Evaluation of the Predictive Value of Routinely Collected Health-Related Social Needs Measures.

The objective was to assess the value of routinely collected patient-reported health-related social needs (HRSNs) measures for predicting utilization and health outcomes. The authors identified Mayo Clinic patients with cancer, diabetes, or heart failure. The HRSN measures were collected as part of patient-reported screenings from June to December 2019 and outcomes (hospitalization, 30-day readmission, and death) were ascertained in 2020. For each outcome and disease combination, 4 models were used: gradient boosting machine (GBM), random forest (RF), generalized linear model (GLM), and elastic net (EN). Other predictors included clinical factors, demographics, and area-based HRSN measures-area deprivation index (ADI) and rurality. Predictive performance for models was evaluated with and without the routinely collected HRSN measures as change in area under the curve (AUC). Variable importance was also assessed. The differences in AUC were mixed. Significant improvements existed in 3 models of death for cancer (GBM: 0.0421, RF: 0.0496, EN: 0.0428), 3 models of hospitalization (GBM: 0.0372, RF: 0.0640, EN: 0.0441), and 1 of death (RF: 0.0754) for diabetes, and 1 model of readmissions (GBM: 0.1817), and 3 models of death (GBM: 0.0333, RF: 0.0519, GLM: 0.0489) for heart failure. Age, ADI, and the Charlson comorbidity index were the top 3 in variable importance and were consistently more important than routinely collected HRSN measures. The addition of routinely collected HRSN measures resulted in mixed improvement in the predictive performance of the models. These findings suggest that existing factors and the ADI are more important for prediction in these contexts. More work is needed to identify predictors that consistently improve model performance.

Association of Patient and System-Level Factors With Social Determinants of Health Screening.

BACKGROUND: Health systems are increasingly recognizing the importance of collecting social determinants of health (SDoH) data. However, gaps remain in our understanding of facilitators or barriers to collection. To address these gaps, we evaluated a real-world implementation of a SDoH screening tool. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the implementation of the SDoH screening tool at Mayo Clinic in 2019. The outcomes are: (1) completion of screening and (2) the modality used (MyChart: filled out on patient portal; WelcomeTablet: filled out by patient on a PC-tablet; EpicCare: data obtained directly by provider and entered in chart). We conducted logistic regression for completion and multinomial logistic regression for modality. The factors of interest included race and ethnicity, use of an interpreter, and whether the visit was for primary care. RESULTS: Overall, 58.7% (293,668/499,931) of screenings were completed. Patients using interpreters and racial/ethnic minorities were less likely to complete the screening. Primary care visits were associated with an increase in completion compared with specialty care visits. Patients who used an interpreter, racial and ethnic minorities, and primary care visits were all associated with greater WelcomeTablet and lower MyChart use. CONCLUSION: Patient and system-level factors were associated with completion and modality. The lower completion and greater WelcomeTablet use among patients who use interpreters and racial and ethnic minorities points to the need to improve screening in these groups and that the availability of the WelcomeTablet may have prevented greater differences. The higher completion in primary care visits may mean more outreach is needed for specialists.

Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy in Newly Diagnosed Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction in the Community.

BACKGROUND: Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) dramatically improves outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Our goal was to examine GDMT use in community patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a population-based, retrospective cohort study of all Olmsted County, Minnesota, residents with newly diagnosed HFrEF (EF ≤ 40%) 2007-2017. We excluded patients with contraindications to medication initiation. We examined the use of beta-blockers, HF beta-blockers (metoprolol succinate, carvedilol, bisoprolol), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIS), and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) in the first year after HFrEF diagnosis. We used Cox models to evaluate the association of being seen in an HF clinic with the initiation of GDMT. From 2007 to 2017, 1160 patients were diagnosed with HFrEF (mean age 69.7 years, 65.6% men). Most eligible patients received beta-blockers (92.6%) and ACEis/ARBs/ARNIs (87.0%) in the first year. However, only 63.8% of patients were treated with an HF beta-blocker, and few received MRAs (17.6%). In models accounting for the role of an HF clinic in initiation of these medications, being seen in an HF clinic was independently associated with initiation of new GDMT across all medication classes, with a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 1.54 (1.15-2.06) for any beta-blocker, 2.49 (1.95-3.20) for HF beta-blockers, 1.97 (1.46-2.65) for ACEis/ARBs/ARNIs, and 2.14 (1.49-3.08) for MRAs. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based study, most patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF received beta-blockers and ACEis/ARBs/ARNIs. GDMT use was higher in patients seen in an HF clinic, suggesting the potential benefit of referral to an HF clinic for patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF.

Coronary revascularization outcomes in relation to skilled nursing facility use following hospital discharge.

