Cost-Effectiveness of Medical Therapy for Heart Failure With Mildly Reduced and Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Three medications are now guideline-recommended treatments for heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF), however, the cost-effectiveness of these agents in combination has yet to be established. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) in individuals with HFmrEF/HFpEF. METHODS: Using a 3-state Markov model, we performed a cost-effectiveness study using simulated cohorts of 1,000 patients with HFmrEF and HFpEF. Treatment with 1-, 2-, and 3-drug combinations was modeled. Based on a United States health care sector perspective, outcome data was used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2023 United States dollars based on a 30-year time horizon. RESULTS: Treatment with MRA, MRA+SGLT2i, and MRA+SGLT2i+ARNI therapy resulted in an increase in life years of 1.04, 1.58, and 1.80 in the HFmrEF subgroup, respectively, and 0.99, 1.54, and 1.77 in the HFpEF subgroup, respectively, compared with placebo. At a yearly cost of $18, MRA therapy resulted in ICERs of $10,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in both subgroups. The ICER for the addition of SGLT2i therapy ($4,962 per year) was $113,000 per QALY in the HFmrEF subgroup and $141,000 in the HFpEF subgroup. The addition of ARNI therapy ($5,504 per year) resulted in ICERs >$250,000 per QALY in both subgroups. If SGLT2i and ARNI were available at generic pricing the ICERs become <$10,000 per QALY in both EF subgroups. Outcomes were highly sensitive to assumed benefit in cardiovascular death. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with heart failure, MRA was of high value, SGLT2i was of intermediate value, and ARNI was of low value in both HFmrEF and HFpEF subgroups. For patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF increased use of MRA and SGLT2i therapies should be encouraged and be accompanied with efforts to lower the cost of SGLT2i and ARNI therapies.

Trends in Income Inequities in Cardiovascular Health Among US Adults, 1988-2018.

BACKGROUND: Mean cardiovascular health has improved over the past several decades in the United States, but it is unclear whether the benefit is shared equitably. This study examined 30-year trends in cardiovascular health using a suite of income equity metrics to provide a comprehensive picture of cardiovascular income equity. METHODS: The study evaluated data from the 1988-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Survey groupings were stratified by poverty-to-income ratio (PIR) category, and the mean predicted 10-year risk of a major cardiovascular event or death based on the pooled cohort equations (PCE) was calculated (10-year PCE risk). Equity metrics including the relative and absolute concentration indices and the achievement index-metrics that assess both the prevalence and the distribution of a health measure across different socioeconomic categories-were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 26 633 participants aged 40 to 75 years were included (mean age, 53.0-55.5 years; women, 51.9%-53.0%). From 1988-1994 to 2015-2018, the mean 10-year PCE risk improved from 7.8% to 6.4% (P<0.05). The improvement was limited to the 2 highest income categories (10-year PCE risk for PIR 5: 7.7%-5.1%, P<0.05; PIR 3-4.99: 7.6%-6.1%, P<0.05). The 10-year PCE risk for the lowest income category (PIR <1) did not significantly change (8.1%-8.7%). In 1988-1994, the 10-year PCE risk for PIR <1 was 6% higher than PIR 5; by 2015-2018, this relative inequity increased to 70% (P<0.05). When using metrics that account for all income categories, the achievement index improved (8.0%-7.1%, P<0.05); however, the achievement index was consistently higher than the mean 10-year PCE risk, indicating the poor persistently had a greater share of adverse health. CONCLUSIONS: In this serial cross-sectional survey of US adults spanning 30 years, the population's mean 10-year PCE risk improved, but the improvement was not felt equally across the income spectrum.

New models for heart failure care delivery.

Heart failure (HF) is a common disease with increasing prevalence around the world. There is high morbidity and mortality associated with poorly controlled HF along with increasing costs and strain on healthcare systems due to a high rate of rehospitalization and resource utilization. Despite the establishment of clear evidence-based guideline directed medical therapies (GDMT) proven to improve HF morbidity and mortality, there remains significant clinical inertia to optimizing HF patients on GDMT. Only a minority of HF patients are prescribed on all four classes of GDMT. To bridge the gap between the vulnerable population of HF patients and lifesaving GDMT, HF implementation is of increasing importance. HF implementation involves strategies and techniques to improve GDMT optimization along with other modalities to improve HF management. HF implementation meets patients where they are, including at the time of acute decompensation in the inpatient setting, at the vulnerable discharge stage, and at the chronic management stage in the outpatient setting. Inpatient HF implementation strategies include protocolized rapid titration of GDMT, site-level audit-and-feedback, virtual GDMT optimization teams, and electronic health record notifications and alerts. Discharge HF implementation strategies include education at patient and provider levels, discharge summaries, and HF transitional programs. Outpatient HF implementation strategies include digital innovations such as electronic health record utilization and mobile applications, population level strategies such as registries and clinical dashboards), changes in HF team structure and member roles, remote monitoring with implanted devices and telemonitoring, and hospital at home care model. With a growing population of HF patients, there is an increasing need for novel and creative HF implementation and monitoring methods.

Development and Optimization of the Veterans Affairs' National Heart Failure Dashboard for Population Health Management.

BACKGROUND: In 2020, the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system deployed a heart failure (HF) dashboard for use nationally. The initial version was notably imprecise and unreliable for the identification of HF subtypes. We describe the development and subsequent optimization of the VA national HF dashboard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study describes the stepwise process for improving the accuracy of the VA national HF dashboard, including defining the initial dashboard, improving case definitions, using natural language processing for patient identification, and incorporating an imaging-quality hierarchy model. Optimization further included evaluating whether to require concurrent ICD-codes for inclusion in the dashboard and assessing various imaging modalities for patient characterization. RESULTS: Through multiple rounds of optimization, the dashboard accuracy (defined as the proportion of true results to the total population) was improved from 54.1% to 89.2% for the identification of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and from 53.9% to 88.0% for the identification of HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). To align with current guidelines, HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) was added to the dashboard output with 88.0% accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of an imaging-quality hierarchy model and natural-language processing algorithm improved the accuracy of the VA national HF dashboard. The revised dashboard informatics algorithm has higher use rates and improved reliability for the health management of the population.

Economic Modeling Analysis of an Intensive GDMT Optimization Program in Hospitalized Heart Failure Patients.

BACKGROUND: The STRONG-HF trial (Safety, Tolerability and Efficacy of Up-Titration of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapies for Acute Heart Failure) demonstrated substantial reductions in the composite of mortality and morbidity over 6 months among hospitalized patients with heart failure (HF) who were randomized to intensive guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) optimization compared with usual care. Whether an intensive GDMT optimization program would be cost-effective for patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction is unknown. METHODS: Using a 2-state Markov model, we evaluated the effect of an intensive GDMT optimization program on hospitalized patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Two population models were created to simulate this intervention, a clinical trial model, based on the participants in the STRONG-HF trial, and a real-world model, based on the Get With The Guidelines-HF registry of patients admitted with worsening HF. We then modeled the effect of a 6-month intensive triple therapy GDMT optimization program comprised of cardiologists, clinical pharmacists, and registered nurses. Hazard ratios from the intervention arm of the STRONG-HF trial were applied to both population models to simulate clinical and financial outcomes of an intensive GDMT optimization program from a US health care sector perspective with a lifetime time horizon. Optimal quadruple GDMT use was also modeled. RESULTS: An intensive GDMT optimization program was extremely cost-effective with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios <$10 000 per quality-adjusted life-year in both models. Optimal quadruple GDMT implementation resulted in the most gains in life-years with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $60 000 and $54 000 in the clinical trial and real-world models, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: An intensive GDMT optimization program for patients hospitalized with HF with reduced ejection fraction would be cost-effective and result in substantial gains in clinical outcomes, especially with the use of optimal quadruple GDMT. Clinicians, payers, and policymakers should prioritize the creation of such programs.

Impact of Age and Variant Time Period on Clinical Presentation and Outcomes of Hospitalized Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of age and COVID-19 variant time period on morbidity and mortality among those hospitalized with COVID-19. Patients and Methods: Patients from the American Heart Association's Get With The Guidelines COVID-19 cardiovascular disease registry (January 20, 2020-February 14, 2022) were divided into groups based on whether they presented during periods of wild type/alpha, delta, or omicron predominance. They were further subdivided by age (young: 18-40 years; older: more than 40 years), and characteristics and outcomes were compared. Results: The cohort consisted of 45,421 hospitalized COVID-19 patients (wild type/alpha period: 41,426, delta period: 3349, and omicron period: 646). Among young patients (18-40 years), presentation during delta was associated with increased odds of severe COVID-19 (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3-2.1), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.5), and in-hospital mortality (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.5-3.3) when compared with presentation during wild type/alpha. Among older patients (more than 40 years), presentation during delta was associated with increased odds of severe COVID-19 (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3), MACE (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.4-1.7), and in-hospital mortality (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.3-1.6) when compared with wild type/alpha. Among older patients (more than 40 years), presentation during omicron associated with decreased odds of severe COVID-19 (OR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9) and in-hospital mortality (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9) when compared with wild type/alpha. Conclusion: Among hospitalized adults with COVID-19, presentation during a time of delta predominance was associated with increased odds of severe COVID-19, MACE, and in-hospital mortality compared with presentation during wild type/alpha. Among older patients (aged more than 40 years), presentation during omicron was associated with decreased odds of severe COVID-19 and in-hospital mortality compared with wild type/alpha.

Geographic Variation in the Quality of Heart Failure Care Among U.S. Veterans.

BACKGROUND: The burden of heart failure is growing. Guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) reduce adverse outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Whether there is geographic variation in HFrEF quality of care is not well described. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated variation nationally for prescription of GDMT within the Veterans Health Administration. METHODS: A cohort of Veterans with HFrEF had their address linked to hospital referral regions (HRRs). GDMT prescription was defined using pharmacy data between July 1, 2020, and July 1, 2021. Within HRRs, we calculated the percentage of Veterans prescribed GDMT and a composite GDMT z-score. National choropleth maps were created to evaluate prescription variation. Associations between GDMT performance and demographic characteristics were evaluated using linear regression. RESULTS: Maps demonstrated significant variation in the HRR composite score and GDMT prescriptions. Within HRRs, the prescription of beta-blockers to Veterans was highest with a median of 80% (IQR: 77.3%-82.2%) followed by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (69.3%; IQR: 66.4%-72.1%), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (10.3%; IQR: 7.7%-12.8%), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (29.2%; IQR: 25.8%-33.9%), and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (12.2%; IQR: 8.6%-15.3%). HRR composite GDMT z-scores were inversely associated with the HRR median Gini coefficient (R = -0.13; P = 0.0218) and the percentage of low-income residents (R = -0.117; P = 0.0413). CONCLUSIONS: Wide geographic differences exist for HFrEF care. Targeted strategies may be required to increase GDMT prescription for Veterans in lower-performing regions, including those affected by income inequality and poverty.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Asian American/Pacific Islanders (AAPIs) and Hispanics are growing minority United States populations, but are poorly represented in the cardiovascular literature. This study examines guideline adherence and outcomes in AAPIs and Hispanics compared with non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs) in a quaternary care center after inpatient percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The primary end points were inpatient post-PCI bleed, heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and all-cause mortality, whereas the secondary end point was the prescription rate of post-PCI guideline-directed medical therapy including aspirin, statins, P2Y12 receptor blockers, and cardiopulmonary rehabilitation. Intergroup differences were assessed through analysis of variance or two-way chi-square tests, and the association of race with binary outcomes was examined through logistic regression with NHW as the reference group. Compared with NHW, AAPIs, and Hispanics had higher odds of diabetes mellitus, and AAPIs had higher odds of hypertension and being on dialysis. Hispanics had higher odds of post-PCI mortality versus NHW, both in acute coronary syndrome (odds ratio [OR] 2.04, p = 0.03) and elective PCI (OR 2.51, p = 0.04). AAPI also trended toward higher mortality than NHW in both categories. AAPIs were found to have higher odds of statin prescription (OR 1.91, p = 0.04). Hispanics had lower odds of ticagrelor prescription versus NHW (OR 0.65, p = 0.04), and AAPIs trended toward such. No differences were found for cardiopulmonary rehabilitation prescriptions in groups. This study suggests that despite quality improvement efforts, disparities remain in postprocedural outcomes in minority groups in comparison with NHW.

DASH-HF Study: A Pragmatic Quality Improvement Randomized Implementation Trial for Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure is a prevailing diagnosis of hospitalization and readmission within 6 months, and nearly a quarter of these patients die within a year. Guideline-directed medication therapies reduce risk of mortality by 73% over 2 years; however, the implementation of these therapies to their target dose in clinical practice continues to be challenging. In 2020, the Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System developed a HF dashboard to monitor and improve outpatient HF management. The DASH-HF (Dashboard Activated Services and Telehealth for Heart Failure) study is a randomized, pragmatic clinical trial to evaluate proactive dashboard-directed telehealth clinics to improve the use and dosing of guideline-directed medication therapy for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction not on optimal guideline-directed medication therapy within the VA. METHODS: Three hundred veterans with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction met inclusion criteria with an optimization potential score (OPS) of 5 or less out of 10, representing nonoptimal guideline-directed medication therapy. The primary outcome was a composite score of guideline-directed medical therapy, the OPS, 6 months after the end of the intervention. Secondary outcomes included active prescriptions for each individual guideline-directed medical therapy class, HF-related hospitalizations, deaths, and clinician time per patient during the intervention clinics. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the intervention arm and usual care group in the primary outcome (OPS, 2.9; SD=2.1 versus OPS, 2.6, SD=2.1); adjusted mean difference 0.3 (95% CI, -0.1 to 0.7) or in the prespecified secondary outcomes for hospitalization and all-cause mortality for the intervention of proactive dashboard-based clinics. CONCLUSIONS: A dashboard-based clinic intervention did not improve the OPS or secondary outcomes of hospitalization and all-cause mortality. There remains a larger opportunity to better target patients and provide more intensive follow-up to further evaluate the utility of proactive dashboard-based clinics for HF management and quality improvement. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT05001165.

Cost-Effectiveness of Comprehensive Quadruple Therapy for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is one of the most costly and deadly chronic disease states. The cost effectiveness of a comprehensive quadruple therapy regimen for HFrEF has not been studied. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to determine the cost-effectiveness of quadruple therapy comprised of beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, and sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors vs regimens composed of only beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (triple therapy), and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers (double therapy). METHODS: Using a 2-state Markov model, the authors performed a cost-effectiveness study using simulated populations of 1,000 patients with HFrEF based on the participants in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure) trial and compared them by treatment strategy (quadruple therapy vs triple and double therapy) from a United States health care system perspective. The authors also performed 10,000 probabilistic simulations. RESULTS: Treatment with quadruple therapy resulted in an increase of 1.73 and 2.87 life-years compared with triple therapy and double therapy, respectively, and an increase in quality-adjusted life-years of 1.12 and 1.85 years, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of quadruple therapy vs triple therapy and double therapy were $81,000 and $51,081, respectively. In 91.7% and 99.9% of probabilistic simulations quadruple therapy had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of <$150,000 compared with triple therapy and double therapy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: At current pricing, the use of quadruple therapy in patients with HFrEF was cost effective compared with triple therapy and double therapy. These findings highlight the need for improved access and optimal implementation of comprehensive quadruple therapy in eligible patients with HFrEF.

Sex Differences in Outcomes of Percutaneous Pulmonary Artery Thrombectomy in Patients With Pulmonary Embolism.

