Association of Wearable Device Use With Pulse Rate and Health Care Use in Adults With Atrial Fibrillation.

Importance: Increasingly, individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF) use wearable devices (hereafter wearables) that measure pulse rate and detect arrhythmia. The associations of wearables with health outcomes and health care use are unknown. Objective: To characterize patients with AF who use wearables and compare pulse rate and health care use between individuals who use wearables and those who do not. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, propensity-matched cohort study included 90 days of follow-up of patients in a tertiary care, academic health system. Included patients were adults with at least 1 AF-specific International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) code from 2017 through 2019. Electronic medical records were reviewed to identify 125 individuals who used wearables and had adequate pulse-rate follow-up who were then matched using propensity scores 4 to 1 with 500 individuals who did not use wearables. Data were analyzed from June 2020 through February 2021. Exposure: Using commercially available wearables with pulse rate or rhythm evaluation capabilities. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mean pulse rates from measures taken in the clinic or hospital and a composite health care use score were recorded. The composite outcome included evaluation and management, ablation, cardioversion, telephone encounters, and number of rate or rhythm control medication orders. Results: Among 16 320 patients with AF included in the analysis, 348 patients used wearables and 15 972 individuals did not use wearables. Prior to matching, patients using wearables were younger (mean [SD] age, 64.0 [13.0] years vs 70.0 [13.8] years; P < .001) and healthier (mean [SD] CHA2DS2-VASc [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 65 years or 65-74 years, diabetes, prior stroke/transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, sex] score, 3.6 [2.0] vs 4.4 [2.0]; P < .001) compared with individuals not using wearables, with similar gender distribution (148 [42.5%] women vs 6722 women [42.1%]; P = .91). After matching, mean pulse rate was similar between 125 patients using wearables and 500 patients not using wearables (75.01 [95% CI, 72.74-77.27] vs 75.79 [95% CI, 74.68-76.90] beats per minute [bpm]; P = .54), whereas mean composite use score was higher among individuals using wearables (3.55 [95% CI, 3.31-3.80] vs 3.27 [95% CI, 3.14-3.40]; P = .04). Among measures in the composite outcome, there was a significant difference in use of ablation, occurring in 22 individuals who used wearables (17.6%) vs 37 individuals who did not use wearables (7.4%) (P = .001). In the regression analyses, mean composite use score was 0.28 points (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.56 points) higher among individuals using wearables compared with those not using wearables and mean pulse was similar, with a -0.79 bpm (95% CI -3.28 to 1.71 bpm) difference between the groups. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that follow-up health care use among individuals with AF was increased among those who used wearables compared with those with similar pulse rates who did not use wearables. Given the increasing use of wearables by patients with AF, prospective, randomized, long-term evaluation of the associations of wearable technology with health outcomes and health care use is needed.

The effect of risk and race on lower extremity amputations among Medicare diabetic patients.

OBJECTIVE: The effect of national quality initiatives aiming at limiting lower extremity amputations in diabetic patients remains uncertain. We therefore explored trends in amputation among Medicare diabetic patients with a focus on those at highest risk. METHODS: The Diabetes Analytical File, an enhanced sample of all diabetic patients from the Medicare 5% sample, was used to study the national incidence of amputation in diabetic patients. Within a cohort of ∼5 million diabetic patients between 1999 and 2006, we compared the incidence of amputation in high-risk (end-stage renal disease or more than three comorbidities) and low-risk groups and by race. RESULTS: Between 1999 and 2006, 23,976 amputations were performed, comprising 11,558 in high-risk and 12,418 in low-risk patients. The amputation rate declined over time from 4.8/1000 in 1999 to 4.4/1000 in 2006 (P<.001). High-risk patients represented a growing proportion of all amputations (33% in 1999, 50% in 2006; P<.001) despite representing 4% of diabetic patients in 1999 and 10% in 2006 (P<.001). The incidence of amputation was 29.6/1000 in the high-risk group vs 2.7/1000 in low-risk patients (P<.001). African Americans had higher rates of amputation in high-risk and low-risk groups. CONCLUSIONS: High-risk patients represent a minority of Medicare diabetic patients but account for 50% of all amputations, and this effect is magnified in African Americans. Future quality improvement efforts should focus on high-risk patients and African Americans.

Demand on ED resources during periods of widespread influenza activity.

The purpose of this study was to investigate ED resource demand during periods of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-declared widespread influenza activity (WIA). An observational analysis of secondary data describing ED resource demand was performed using computerized ED patient data over a 130-week period. Measures of ED resource utilization were compared during WIA and non-WIA periods. These measures included weekly census; percentage of patients triaged as having fever, infection, or respiratory (flu index) chief complaints; admission rate, ED LOS (length of stay), total bed time (TBT), the number of patients who left the ED without being seen by a physician (LWBS), and ED saturation time. The study included 34 weeks of CDC-designated WIA occurring over 3 distinct periods. During WIA, the flu index was elevated, 23% (95% confidence interval [CI], 20-25) versus 17% (95% CI, 16-17). There was increased resource utilization during WIA periods compared with the non-WIA periods for the following parameters: admission rate (24% [95% CI, 24-25%] versus 23% [23-23%]), ED LOS admitted (296 [95% CI, 280-313] versus 271 [95% CI, 265-277]), ED LOS discharged (162 [95% CI, 156-168] versus 152 [95% CI, 150-154]), ED saturation time (1292 [95% CI, 689-1894] versus 409 [95% CI, 209-609]) and LWBS (31 [95% CI, 19-42] versus 14 [95% CI, 12-15]). Although each WIA period was marked by an initial spike in patient volume, weekly census did not increase (1365 [95% CI, 1297-1433] during WIA versus 1297 [95% CI, 1275-1320] during non-WIA). An association between WIA and greater ED resource demand was observed. A spike in census was observed at the onset of each WIA period. In addition, the flu index increased during WIA, suggesting the use of the ED as a site for syndromic surveillance of WIA onset.