Equity in the Setting of Heart Failure Diagnosis: An Analysis of Differences Between and Within Clinician Practices.

BACKGROUND: Timely heart failure (HF) diagnosis can lead to earlier intervention and reduced morbidity. Among historically marginalized patients, new-onset HF diagnosis is more likely to occur in acute care settings (emergency department or inpatient hospitalization) than outpatient settings. Whether inequity within outpatient clinician practices affects diagnosis settings is unknown. METHODS: We determined the setting of incident HF diagnosis among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries between 2013 and 2017. We identified sociodemographic and medical characteristics associated with HF diagnosis in the acute care setting. Within each outpatient clinician practice, we compared acute care diagnosis rates across sociodemographic characteristics: female versus male sex, non-Hispanic White versus other racial and ethnic groups, and dual Medicare-Medicaid eligible (a surrogate for low income) versus nondual-eligible patients. Based on within-practice differences in acute diagnosis rates, we stratified clinician practices by equity (high, intermediate, and low) and compared clinician practice characteristics. RESULTS: Among 315 439 Medicare patients with incident HF, 173 121 (54.9%) were first diagnosed in acute care settings. Higher adjusted acute care diagnosis rates were associated with female sex (6.4% [95% CI, 6.1%-6.8%]), American Indian (3.6% [95% CI, 1.1%-6.1%]) race, and dual eligibility (4.1% [95% CI, 3.7%-4.5%]). These differences persisted within clinician practices. With clinician practice adjustment, dual-eligible patients had a 4.9% (95% CI, 4.5%-5.4%) greater acute care diagnosis rate than nondual-eligible patients. Clinician practices with greater equity across dual eligibility also had greater equity across sex and race and ethnicity and were more likely to be composed of predominantly primary care clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in HF diagnosis rates in the acute care setting between and within clinician practices highlight an opportunity to improve equity in diagnosing historically marginalized patients.

Clinical Impact of Routine Assessment of Patient-Reported Health Status in Heart Failure Clinic: The PRO-HF Trial.

BACKGROUND: The impact of routine clinic use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures on clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) has not been well-characterized. We tested if clinic-based use of a disease-specific PRO improves patient-reported quality of life at 1 year. METHODS: The PRO-HF trial (Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement in Heart Failure Clinic) was an open-label, parallel, patient-level randomized clinical trial of routine PRO assessment or usual care at an academic HF clinic between August 30, 2021, and June 30, 2022, with 1 year of follow-up. In the PRO assessment arm, participants completed the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 (KCCQ-12) at each HF clinic visit, and results were shared with their treating clinician. The usual care arm completed the KCCQ-12 at randomization and 1 year later, which was not shared with the treating clinician. The primary outcome was the KCCQ-12 overall summary score (OSS) between 12 and 15 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes included domains of the KCCQ-12, hospitalization and emergency department visit rates, HF medication therapy, clinic visit frequency, and testing rates. RESULTS: Across 17 clinicians, 1248 participants were enrolled and randomized to PRO assessment (n=624) or usual care (n=624). The median age was 63.9 years (interquartile range [IQR], 51.8-72.8), 38.9% were women, and the median baseline KCCQ-12 OSS was 82.3 (IQR, 58.3-94.8). Final KCCQ-12 (available in 87.9% of the PRO arm and 85.1% in usual care; P=0.16) median OSS were 87.5 (IQR, 68.8-96.9) in the PRO arm and 87.6 (IQR, 69.7-96.9) in the usual care arm with a baseline-adjusted mean difference of 0.2 ([95% CI, -1.7 to 2.0]; P=0.85). The results were consistent across prespecified subgroups. A post hoc analysis demonstrated a significant interaction with greater benefit among participants with a baseline KCCQ-12 OSS of 60 to 80 but not in less or more symptomatic participants. No significant differences were found in 1-year mortality, hospitalizations, emergency department visits, medication therapy, clinic follow-up, or testing rates between arms. CONCLUSIONS: Routine PRO assessment in HF clinic visits did not impact patient-reported quality of life or other clinical outcomes. Alternate strategies and settings for embedding PROs into routine clinical care should be tested. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04164004.

A Stepwise Replicable Approach to Negotiating Value-driven Supply Chain Contracts for Orthobiologics.

INTRODUCTION: Orthobiologics are increasingly used to augment healing of tissues. Despite growing demand for orthobiologic products, many health systems do not enjoy substantial savings expected with high-volume purchases. The primary goal of this study was to evaluate an institutional program designed to (1) prioritize high-value orthobiologics and (2) incentivize vendor participation in value-driven contractual programs. METHODS: A three-step approach was used to reduce costs through optimization of orthobiologics supply chain. First, surgeons with orthobiologics expertise were engaged in key supply chain purchasing decisions. Second, eight orthobiologics formulary categories were defined. Capitated pricing expectations were established for each product category. Capitated pricing expectations were established for each product using institutional invoice data and market pricing data. In comparison with similar institutions, products offered by multiple vendors were priced at a lower benchmark (10th percentile of market price) than more rare products priced at the 25th percentile of the market price. Pricing expectations were transparent to vendors. Third, a competitive bidding process required vendors to submit pricing proposals for products. Clinicians and supply chain leaders jointly awarded contracts to vendors that met pricing expectations. RESULTS: Compared with our projected estimate of $423,946 savings using capitated product prices, our actual annual savings was $542,216. Seventy-nine percent of savings came from allograft products. Although the number of total vendors decreased from 14 to 11, each of the nine returning vendors received a larger, three-year institutional contract. Average pricing decreased across seven of the eight formulary categories. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates a three-step replicable approach to increase institutional savings for orthobiologic products, engaging clinician experts, and strengthening relationships with select vendors. Vendor consolidation permits a symbiotic win-win relationship: Health systems achieve increased value by reducing unnecessary complexity of multiple contracts, and vendors obtain larger contracts with increased market share. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV study.

