Reversing the "Risk-Treatment Paradox" of Bleeding in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Risk-Concordant Use of Bleeding Avoidance Strategies Is Associated With Reduced Bleeding and Lower Costs.

Background Bleeding is a common, morbid, and costly complication of percutaneous coronary intervention. While bleeding avoidance strategies ( BAS ) are effective, they are used paradoxically less in patients at high risk of bleeding. Whether a patient-centered approach to specifically increase the risk-concordant use of BAS and, thus, reverse the risk-treatment paradox is associated with reduced bleeding and costs is unknown. Methods and Results We implemented an intervention to reverse the bleeding risk-treatment paradox at Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis, MO, and examined: (1) the temporal trends in BAS use and (2) the association of risk-concordant BAS use with bleeding and hospital costs of percutaneous coronary intervention. Among 3519 percutaneous coronary interventions, there was a significantly increasing trend ( P=0.002) in risk-concordant use of BAS . The bleeding incidence was 2% in the risk-concordant group versus 9% in the risk-discordant group (absolute risk difference, 7%; number needed to treat, 14). Risk-concordant BAS use was associated with a 67% (95% confidence interval, 52-78%; P<0.001) reduction in the risk of bleeding and a $4738 (95% confidence interval, 3353-6122; P<0.001) reduction in per-patient percutaneous coronary intervention hospitalization costs (21.6% cost-savings). Conclusions In this study, patient-centered care directly aimed to make treatment-related decisions based on predicted risk of bleeding, led to more risk-concordant use of BAS and reversal of the risk-treatment paradox. This, in turn, was associated with a reduction in bleeding and hospitalization costs. Larger multicentered studies are needed to corroborate these results. As clinical medicine moves toward personalization, both patients and hospitals can benefit from a simple practice change that encourages objectivity and mitigates variability in care.

Assessment of health-related quality of life in spine treatment: conversion from SF-36 to VR-12.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Health-related quality-of-life outcomes have been collected with the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Short Form 36 (SF-36) survey. Boston University School of Public Health has developed algorithms for the conversion of SF-36 to Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores. PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study is to investigate the conversion of the SF-36 to VR-12 PCS and MCS scores. STUDY DESIGN: Preoperative and postoperative SF-36 were collected from patients who underwent lumbar or cervical surgery from a single surgeon between August 1998 and January 2013. METHODS: Short Form 36 PCS and MCS scores were calculated following their original instructions. The SF-36 answers were then converted to VR-12 PCS and MCS scores following the algorithm provided by the Boston University School of Public Health. The mean score, preoperative to postoperative change, and proportions of patients who reach the minimum detectable change were compared between SF-36 and VR-12. RESULTS: A total of 1,968 patients (1,559 lumbar and 409 cervical) had completed preoperative and postoperative SF-36. The values of the SF-36 and VR-12 mean scores were extremely similar, with score differences ranging from 0.77 to 1.82. The preoperative to postoperative improvement was highly significant (p<.001) for both SF-36 and VR-12 scores. The mean change scores were similar, with a difference of up to 0.93 for PCS and up to 0.37 for MCS. Minimum detectable change (MDC) values were almost identical for SF-36 and VR-12, with a difference of 0.12 for PCS and up to 0.41 for MCS. The proportions of patients whose change in score reached MDC were also nearly identical for SF-36 and VR-12. About 90% of the patients above SF-36 MDC were also above VR-12 MDC. CONCLUSIONS: The converted VR-12 scores, similar to the SF-36 scores, detect a significant postoperative improvement in PCS and MCS scores. The calculated MDC values and the proportions of patients whose score improvement reach MDC are similar for both SF-36 and VR-12.

Novel Patient-Centered Approach to Facilitate Same-Day Discharge in Patients Undergoing Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Same-day discharge (SDD) after elective percutaneous coronary intervention is safe, less costly, and preferred by patients, but it is usually performed in low-risk patients, if at all. To increase the appropriate use of SDD in more complex patients, we implemented a "patient-centered" protocol based on risk of complications at Barnes-Jewish Hospital. METHODS AND RESULTS: Our objectives were as follows: (1) to evaluate time trends in SDD; (2) to compare (a) mortality, bleeding, and acute kidney injury, (b) patient satisfaction, and (c) hospital costs by SDD versus no SDD (NSDD); and (3) to compare SDD eligibility by our patient-centered approach versus Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions guidelines. Our patient-centered approach was based on prospectively identifying personalized bleeding, mortality, and acute kidney injury risks, with a personalized safe contrast limit and mitigating those risks. We analyzed Barnes-Jewish Hospital's National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry data from July 1, 2009 to September 30, 2015 (N=1752). SDD increased rapidly from 0% to 77% (P<0.001), independent of radial access. Although SDD patients were comparable to NSDD patients, SDD was not associated with adverse outcomes (0% mortality, 0% bleeds, and 0.4% acute kidney injury). Patient satisfaction was high with SDD. Propensity score-adjusted costs were $7331 lower/SDD patient (P<0.001), saving an estimated $1.8 million annually. Only 16 patients (6.95%) met the eligibility for SDD by Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions guidelines, implying our patient-centered approach markedly increased SDD eligibility. CONCLUSIONS: With a patient-centered approach, SDD rapidly increased and was safe in 75% of patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention, despite patient complexity. Patient satisfaction was high, and hospital costs were lower. Patient-centered decision making to facilitate SDD is an important opportunity to improve the value of percutaneous coronary intervention.