BACKGROUND: The sex differences in use, safety outcomes, and health-care resource use of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) undergoing percutaneous pulmonary artery thrombectomy are not well characterized. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the sex differences in outcomes for patients diagnosed with PE who undergo percutaneous pulmonary artery thrombectomy? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study used national inpatient claims data to identify patients in the United States with a discharge diagnosis of PE who underwent percutaneous thrombectomy between January 2016 and December 2018. We evaluated the demographics, comorbidities, safety outcomes (in-hospital mortality), and health-care resource use (discharge to home, length of stay, and hospital charges) of patients with PE undergoing percutaneous thrombectomy. RESULTS: Among 1,128,904 patients with a diagnosis of PE between 2016 and 2018, 5,160 patients (0.5%) underwent percutaneous pulmonary artery thrombectomy. When compared with male patients, female patients showed higher procedural bleeding (16.9% vs 11.2%; P < .05), required more blood transfusions (11.9% vs 5.7%; P < .05), and experienced more vascular complications (5.0% vs 1.5%; P < .05). Women experienced higher in-hospital mortality (16.9% vs 9.3%; adjusted OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.0; P = .003) when compared with men. Although length of stay and hospital charges were similar to those of men, women were less likely to be discharged home after surviving hospitalization (47.9% vs 60.3%; adjusted OR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.50-0.99; P = .04). INTERPRETATION: In this large nationwide cohort, women with PE who underwent percutaneous thrombectomy showed higher morbidity and in-hospital mortality compared with men.

SGLT2 Inhibitors in Heart Failure: Early Initiation to Achieve Rapid Clinical Benefits.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are a recent addition to the pillars of medical therapy for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction, all of which improve quality of life, morbidity, and mortality. These benefits are evident within the first 30 days of initiation. This review discusses the rationale for SGLT2i initiation in simultaneous or in rapid sequence with other guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). We also discuss SGLT2i use and early benefits in HF patients with an ejection fraction greater than 40%.

The design of the Dashboard Activated Services and Telehealth for Heart Failure (DASH-HF) study: A pragmatic quality improvement randomized implementation trial for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: Gaps in the receipt and dosing of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) persist for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) [1]. In 2020, the Veterans Affairs (VA) developed a heart failure (HF) specific population dashboard to monitor care quality and performance on standard HFrEF performance measures [2]. METHODS: The Dashboard Activated Services and Telehealth for HF (DASH-HF) study is a pragmatic randomized quality improvement study designed to evaluate the utility of proactive population management clinics using the VA's HF dashboard to optimize GDMT for patients with HFrEF. Panel management telemedicine clinics incorporated multidisciplinary clinicians to perform chart review and impromptu telephone encounters to evaluate current HFrEF management and opportunities to optimize GDMT. The study will evaluate the efficacy of proactive panel management to usual care at 6 months as quantified by the GDMT optimization potential score. Secondary outcomes include hospitalizations, mortality, and clinician time per intervention. The study completed enrollment and randomization of 300 participants. The intervention was performed from September to December 2021. CONCLUSION: DASH-HF will contribute to the literature by evaluating use of the existing VA dashboard to identify HF patients with the lowest adherence to GDMT and proactively target this group for the intervention. REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT05001165.

Expenditure on Heart Failure in the United States: The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey 2009-2018.

BACKGROUND: With rising United States health care expenditure, estimating current spending for patients with heart failure (HF) informs the value of preventative health interventions. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to estimate current health care expenditure growth for patients with HF in the United States. METHODS: The authors pooled MEPS (Medical Expenditure Panel Survey) data from 2009-2018 to calculate total HF-related expenditure across clinical settings in the United States. A 2-part model adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, and year was used to estimate annual mean and incremental expenditures associated with HF. RESULTS: In the United States, an average of $28,950 (2018 inflation-adjusted dollars) is spent per year for health care-related expenditure for individuals with HF compared with $5,727 for individuals without HF. After adjusting for demographics and comorbidities, a diagnosis of HF was associated with $3,594 in annual incremental expenditure compared with those without HF. HF-related expenditure increased from $26,864 annual per person in 2009-2010 to $32,955 in 2017-2018, representing a 23% rise over 10 years. In comparison, expenditure on myocardial infarction, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and cancer grew by 16%, 28%, and 16%, respectively. Most of the cost was related to hospitalization: $12,569 per year. Outpatient office-based care and prescription medications saw the greatest growth in cost over the period, 41% and 24%, respectively. Estimated incremental national expenditure for HF per year was $22.3 billion; total annual expenditure for adults with HF was $179.5 billion. CONCLUSIONS: HF is a costly condition for which expenditure is growing faster than that of other chronic conditions.

US Surveillance of Acute Ischemic Stroke Patient Characteristics, Care Quality, and Outcomes for 2019.

BACKGROUND: The United States lacks a timely and accurate nationwide surveillance system for acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We use the Get With The Guidelines-Stroke registry to apply poststratification survey weights to generate national assessment of AIS epidemiology, hospital care quality, and in-hospital outcomes. METHODS: Clinical data from the Get With The Guidelines-Stroke registry were weighted using a Bayesian interpolation method anchored to observations from the national inpatient sample. To generate a US stroke forecast for 2019, we linearized time trend estimates from the national inpatient sample to project anticipated AIS hospital volume, distribution, and race/ethnicity characteristics for the year 2019. Primary measures of AIS epidemiology and clinical care included patient and hospital characteristics, stroke severity, vital and laboratory measures, treatment interventions, performance measures, disposition, and clinical outcomes at discharge. RESULTS: We estimate 552 476 patients with AIS were admitted in 2019 to US hospitals. Median age was 71 (interquartile range, 60-81), 48.8% female. Atrial fibrillation was diagnosed in 22.6%, 30.2% had prior stroke/transient ischemic attack, and 36.4% had diabetes. At baseline, 46.4% of patients with AIS were taking antiplatelet agents, 19.2% anticoagulants, and 46.3% cholesterol-reducers. Mortality was 4.4%, and only 52.3% were able to ambulate independently at discharge. Performance nationally on AIS achievement measures were generally higher than 95% for all measures but the use of thrombolytics within 3 hours of early stroke presentations (81.9%). Additional quality measures had lower rates of receipt: dysphagia screening (84.9%), early thrombolytics by 4.5 hours (79.7%), and statin therapy (80.6%). CONCLUSIONS: We provide timely, reliable, and actionable US national AIS surveillance using Bayesian interpolation poststratification weights. These data may facilitate more targeted quality improvement efforts, resource allocation, and national policies to improve AIS care and outcomes.

Expansion of telemedicine during COVID-19 at a VA specialty clinic.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 rapidly accelerated the implementation of telemedicine in U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) specialty care clinics. This mixed-methods study was conducted at a VA medical center to understand the use of telemedicine, and the barriers and facilitators to its implementation, in cardiology outpatient clinics. METHODS: Quantitative analyses modeled monthly trends of telemedicine use over 24-months (March 2019-March 2021) with segmented logistic regression and adjusted for socio-demographic predictors of patient-level telemedicine use. Qualitative interviews were conducted (July-October 2020) with eight cardiology clinicians. RESULTS: At the onset of COVID-19, likelihood of telemedicine use was ∼12 times higher than it was pre-COVID-19 (p < 0.001). White (OR = 1.38, 95% CI:1.23-1.54), married (OR = 1.25, 95% CI:1.11-1.40), Veterans with other health insurance (OR = 1.19, 95% CI:1.06-1.35), were more likely to use telemedicine. Veterans with higher health risk factors were less likely (OR = 0.95, 95% CI:0.93-0.97). Facilitators to rapid expansion of telemedicine included prior telemedicine experience; provider trainings; and staff champions. In contrast, lack of technical support and scheduling grids for virtual visits and patient ability/preference served as barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that once mutable barriers were addressed, the medical center was able to expand its telemedicine efforts during COVID-19. Beyond the pandemic, a hybrid of virtual and face-to-face care might be feasible and likely beneficial for healthcare providers and patients in specialty care. IMPLICATIONS: The ability to rapidly transition from in-person to virtual visits can potentially assist with the continuity of care and management of chronic disease during infectious outbreaks and other major disasters that obstruct traditional care models.