The Diversity of Surgical Trainees Index identifies racial and ethnic disparities among surgical specialties.

OBJECTIVE: Racial and ethnic disparities have been well-described among surgical specialties; however, variations in underrepresented in medicine (URiM) representation between these specialties have not previously been quantified. METHODS: Data collected from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) annual reports were used to derive the Diversity of Surgical Trainee Index (DoSTI) metric, which was calculated as the proportion of URiM residents and fellow physicians within a given surgical specialty, relative to the overall proportion of URiM trainees within all surgical and non-surgical ACGME-accredited programs in the same academic year. RESULTS: From 2013 to 2022, a total of 108,193 ACGME-accredited residency programs trained 1,296,204 residents and fellows in the United States. Of these, 14.1% (n = 182,680) of trainees self-identified as URiM over the study period. The mean DoSTI among all surgical specialties was 0.80 (standard error, 0.01) compared with all ACGME-accredited programs. High DoSTI specialties incorporated significantly higher proportions of Hispanic (8.7% vs 6.3%) and Black (5.2% vs 2.5%) trainees compared with low DoSTI specialties (P < .0001 each). General surgery (1.06 ± 0.01), plastic surgery (traditional) (1.12 ± 0.06), vascular surgery (integrated) (0.96 ± 0.03), and vascular surgery (traditional) (0.94 ± 0.06) had the highest DoSTI indices (P < .05 each vs composite). On linear regression analysis, only ophthalmology (+0.01/year; R2 = 0.41; P = .019), orthopedic surgery (+0.01/year; R2 = 0.33; P = .047), otolaryngology (+0.02/year; R2 = 0.86; P < .001), and pediatric surgery (+0.06/year; R2 = 0.33; P = .048) demonstrated an annual increase in DoSTI. CONCLUSIONS: The DoSTI is a novel metric used to quantify the degree of URiM representation among surgical specialties. DoSTI has revealed specialty-specific variations in racial/ethnic minority representation among surgical training programs. This metric may be used to improve provider awareness, identify high performing DoSTI specialties to highlight their best practices, and ultimately, recruit a more diverse surgical workforce.

Impact of risk factor control on peripheral artery disease outcomes and health disparities.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is associated with modifiable atherosclerotic risk factors like hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and smoking. However, the effect of risk factor control on outcomes and disparities in achieving control is less well understood. METHODS: All patients in an integrated, regional health system with PAD-related encounters, fee-for-service Medicare, and clinical risk factor control data were identified. Component risk factors were dichotomized into controlled and uncontrolled categories (control defined as low-density lipoprotein < 100 mg/dL, hemoglobin A1c < 7.0%, SBP < 140 mmHg, and current nonsmoker) and composite categories (none, 1, ⩾ 2 uncontrolled RFs) created. The primary outcome was major adverse vascular events (MAVE, a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and lower-extremity revascularization and amputation). RESULTS: The cohort included 781 patients with PAD, average age 72.5 ± 9.8 years, of whom 30.1% were Black, and 19.1% were Medicaid dual-enrolled. In this cohort, 260 (33.3%) had no uncontrolled risk factors and 200 (25.6%) had two or more uncontrolled risk factors. Patients with the poorest risk factor control were more likely to be Black (p < 0.001), Medicaid dual-enrolled (p < 0.001), and have chronic limb-threatening ischemia (p = 0.009). Significant differences in MAVE by degree of risk factor control were observed at 30 days (none uncontrolled: 5.8%, 1 uncontrolled: 11.5%, ⩾ 2 uncontrolled: 13.6%; p = 0.01) but not at 1 year (p = 0.08). risk factor control was not associated with outcomes at 1 year after adjustment for patient and PAD-specific characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: risk factor control is poor among patients with PAD. Significant disparities in achieving optimal risk factor control represent a potential target for reducing inequities in outcomes.

Clinician Specialty, Access to Care, and Outcomes Among Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the relationship between patterns of peripheral artery disease and outcomes is an essential step toward improving care and outcomes. We hypothesized that clinician specialty would be associated with occurrence of major adverse vascular events (MAVE). METHODS: Patients with at least 1 peripheral artery disease-related encounter in our health system and fee-for-service Medicare were divided into groups based on the specialty of the clinician (ie, cardiologist, surgeon, podiatrist, primary care, or other) providing a plurality of peripheral artery disease-coded care in the year prior to index encounter. The primary outcome was MAVE (a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, lower extremity revascularization, and lower extremity amputation). RESULTS: The cohort included 1768 patients, of whom 30.0% were Black, 23.9% were Medicaid dual-enrollment eligible, and 31.1% lived in rural areas. Patients receiving a plurality of their care from podiatrists had the highest 1-year rates of MAVE (34.4%, P <.001), hospitalization (65.9%, P <.001), and amputations (22.6%, P <.001). Clinician specialty was not associated with outcomes after adjustment. Patients who were Medicaid dual-eligible had higher adjusted risks of mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HRadj] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-2.14) and all-cause hospitalization (HRadj 1.20, 95% CI 1.03-1.40) and patients who were Black had a higher adjusted risk of amputation (HRadj 1.49, 95% CI 1.03-2.15). CONCLUSIONS: Clinician specialty was not associated with worse outcomes after adjustment, but certain socioeconomic factors were. The effects of clinician specialty and socioeconomic status were likely attenuated by the fact that all patients in this study had health insurance; these analyses require confirmation in a more representative cohort.