Impact of Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement in Heart Failure Clinic on Clinician Health Status Assessment and Patient Experience: A Substudy of the PRO-HF Trial.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians typically estimate heart failure health status using the New York Heart Association Class, which is often discordant with patient-reported health status. It is unknown whether collecting patient-reported health status improves the accuracy of clinician assessments. METHODS: The PRO-HF trial (Patient-Reported Outcomes in Heart Failure Clinic) is a randomized, nonblinded trial evaluating routine Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 (KCCQ-12) collection in heart failure clinic. Patients with a scheduled visit to Stanford heart failure clinic between August 30, 2021 and June 30, 2022 were enrolled and randomized to KCCQ-12 assessment or usual care. In this prespecified substudy, we evaluated whether access to the KCCQ-12 improved the accuracy of clinicians' New York Heart Association assessment or patients' perspectives on their clinician interaction. We surveyed clinicians regarding their patients' New York Heart Association Class, quality of life, and symptom frequency. Clinician responses were compared with patients' KCCQ-12 responses. We surveyed patients regarding their clinician interactions. RESULTS: Of the 1248 enrolled patients, 1051 (84.2%) attended a visit during the substudy. KCCQ-12 results were given to the clinicians treating the 528 patients in the KCCQ-12 arm; the 523 patients in the usual care arm completed the KCCQ-12 without the results being shared. The correlation between New York Heart Association Class and KCCQ-12 Overall Summary Score was stronger when clinicians had access to the KCCQ-12 (r=-0.73 versus r=-0.61, P<0.001). More patients in the KCCQ-12 arm strongly agreed that their clinician understood their symptoms (95.2% versus 89.7% of respondents [odds ratio' 2.27; 95% CI' 1.32-3.87]). However, patients in both arms reported similar quality of clinician communication and therapeutic alliance. CONCLUSIONS: Collecting the KCCQ-12 in heart failure clinic improved clinicians' accuracy of health status assessment; correspondingly, patients believed their clinicians better understood their symptoms. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04164004.

Racial Disparities in Pediatric Kidney Transplantation under the New Kidney Allocation System in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In December 2014, the Kidney Allocation System (KAS) was implemented to improve equity in access to transplantation, but preliminary studies in children show mixed results. Thus, we aimed to assess how the 2014 KAS policy change affected racial and ethnic disparities in pediatric kidney transplantation access and related outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of children <18 years of age active on the kidney transplant list from 2008 to 2019 using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Log-logistic accelerated failure time models were used to determine the time from first activation on the transplant list and the time on dialysis to deceased donor transplant, each with KAS era or race and ethnicity as the exposure of interest. We used logistic regression to assess odds of delayed graft function. Log-rank tests assessed time to graft loss within racial and ethnic groups across KAS eras. RESULTS: All children experienced longer wait times from activation to transplantation post-KAS. In univariable analysis, Black and Hispanic children and other children of color experienced longer times from activation to transplant compared with White children in both eras; this finding was largely attenuated after multivariable analysis (time ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.32; time ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 1.00 to 1.28; and time ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.96 to 1.41 post-KAS, respectively). Multivariable analysis also showed that racial and ethnic disparities in time from dialysis initiation to transplantation in the pre-KAS era were mitigated in the post-KAS era. There were no disparities in odds of delayed graft function. Black and Hispanic children experienced longer times with a functioning graft in the post-KAS era. CONCLUSIONS: No racial and ethnic disparities from activation to deceased donor transplantation were seen before or after implementation of the KAS in multivariable analysis, whereas time on dialysis to transplantation and odds of short-term graft loss improved in equity after the implementation of the KAS, without compromising disparities in delayed graft function. PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2021_12_07_CJN06740521.mp3.

COVID-19 Solutions Are Climate Solutions: Lessons From Reusable Gowns.

The COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare the inadequacy of the U.S. healthcare system to deliver timely and resilient care. According to the American Hospital Association, the pandemic has created a $202 billion loss across the healthcare industry, forcing health care systems to lay off workers and making hospitals scramble to minimize supply chain costs. However, as the demand for personal protective equipment (PPE) grows, hospitals have sacrificed sustainable solutions for disposable options that, although convenient, will exacerbate supply strains, financial burden, and waste. We advocate for reusable gowns as a means to lower health care costs, address climate change, and improve resilience while preserving the safety of health care workers. Reusable gowns' polyester material provides comparable capacity to reduce microbial cross-transmission and liquid penetration. In addition, previous hospitals have reported a 50% cost reduction in gown expenditures after adopting reusable gowns; given the current 2000% price increase in isolation gowns during COVID-19, reusable gown use will build both healthcare resilience and security from price fluctuations. Finally, with the United States' medical waste stream worsening, reusable isolation gowns show promising reductions in energy and water use, solid waste, and carbon footprint. The gowns are shown to withstand laundering 75-100 times in contrast to the single-use disposable gown. The circumstances of the pandemic forewarn the need to shift our single-use PPE practices to standardized reusable applications. Ultimately, sustainable forms of protective equipment can help us prepare for future crises that challenge the resilience of the healthcare system.