BACKGROUND: Observational analyses comparing coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) among elderly or frail patients are likely biased by treatment selection. PCI is typically chosen for frail patients, while CABG is more common for patients with good recovery potential. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that skilled nursing facility (SNF) use after revascularization is a measure of relative frailty associated with outcomes following coronary revascularization. METHODS: We used a 20 percent sample of Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who received inpatient PCI or CABG between 2007-2014. Key explanatory variables were the revascularization strategy and SNF use after revascularization. We used Cox regression to evaluate death and repeat revascularization within one year and logistic regression to evaluate SNF use and 30-day readmissions/death. RESULTS: CABG patients were 25.1 percentage points [95% confidence interval: 24.7, 25.5] more likely to use SNF following revascularization than inpatient PCI patients. SNF use was associated with a higher death rate (hazard ratio (HR): 3.19 [3.02, 3.37]) and a 16.2 percentage point (15.5, 16.9) increase in 30-day readmissions/death. Among patients with SNF use, CABG was associated with a decrease in 30-day readmissions/death compared to PCI. CONCLUSIONS: While CABG was associated with higher rates of SNF use and 30-day readmission/death overall, CABG was associated with significantly lower rates of 30-day readmissions/death among patients with SNF use. The findings suggest that caution is needed in treatment selection for patients at high-risk for SNF use and that selection of inpatient PCI over CABG may be associated with frailty and worse outcomes for some patients.

Treatment selection and medication adherence for stable angina: The role of area-based health literacy.

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES: Clinical studies show equivalent health outcomes from interventional procedures and treatment with medication only for stable angina patients. However, patients may be subject to overuse or access barriers for interventional procedures and may exhibit suboptimal adherence to medications. Our objective is to evaluate whether community-level health literacy is associated with treatment selection and medication adherence patterns. METHOD: The sample included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries (20% random sample) with stable angina in 2007-2013. We used an area-level health literacy variable because of the lack of an individual measure in claims. We measured the association between (a) area-based health literacy with treatment selection (medication only, percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery) and (b) area-based health literacy with medication adherence. We controlled for other factors including demographics, co-morbidity burden, dual eligibility, and area deprivation index. RESULTS: We identified 8300 patients of whom 8.7% lived in a low health literacy area. Overall, 56% of patients received medication only, 28% received PCI, and 15% received CABG. Patients in low health literacy areas were less likely to receive CABG (-3.5 percentage points; 95% CI, -6.8 to -0.3) than were patients in high health literacy areas, but the significance was sensitive to specification. Overall, 81.5% and 71.5% of patients were adherent to antianginals and statins, respectively. Living in low health literacy areas was associated with lower adherence to antianginals (-3.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -6.1 to -0.6) but not statins. CONCLUSIONS: Low area-based health literacy was associated with being less likely to receive CABG and lower adherence, but the differences between low and high health literacy areas were small and sensitive to model specification. Individual factors such as dual eligibility status and race/ethnicity had stronger associations with outcomes than had area-based health literacy, suggesting that this area-based measure was inadequate to account for social determinants in this study.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of neurocognitive-sparing treatments for brain metastases.

BACKGROUND: Decisions regarding how to treat patients who have 1 to 3 brain metastases require important tradeoffs between controlling recurrences, side effects, and costs. In this analysis, the authors compared novel treatments versus usual care to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio from a payer's (Medicare) perspective. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using a microsimulation of a Markov model for 60 one-month cycles. The model used 4 simulated cohorts of patients aged 65 years with 1 to 3 brain metastases. The 4 cohorts had a median survival of 3, 6, 12, and 24 months to test the sensitivity of the model to different prognoses. The treatment alternatives evaluated included stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with 3 variants of salvage after recurrence (whole-brain radiotherapy [WBRT], hippocampal avoidance WBRT [HA-WBRT], SRS plus WBRT, and SRS plus HA-WBRT). The findings were tested for robustness using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Traditional radiation therapies remained cost-effective for patients in the 3-month and 6-month cohorts. In the cohorts with longer median survival, HA-WBRT and SRS plus HA-WBRT became cost-effective relative to traditional treatments. When the treatments that involved HA-WBRT were excluded, either SRS alone or SRS plus WBRT was cost-effective relative to WBRT alone. The deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these results. CONCLUSIONS: HA-WBRT and SRS plus HA-WBRT were cost-effective for 2 of the 4 cohorts, demonstrating the value of controlling late brain toxicity with this novel therapy. Cost-effectiveness depended on patient life expectancy. SRS was cost-effective in the cohorts with short prognoses (3 and 6 months), whereas HA-WBRT and SRS plus HA-WBRT were cost-effective in the cohorts with longer prognoses (12 and 24 months).