The association of healthcare disparities and patient-specific factors on clinical outcomes in peripheral artery disease.

BACKGROUND: PAD increases the risk of cardiovascular mortality and limb loss, and disparities in treatment and outcomes have been described. However, the association of patient-specific characteristics with variation in outcomes is less well known. METHODS: Patients with PAD from Duke University Health System (DUHS) between January 1, 2015 and March 31, 2016 were identified. PAD status was confirmed through ground truth adjudication and predictive modeling using diagnosis codes, procedure codes, and other administrative data. Symptom severity, lower extremity imaging, and ankle-brachial index (ABI) were manually abstracted from the electronic health record (EHR). Data was linked to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data to provide longitudinal follow up. Primary outcome was major adverse vascular events (MAVE), a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, lower extremity revascularization and amputation. RESULTS: Of 1,768 patients with PAD, 31.6% were asymptomatic, 41.2% had intermittent claudication (IC), and 27.3% had chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). At 1 year, patients with CLTI had higher rates of MAVE compared with asymptomatic or IC patients. CLTI and Medicaid dual eligibility were independent predictors of mortality. CLTI and Black race were associated with amputation. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of MAVE were highest in patients with CLTI, but patients with IC or asymptomatic disease also had high rates of adverse events. Black and Medicaid dual-eligible patients were disproportionately present in the CLTI subgroup and were at higher risk of amputation and mortality, respectively. Future studies must focus on early identification of high-risk patient groups to improve outcomes in patients with PAD.

Use and 1-year outcomes with conventional and drug-coated balloon angioplasty in patients with lower extremity peripheral artery disease.

BACKGROUND: With the growing use of drug-coated balloons for the treatment of peripheral artery disease, information regarding the safety and effectiveness of drug-coated balloons in current practice is needed. We examined patient, physician, and procedural characteristics as well as cardiovascular and limb events in patients who underwent peripheral vascular intervention with drug-coated balloons. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort analysis utilizing Medicare data for 100% of fee-for-service beneficiaries from 2015 to 2016 who had a claim for femoropopliteal intervention. The use of drug-coated balloons was identified via specific transitional pass-through codes. All-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, repeat femoropopliteal intervention, and major lower extremity amputation at 1 year were the clinical outcomes of interest. RESULTS: In total, 83,225 patients underwent femoropopliteal intervention, and drug-coated balloons were utilized in 29% of all procedures. Patients treated with drug-coated balloons had a lower cumulative incidence of all-cause hospitalization, all-cause mortality, and major lower extremity amputation, but were more likely to undergo repeat femoropopliteal intervention when compared with patients treated with conventional balloon angioplasty. After adjustment for measured confounders, patients treated with drug-coated balloons had lower rates of hospitalization (HR 0.91 (0.88, 0.93), P < .001), all-cause mortality (HR 0.89 [0.84, 0.94], P < .001), and major amputation (HR 0.93 [0.88, 0.99], P = .017). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent femoropopliteal intervention with drug-coated balloons had lower observed rates of all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, and major amputation at 1 year. Interestingly, there was not a reduction in rates of repeat revascularization, and further work is required to understand this finding. Nevertheless, the use of drug-coated balloons appears to be safe in this large study of contemporary patients in the United States.

Women undergoing aortic surgery are at higher risk for unplanned readmissions compared with men especially when discharged home.

OBJECTIVE: Women undergoing vascular surgery have higher morbidity and mortality. Our study explores gender-based differences in patient-centered outcomes such as readmission, length of stay (LOS), and discharge destination (home vs nonhome facility) in aortic aneurysm surgery. METHODS: Patients were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database (2011-2013) undergoing abdominal, thoracic, and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (N = 17,763), who were discharged and survived their index hospitalization. The primary outcome was unplanned readmission, and secondary outcomes were discharge to a nonhome facility, LOS, and reasons for unplanned readmission. Univariate, multivariate, and stratified analyses based on gender and discharge destination were used. RESULTS: Overall, 1541 patients (8.7%) experienced an unplanned readmission, with a significantly higher risk in women vs men (10.8% vs 8%; P < .001) overall (Procedure subtypes: abdominal aortic aneurysm [10.1% vs 7.7%; P < .001], thoracic aortic aneurysm [14.1% vs 13.5%; P = .8], and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm [14.8% vs 10%; P = .051]). The higher odds of readmission in women compared with men persisted in multivariate analysis after controlling for covariates (odds ratio [OR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.4). Similarly, the rate of discharge to a nonhome facility was nearly double in women compared with men (20.6% vs 10.7%; P < .001), but discharge to a nonhome facility was not a significant predictor of unplanned readmission. Upon stratification by discharge destination, the higher odds of readmissions in women compared with men occurred in patients who were discharged home (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.02-1.4) but not in those who were discharged to a nonhome facility (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.8-1.4). Significant differences in LOS were seen in patients who were discharged home. No gender differences were found in reasons for readmission with the three most common reasons being thromboembolic events, wound infections, and pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS: Gender disparity exists in the risk of unplanned readmission among aortic aneurysm surgery patients. Women who were discharged home have a higher likelihood of unplanned readmission despite longer LOS than men. These data suggest that further study into the discharge planning processes, social factors, and use of rehabilitation services is needed for women undergoing aortic procedures to decrease readmissions.