Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc ; 30: 100617, 2020 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32904266

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients are vulnerable to over-utilization of resources. METHODS AND RESULTS: We explored the pattern of emergency department (ED) presentations of LVAD patients and their costs compared with non-LVAD heart failure patients. ED visits between 7/2008 and 7/2017 were reviewed to identify 145 LVAD patients, and 435 patients with known heart failure were selected using propensity score matching for age and sex. ED evaluation metrics, hospitalization cost, and length of stay (LOS) were analyzed. Although the most common ED presentations and their frequency differed between groups, few were LVAD specific. LVAD patients were more likely to have taken personal vehicles or be flown to the ED. They had similar times to triage, rooming, and physician evaluation compared with non-LVAD patients. However, LVAD patients were noted to have a shorter time from physician assessment to disposition (109.8 min vs. 177.0 min, p < 0.001) and, overall, LVAD patients had shorter ED LOS (6.33 vs. 9.82 hrs, p = 0.0001). For patients admitted, no significant difference was found between groups in hospital LOS (6.67 vs 6.58 days, p = 0.928) or total cost ($28,766 vs $21,524, p = 0.087). CONCLUSION: Shorter disposition times without increases in LOS or costs may identify a created healthcare disparity among LVAD patients.

2.
J Card Surg ; 35(10): 2529-2538, 2020 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32741013

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Renal function may improve after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implant, however, some patients develop postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI). Randomized trials showed benefit for early renal replacement therapy (RRT) in critically ill patients with AKI, but this practice has not been studied in LVAD patients. METHODS: We performed a single-center, retrospective cohort study of all adults (>18 years) who underwent LVAD placement from 1/2010 to 12/2018. We collected preoperative, hemodynamic, echocardiographic, intraoperative, and postoperative data. AKI was defined according to Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes definition. Early (E) RRT was considered treatment at AKI stage II or below. Standard (S) RRT was considered treatment at AKI stage III. Outcomes and Kaplan-Meier analysis were compared between groups. RESULTS: A total of 184 patients were included (mean age 56.10 years, 81% males, 30.4% African-American race). A total of 71 (38.6%) developed AKI and 17 (9.24%) needed RRT (11 E vs 6 S). A total of 11 remained hemodialysis-dependent at discharge (5 [45.5%] in E vs 6 [100%] in S, P = .043). There was a trend toward shorter intensive care unit stay and ventilation time in E group, and overall hospital stay was significantly less in the E group (48.18 ± 25.95 vs 94.00 ± 53.07 days, P = .028). Thirty-day mortality was similar between groups (E 18% vs S 16%, P = .9), but there was a trend toward improved overall survival in the E group. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to examine early initiation of RRT after LVAD implant. Early RRT was associated with shorter hospital stay, lower need for permanent RRT, and a trend toward improved survival. This practice may provide significant cost savings and should be examined further.


Assuntos
Injúria Renal Aguda/etiologia , Injúria Renal Aguda/terapia , Coração Auxiliar/efeitos adversos , Terapia de Substituição Renal/métodos , Injúria Renal Aguda/economia , Injúria Renal Aguda/mortalidade , Estudos de Coortes , Redução de Custos , Feminino , Humanos , Tempo de Internação , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Terapia de Substituição Renal/economia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Taxa de Sobrevida , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
J Card Surg ; 35(4): 854-859, 2020 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32115823

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The index for mortality prediction after cardiac transplantation (IMPACT) risk score incorporates 12 preoperative recipient-specific variables, and has been validated as an accurate predictor of short- and long-term mortality after orthotopic heart transplantation (OHTx). We believe it can also be used to predict hospital costs, and we hypothesize that higher preoperative IMPACT risk scores are associated with increased hospital resource consumption. METHODS: All OHTx patients ≥18 years of age at our institution were reviewed from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2014. Total index hospitalization costs post-transplant were extracted and presented in 2014 consumer price index inflation-adjusted US dollars. Patients were stratified into quartiles (Q) according to IMPACT risk scores. Logarithmic transformation normalized cost data, and linear regression assessed for correlation. A comparison of cost between Q of IMPACT risk score was performed using rank-sum and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-six (n = 356) OHTx were performed during the study period. The median IMPACT score for the cohort was five (interquartile range [IQR] 3-6). Eight (2.2%) patients died within 30-days and 1-year Kaplan-Meier survival was 88.3%. The median length of stay (LOS) was 16 (IQR 14-24) days. The median hospital cost for index admission was $222 200 (IQR:$169 200-$313 700). Median LOS was longer in Q4 vs Q1 (18 days vs 15 days, P = .01) and index hospital costs in Q4 were significantly higher compared to Q1 patients ($280 400 vs $205 000, P < .01). There was a significant positive correlation between IMPACT risk score and cost (regression coefficient .04, P < .01). CONCLUSION: This is the first study in adult cardiac transplantation to identify a positive correlation between hospital cost and recipient risk using the IMPACT risk score. Cost and resource consumption for the index admission after OHTx were significantly higher in the highest IMPACT risk Q compared with patients in the lowest Q.


Assuntos
Economia/estatística & dados numéricos , Recursos em Saúde/economia , Recursos em Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Insuficiência Cardíaca/economia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/cirurgia , Transplante de Coração/economia , Transplante de Coração/mortalidade , Custos Hospitalares , Adolescente , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Período Pré-Operatório , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Risco , Taxa de Sobrevida , Fatores de Tempo , Adulto Jovem
4.
Clin Cardiol ; 41(11): 1463-1467, 2018 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30225924

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Lower socioeconomic status (SES) is a known risk factor for worse outcomes after major cardiovascular interventions. Furthermore, individuals with lower SES face barriers to evaluation for advanced heart failure therapies, including ventricular assist device (VAD) implantation. HYPOTHESIS: Examination of the effects of individual determinants of SES on VAD outcomes will show similar survival benefit in patients with lower compared with higher SES. METHODS: All VAD implants at the University of Florida from January 2008 to December 2015 were reviewed. Patient-level determinants of SES included place of residence, education level, marital status, insurance status, and financial resources stratified by percent federal poverty level. Survival or transplantation at 1 year, 30-day readmission, implant length of stay (LOS), and an aggregate of VAD-related complications were assessed in univariate fashion and multivariable regression modeling. RESULTS: A total of 111 patients were included (mean age at the time of implant 57.6 years, 82.8% men). More than half received destination therapy. At 1 year, 78.3% were alive on device support or had undergone successful transplantation. There were no differences in survival, 30-day readmission, or aggregate VAD complications by the SES category. Although patients with lower levels of education had longer LOS in univariate analysis, on multivariable ordinal regression modeling, this relationship was no longer seen. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with lower SES receive the same survival benefit from VAD implantation and are not more likely to have 30-day readmissions, complications of device support, or prolonged implant LOS. Therefore, VAD implantation should not be withheld based on these parameters alone.


Assuntos
Insuficiência Cardíaca/terapia , Coração Auxiliar , Classe Social , Determinantes Sociais da Saúde , Função Ventricular Esquerda , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Escolaridade , Feminino , Florida , Insuficiência Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/mortalidade , Insuficiência Cardíaca/fisiopatologia , Transplante de Coração , Humanos , Renda , Seguro Saúde , Tempo de Internação , Masculino , Estado Civil , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Readmissão do Paciente , Falha de Prótese , Recuperação de Função Fisiológica , Características de Residência , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA