Veteran patient group worked with other stakeholders to develop a research agenda for LDCT screening and to describe the research questions that they prioritized. METHODS: We worked with Veterans organizations to identify 12 Veterans or family members at risk for or having experience with lung cancer to form a Patient Advisory Council (PAC). The PAC met repeatedly from June 2018 to December 2020, both independently and jointly, with stakeholders representing clinicians, health administrators and researchers to identify relevant research topics. The PAC prioritized these topics and then identified questions within these areas where research was needed using an iterative process. Finally, they ranked the importance of obtaining answers to these questions. RESULTS: PAC members valued the co-learning generated by interactions with stakeholders, but emphasized the importance of facilitation to avoid stakeholders dominating the discussion. The PAC prioritized three broad research areas-(1) the impact of insurance on uptake of LDCT; (2) how best to inform Veterans about LDCT; and (3) follow-up and impact of screening results. Using these areas as guides, PAC members identified 20 specific questions, ranking as most important (1) innovative outreach methods, (2) the impact of screening on psychological health, and (3) the impact of outsourcing scans from VA to non-VA providers on completion of recommended follow-up of screening results. The latter two were not identified as high priority by the stakeholder group. CONCLUSIONS: We present an approach that facilitates co-learning between Veteran patients and providers, researchers and health system administrators to increase patient confidence in their ability to contribute important information to a research agenda. The research questions prioritized by the Veterans who participated in this project illustrate that for this new screening technology, patients are concerned about the practical details of implementation (e.g., follow-up) and the technology's impact on quality of life. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Veterans and Veteran advocates contributed to our research team throughout the entire research process, including conceiving and co-authoring this manuscript.

Influence of mid-life cognitive activity on cognitive function among men aged 68 years or older.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive activity in early and late life has been associated with increased cognitive function among older adults. There is less evidence on the effects of midlife cognitive activity. AIMS: We examined the association of midlife cognitive activity with cognitive function after age 65. METHODS: We studied 78 men 68 years old or older. We asked participants to assess their current and midlife cognitive activity using adaptations of a measure created by Wilson et al., which includes reading, writing letters, visiting museums and other leisure activities. Our outcomes were validated measures of cognitive and overall function. We compared midlife cognitive activity to our outcome measures in simple bivariable analyses, then adjusted for demographic characteristics using linear regression. RESULTS: Our study population of older (mean age 74.8 years) men was primarily white (87%) and well-educated; 65% had at least some post high school education. Although 67% were retired, household income was high (24% < $30 k and 44% > $50 k). More midlife cognitive activity was related to more current cognitive activity (p = < .0001, r2 = 0.55339). However, midlife activity was not associated with measures of cognitive or overall function, adjusted analyses gave similar results. DISCUSSION: We did not find an association between midlife cognitive activity and later life function. However, the Wilson measure of cognitive activity that we used excludes instrumental cognitive activities such as dealing with finances or healthcare, likely underestimating cognitive activity for many participants. CONCLUSION: Midlife cognitive activity was associated with late-life cognitive activity, suggesting efforts to increase late-life cognitive activity may need to start earlier in life. However, more robust measures of everyday cognitive activity might detect such an association.

Cost-Effectiveness of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control.

BACKGROUND: In the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), adults at high risk for cardiovascular disease who received intensive systolic blood-pressure control (target, <120 mm Hg) had significantly lower rates of death and cardiovascular disease events than did those who received standard control (target, <140 mm Hg). On the basis of these data, we wanted to determine the lifetime health benefits and health care costs associated with intensive control versus standard control. METHODS: We used a microsimulation model to apply SPRINT treatment effects and health care costs from national sources to a hypothetical cohort of SPRINT-eligible adults. The model projected lifetime costs of treatment and monitoring in patients with hypertension, cardiovascular disease events and subsequent treatment costs, treatment-related risks of serious adverse events and subsequent costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for intensive control versus standard control of systolic blood pressure. RESULTS: We determined that the mean number of QALYs would be 0.27 higher among patients who received intensive control than among those who received standard control and would cost approximately $47,000 more per QALY gained if there were a reduction in adherence and treatment effects after 5 years; the cost would be approximately $28,000 more per QALY gained if the treatment effects persisted for the remaining lifetime of the patient. Most simulation results indicated that intensive treatment would be cost-effective (51 to 79% below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY and 76 to 93% below the threshold of $100,000 per QALY), regardless of whether treatment effects were reduced after 5 years or persisted for the remaining lifetime. CONCLUSIONS: In this simulation study, intensive systolic blood-pressure control prevented cardiovascular disease events and prolonged life and did so at levels below common willingness-to-pay thresholds per QALY, regardless of whether benefits were reduced after 5 years or persisted for the patient's remaining lifetime. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; SPRINT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01206062 .).

Effect of Intensive Blood-Pressure Treatment on Patient-Reported Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The previously published results of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial showed that among participants with hypertension and an increased cardiovascular risk, but without diabetes, the rates of cardiovascular events were lower among those who were assigned to a target systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg (intensive treatment) than among those who were assigned to a target of less than 140 mm Hg (standard treatment). Whether such intensive treatment affected patient-reported outcomes was uncertain; those results from the trial are reported here. METHODS: We randomly assigned 9361 participants with hypertension to a systolic blood-pressure target of less than 120 mm Hg or a target of less than 140 mm Hg. Patient-reported outcome measures included the scores on the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) of the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey, the Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item depression scale (PHQ-9), patient-reported satisfaction with their blood-pressure care and blood-pressure medications, and adherence to blood-pressure medications. We compared the scores in the intensive-treatment group with those in the standard-treatment group among all participants and among participants stratified according to physical and cognitive function. RESULTS: Participants who received intensive treatment received an average of one additional antihypertensive medication, and the systolic blood pressure was 14.8 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, 14.3 to 15.4) lower in the group that received intensive treatment than in the group that received standard treatment. Mean PCS, MCS, and PHQ-9 scores were relatively stable over a median of 3 years of follow-up, with no significant differences between the two treatment groups. No significant differences between the treatment groups were noted when participants were stratified according to baseline measures of physical or cognitive function. Satisfaction with blood-pressure care was high in both treatment groups, and we found no significant difference in adherence to blood-pressure medications. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported outcomes among participants who received intensive treatment, which targeted a systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, were similar to those among participants who received standard treatment, including among participants with decreased physical or cognitive function. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; SPRINT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01206062 .).

Patient expectations for recovery after elective surgery: a common-sense model approach.

Patient perceptions of the causes of preoperative symptoms, expected impact of surgery on symptoms and anticipated timeline of recovery are likely to affect the risk of readmission following elective surgical procedures. However, these perceptions have not been studied. A qualitative study was designed to explore these perceptions, using the common-sense model of self-regulation (CSM) as the conceptual framework. CSM is grounded in illness representations, describing how patients make sense of changes in physical well-being (e.g. symptoms) and develop and assess management plans. It also establishes a broader framework for examining patients' a priori expectations and timelines for outcomes based on comparisons to prior experiences and underlying self-prototypes, or "Self as Anchor". A convenience sample of 14 patients aged 56-81 who underwent elective surgery was recruited. Semi-structured interviews informed by the CSM were completed on the day of discharge. Content analysis with deductive coding was used, and emerging themes were fit to components of the CSM, including the five domains of Illness Representations-identity, cause, timeline, control, and consequences. Two additional themes, outlook (toward the health care system, providers and recovery efforts), and motivation (external or internal for recovering), relate to self-prototypes, expectations for outcomes, and search for coherence. Misattribution of symptoms, unrealistic expectations for outcomes (e.g. expecting complete resolution of symptoms unrelated to the surgical procedure) and timelines for recovery (unrealistically short), and the (baseline) "normal healthy self" as distinct from the (temporarily) "sick self" were recurrent themes. Findings suggest that patient perceptions and the actual recovery process may be misaligned. The results underscore the importance of assessing patients' perceptions and expectations, actively engaging patients in their own healthcare, and providing adequate support during the transition to home.

Influence of metabolic syndrome and race on the relationship between intensive blood pressure control and cardiovascular outcomes in the SPRINT cohort.

AIMS: To determine whether baseline metabolic syndrome (MetS) modifies the effect of intensive blood pressure control on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes, and whether the effects varied by race/ethnicity. METHODS: We performed post hoc analyses among non-Hispanic black, non-hispanic white and Hispanic participants, with and without MetS, in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), who were randomized to a systolic blood pressure (SBP) target of <120 mm Hg (intensive group, N = 4544) or an SBP target of <140 mm Hg (standard group, N = 4553). The median follow-up was 3.26 years. The primary outcome was the composite of the first occurrence of myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, non-myocardial infarction acute coronary syndrome or CV death. RESULTS: Overall, 3521/9097 participants (38.7%) met the criteria for MetS at baseline. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two SBP target groups within each MetS subgroup, except body mass index was slightly higher in the standard arm of the MetS subgroup (33.3 ± 5.6 vs 33.0 ± 5.3 kg/m2 ; P < .01), but were similar across treatment arms in the non-MetS subgroup. The hazard ratio for the primary outcome was similarly reduced in participants with or without baseline MetS: 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57, 0.96) and 0.71 (95% CI 0.57, 0.87), respectively (adjusted P value for treatment by subgroup interaction = .98). Similarly, there was no evidence of treatment × MetS subgroup interaction for all-cause mortality (adjusted interaction P value = .98). The findings were also similar across race/ethnic subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis the CV benefit of intensive SBP control did not differ among participants by baseline MetS status, regardless of race/ethnicity.

Association of Albuminuria and Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate with Functional Performance Measures in Older Adults with Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is increasingly common and disproportionately affects older adults. The contribution of kidney disease to the functional impairment noted in the elderly CKD population is unclear. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis of a hypertensive cohort of people aged ≥75 years from the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial. We evaluated estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) as predictors of 3 measures of functional status: EuroQol-5 Dimensional (EQ-5D) score, Falls Efficacy Scale (FES) score, and gait speed. Linear regression models were used to evaluate the associations between our independent variables and outcome measures. RESULTS: Our analysis included 2,620 participants, mean age of 79.9 (4.0) years. Unadjusted models showed that lower eGFR level and higher UACR level were associated with lower EQ-5D (p < 0.001 for both) and slower gait speed (p < 0.001 for both) and worse scores on FES (p = 0.032 and p = 0.039). In the fully adjusted models, higher levels of UACR remained significantly associated with lower EQ-5D scores and slower gait speed (p = 0.011 and p = 0.002, respectively). In contrast, level of eGFR was not associated with any functional outcome measures when accounting for covariates. CONCLUSIONS: In individuals aged ≥75 years, albuminuria and eGFR were associated with impairments in physical performance and self-reported functional status; however, only the association with albuminuria remained after adjusting for relevant demographics and comorbidities. Evaluation of albuminuria may provide an additional tool for identifying older individuals at risk for functional impairment.

A study to reduce readmissions after surgery in the Veterans Health Administration: design and methodology.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmissions are associated with higher resource utilization and worse patient outcomes. Causes of unplanned readmission to the hospital are multiple with some being better targets for intervention than others. To understand risk factors for surgical readmission and their incremental contribution to current Veterans Health Administration (VA) surgical quality assessment, the study, Improving Surgical Quality: Readmission (ISQ-R), is being conducted to develop a readmission risk prediction tool, explore predisposing and enabling factors, and identify and rank reasons for readmission in terms of salience and mutability. METHODS: Harnessing the rich VA enterprise data, predictive readmission models are being developed in data from patients who underwent surgical procedures within the VA 2007-2012. Prospective assessment of psychosocial determinants of readmission including patient self-efficacy, cognitive, affective and caregiver status are being obtained from a cohort having colorectal, thoracic or vascular procedures at four VA hospitals in 2015-2017. Using these two data sources, ISQ-R will develop readmission categories and validate the readmission risk prediction model. A modified Delphi process will convene surgeons, non-surgeon clinicians and quality improvement nurses to rank proposed readmission categories vis-à-vis potential preventability. DISCUSSION: ISQ-R will identify promising avenues for interventions to facilitate improvements in surgical quality, informing specifications for surgical workflow managers seeking to improve care and reduce cost. ISQ-R will work with Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Program (VASQIP) to recommend potential new elements VASQIP might collect to monitor surgical complications and readmissions which might be preventable and ultimately improve surgical care.

Clinical and demographic correlates of medication and visit adherence in a large randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patient characteristics are associated with adherence, which has implications for planning clinical research or designing payment systems that reward superior outcomes. It is unclear to what extent clinician efforts to improve adherence can attenuate these associations. METHODS: To identify factors predicting visit and medication adherence in settings designed to optimize adherence, we did a retrospective analysis of participants in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). ALLHAT recruited participants at 632 sites in North America, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands for random assignment to antihypertensive treatment with amlodipine, chlorthalidone, or lisinopril. Site investigators reported clinic characteristics at the time they applied to participate in the study and research coordinators used standardized methods to measure patient characteristics. We defined adequate visit adherence as attending at least 80 % of scheduled visits; adequate medication adherence was defined as taking 80 % or more of the randomly assigned medication at all study visits. RESULTS: The 31,250 ALLHAT participants eligible for the visit adherence analysis attended 78.5 % of scheduled study visits; 68.9 % attended more than 80 % of scheduled visits. Clinic setting was predictive of both forms of adherence; adherence was worst at private clinics; clinics that enrolled more study participants had superior adherence. Adjusting for clinic characteristics and clinical factors, women, younger participants, Blacks and smokers were less likely to have adequate visit adherence. Among the 28,967 participants eligible for the medication adherence analysis, 21,261 (73.4 %) reported adequate medication adherence. In adjusted analyses, younger and less educated participants, Blacks, and smokers were less likely to report adequate adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Participant demographics were associated with adherence despite strenuous efforts to optimize adherence. Our results could inform decisions by researchers planning trials and policymakers designing payment systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00000542 . Registered 27 October 1999.

Visit-to-Visit Variability of Blood Pressure and Coronary Heart Disease, Stroke, Heart Failure, and Mortality: A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Variability of blood pressure (BP) across outpatient visits is frequently dismissed as random fluctuation around a patient's underlying BP. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of visit-to-visit variability (VVV) of systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Post hoc analysis of ALLHAT (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial). PARTICIPANTS: 25 814 ALLHAT participants. MEASUREMENTS: The VVV of SBP was defined as the SD across SBP measurements obtained at 7 visits conducted from 6 to 28 months after ALLHAT enrollment. Participants without CVD events during the first 28 months of follow-up were followed from the 28-month visit through the end of active ALLHAT follow-up. Outcomes included fatal coronary heart disease (CHD) or nonfatal myocardial infarction, all-cause mortality, stroke, and heart failure. RESULTS: During follow-up, 1194 fatal CHD or nonfatal MI events, 1948 deaths, 606 strokes, and 921 heart failure events occurred. After multivariable adjustment, including for mean SBP, the hazard ratio comparing participants in the highest versus lowest quintile of SD of SBP (≥14.4 mm Hg vs. <6.5 mm Hg) was 1.30 (95% CI, 1.06 to 1.59) for fatal CHD or nonfatal MI, 1.58 (CI, 1.32 to 1.90) for all-cause mortality, 1.46 (CI, 1.06 to 2.01) for stroke, and 1.25 (CI, 0.97 to 1.61) for heart failure. Higher VVV of diastolic BP was also associated with CVD events and mortality. LIMITATION: Long-term outcomes were not available. CONCLUSION: Higher VVV of SBP is associated with an increased risk for CVD and mortality. Future studies should examine whether reducing VVV of BP lowers this risk. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Group Cohesion in a Formal Exercise Program Composed of Predominantly Older Men.

Individuals reporting high group cohesion are less likely to discontinue participation in group exercise programs. A validated measure of group cohesion, the Physical Activity Group Environment Questionnaire (PAGEQ), is untested in older men. The PAGEQ was administered to, and questions about demographics and frequency and duration of participation were asked of, the Walk A Mile or More (WAMM) exercise group, which was composed of U.S. military Veterans. Forty participants (mean age = 62 years, 77.5% male) completed surveys. Cronbach's alpha for the overall PAGEQ was 0.976. Although no significant relationship was found between group cohesion scores and frequency of attending WAMM sessions, there was a trend for individuals who had participated for a longer time to report more group cohesiveness, particularly regarding the task (i.e., exercise) itself. The PAGEQ was easily administered and internally consistent in this group of older men, and provides a useful benchmark for future gerontological researchers. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 42(8), 18-23.].

The association of lacking insurance with outcomes of severe sepsis: retrospective analysis of an administrative database*.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with severe sepsis have high mortality that is improved by timely, often expensive, treatments. Patients without insurance are more likely to delay seeking care; they may also receive less intense care. DESIGN: We performed a retrospective analysis of administrative database-Healthcare Costs and Utilization Project's Nationwide Inpatient Sample-to test whether mortality is more likely among uninsured patients hospitalized for severe sepsis. PATIENTS: None. INTERVENTIONS: We used International Classification of Diseases-9th Revision, Clinical Modification, codes indicating sepsis and organ system failure to identify hospitalizations for severe sepsis among patients aged 18-64 between 2000 and 2008. We excluded patients with end-stage renal disease or solid organ transplants because very few are uninsured. We performed multivariate logistic regression modeling to examine the association of insurance status and in-hospital mortality, adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics. We performed subgroup analysis to examine whether the impact of insurance status varied by geographical region; by patient age, sex, or race; or by hospital characteristics such as teaching status, size, or ownership. We used similar methods to examine the impact of insurance status on the use of certain procedures, length of stay, and discharge destination. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were 1,600,269 discharges with severe sepsis from 2000 through 2008 in the age group 18-64 years. Uninsured people, who accounted for 7.5% of admissions with severe sepsis, had higher adjusted odds of mortality (odds ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.37-1.47) than privately insured people. The higher mortality in uninsured was present in all subgroups and was similar in each year from 2000 to 2008. After adjustment, uninsured individuals had a slightly shorter length of stay than insured people and were less likely to receive five of the six interventions we examined. They were also less likely to be discharged to skilled nursing facilities or with home healthcare after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Uninsured are more likely to die following admission for severe sepsis than patients with insurance, even after adjusting for potential confounders. This was not due to a hospital effect or demographic or clinical factors available in our administrative database. Further research should examine the mechanisms that lead to this association.

Haemodynamics during dialysis and cognitive performance.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Persons receiving haemodialysis (HD) are at increased risk of cognitive impairment (CI). Since blood pressure (BP) fluctuations during HD may affect cerebral perfusion - and subsequently cognitive function - we examined the relationship between dialytic BP fluctuation and cognitive outcomes. METHODS: We included HD patients without diagnosed dementia who were 50 years or older. Using established methods, we classified participants' in CI categories (none to mild and moderate to severe) based on results of a neurocognitive battery. We collected demographic and laboratory data from dialysis unit records, as well as all BP measurements from 12 dialysis sessions. We tested the association between CI and BP fluctuation, adjusting for demographic and laboratory variables. RESULTS: Our study enrolled 39 patients; 25 had moderate to severe CI. The normal to mild CI group and the moderate to severe patients had similar degrees of BP fluctuation (average minimum systolic BP (SBP): 107.6 ± 18.7 vs 110.2 ± 18.6 mmHg, maximum drop in SBP: 32.6 ± 10.2 vs 35.4 ± 15.0 mmHg; proportion of sessions with SBP < 90 mmHg: 0.2 ± 0.3 vs 0.2 ± 0.3; average change in SBP, pre to post HD: 10.2 ± 12.4 vs 11.8 ± 16.4 mmHg, all P > 0.55). There was no association between BP variables and performance on individual cognitive tests. Multivariable analysis showed that older age and non-Caucasian race were associated with a reduction in cognitive scores. CONCLUSIONS: There was no cross-sectional association between dialytic BP changes and cognitive performance.

Evidence on COVID-19 Mortality and Disparities Using a Novel Measure, COVID excess mortality percentage: Evidence from Indiana, Wisconsin, and Illinois.

COVID-19 mortality rates increase rapidly with age, are higher among men than women, and vary across racial/ethnic groups, but this is also true for other natural causes of death. Prior research on COVID-19 mortality rates and racial/ethnic disparities in those rates has not considered to what extent disparities reflect COVID-19-specific factors, versus preexisting health differences. This study examines both questions. We study the COVID-19-related increase in mortality risk and racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 mortality, and how both vary with age, gender, and time period. We use a novel measure validated in prior work, the COVID Excess Mortality Percentage (CEMP), defined as the COVID-19 mortality rate (Covid-MR), divided by the non-COVID natural mortality rate during the same time period (non-Covid NMR), converted to a percentage. The CEMP denominator uses Non-COVID NMR to adjust COVID-19 mortality risk for underlying population health. The CEMP measure generates insights which differ from those using two common measures-the COVID-MR and the all-cause excess mortality rate. By studying both CEMP and COVID-MRMR, we can separate the effects of background health from Covid-specific factors affecting COVID-19 mortality. We study how CEMP and COVID-MR vary by age, gender, race/ethnicity, and time period, using data on all adult decedents from natural causes in Indiana and Wisconsin over April 2020-June 2022 and Illinois over April 2020-December 2021. CEMP levels for racial and ethnic minority groups can be very high relative to White levels, especially for Hispanics in 2020 and the first-half of 2021. For example, during 2020, CEMP for Hispanics aged 18-59 was 68.9% versus 7.2% for non-Hispanic Whites; a ratio of 9.57:1. CEMP disparities are substantial but less extreme for other demographic groups. Disparities were generally lower after age 60 and declined over our sample period. Differences in socio-economic status and education explain only a small part of these disparities.