Comparative Effectiveness of Aspirin Dosing in Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate dose of aspirin to lower the risk of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke and to minimize major bleeding in patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is a subject of controversy. METHODS: Using an open-label, pragmatic design, we randomly assigned patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease to a strategy of 81 mg or 325 mg of aspirin per day. The primary effectiveness outcome was a composite of death from any cause, hospitalization for myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for stroke, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. The primary safety outcome was hospitalization for major bleeding, also assessed in a time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: A total of 15,076 patients were followed for a median of 26.2 months (interquartile range [IQR], 19.0 to 34.9). Before randomization, 13,537 (96.0% of those with available information on previous aspirin use) were already taking aspirin, and 85.3% of these patients were previously taking 81 mg of daily aspirin. Death, hospitalization for myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for stroke occurred in 590 patients (estimated percentage, 7.28%) in the 81-mg group and 569 patients (estimated percentage, 7.51%) in the 325-mg group (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91 to 1.14). Hospitalization for major bleeding occurred in 53 patients (estimated percentage, 0.63%) in the 81-mg group and 44 patients (estimated percentage, 0.60%) in the 325-mg group (hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.77). Patients assigned to 325 mg had a higher incidence of dose switching than those assigned to 81 mg (41.6% vs. 7.1%) and fewer median days of exposure to the assigned dose (434 days [IQR, 139 to 737] vs. 650 days [IQR, 415 to 922]). CONCLUSIONS: In this pragmatic trial involving patients with established cardiovascular disease, there was substantial dose switching to 81 mg of daily aspirin and no significant differences in cardiovascular events or major bleeding between patients assigned to 81 mg and those assigned to 325 mg of aspirin daily. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; ADAPTABLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02697916.).

Framework of the strengths and challenges of clinically integrated trials: An expert panel report.

The limitations of the explanatory clinical trial framework include the high expense of implementing explanatory trials, restrictive entry criteria for participants, and redundant logistical processes. These limitations can result in slow evidence generation that is not responsive to population health needs, yielding evidence that is not generalizable. Clinically integrated trials, which integrate clinical research into routine care, represent a potential solution to this challenge and an opportunity to support learning health systems. The operational and design features of clinically integrated trials include a focused scope, simplicity in design and requirements, the leveraging of existing data structures, and patient participation in the entire trial process. These features are designed to minimize barriers to participation and trial execution and reduce additional research burdens for participants and clinicians alike. Broad adoption and scalability of clinically integrated trials are dependent, in part, on continuing regulatory, healthcare system, and payer support. This analysis presents a framework of the strengths and challenges of clinically integrated trials and is based on a multidisciplinary expert "Think Tank" panel discussion that included representatives from patient populations, academia, non-profit funding agencies, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and industry.

Drug development for major chronic health conditions-aligning with growing public health needs: Proceedings from a multistakeholder think tank.

The global pharmaceutical industry portfolio is skewed towards cancer and rare diseases due to more predictable development pathways and financial incentives. In contrast, drug development for major chronic health conditions that are responsible for a large part of mortality and disability worldwide is stalled. To examine the processes of novel drug development for common chronic health conditions, a multistakeholder Think Tank meeting, including thought leaders from academia, clinical practice, non-profit healthcare organizations, the pharmaceutical industry, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), payors as well as investors, was convened in July 2022. Herein, we summarize the proceedings of this meeting, including an overview of the current state of drug development for chronic health conditions and key barriers that were identified. Six major action items were formulated to accelerate drug development for chronic diseases, with a focus on improving the efficiency of clinical trials and rapid implementation of evidence into clinical practice.

Why Evidence Generation Should Matter to Payers and How They Can Help.

Importance: The US leads the world in bringing new medical products to market, but the ability to generate evidence to inform clinical practice in postmarket settings needs improvement. Although a diverse group of stakeholders is working to improve postmarket evidence generation, the role of private payers has been underappreciated. Observations: Payers are crucial allies in improving evidence generation because better data would better inform coverage decisions, their policies and practices influence the conduct of care and research, and their claims data are a source of real-world evidence used in medical product evaluation. In addition, payers have a stake in improving evidence generation because the kinds of evidence needed to inform health care and coverage decisions are often not available when a product enters the market and may not be generated without their involvement. Here, we describe several key steps payers could take to improve evidence generation, including participating in efforts to reduce administrative and financial barriers to the conduct of clinical trials, directly incentivizing evidence generation on high-priority questions by funding potential cost-saving trials, increasing engagement with the medical products industry on evidentiary needs for coverage decisions, and improving usability of claims data by reducing data lags and routinely recording unique device identifiers. Broad payer engagement with US Food and Drug Administration recommendations regarding evidence generation will ensure that the opportunities to participate in clinical research are extended to all communities and that evidence needed to inform care is generated in trials and surveillance systems that reflect the clinical reality across the US. Conclusions and Relevance: Increasing payer involvement in evidence generation can benefit all participants in the medical innovation ecosystem. The importance of payers in these efforts will continue to grow in response to imperatives to increase integration of care and research, engage a diverse set of communities in clinical research, and move toward alternative payment models.

Lessons From COVID-19 for Pandemic Preparedness: Proceedings From a Multistakeholder Think Tank.

While the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to present global challenges, sufficient time has passed to reflect on lessons learned and use those insights to inform policy and approaches to prepare for the next pandemic. In May 2022, the Duke Clinical Research Institute convened a think tank with thought leaders from academia, clinical practice, the pharmaceutical industry, patient advocacy, the National Institutes of Health, the US Food and Drug Administration, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to share, firsthand, expert knowledge of the insights gained from the COVID-19 pandemic and how this acquired knowledge can help inform the next pandemic response. The think tank focused on pandemic preparedness, therapeutics, vaccines, and challenges related to clinical trial design and scale-up during the early phase of a pandemic. Based on the multi-faceted discussions, we outline 10 key steps to an improved and equitable pandemic response.

Fitness of real-world data for clinical trial data collection: Results and lessons from a HARMONY Outcomes ancillary study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the extensive use of real-world data for retrospective, observational clinical research, our understanding of how real-world data might increase the efficiency of data collection in patient-level randomized clinical trials is largely unknown. The structure of real-world data is inherently heterogeneous, with each source electronic health record and claims database different from the next. Their fitness-for-use as data sources for multisite trials in the United States has not been established. METHODS: For a subset of participants in the HARMONY Outcomes Trial, we obtained electronic health record data from recruiting sites or Medicare claims data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. For baseline characteristics and follow-up events, we assessed the level of agreement between these real-world data and data documented in the trial database. RESULTS: Real-world data-derived demographic information tended to agree with trial-reported demographic information, although real-world data were less accurate in identifying medical history. The ability of real-world data to identify baseline medication usage differed by real-world data source, with claims data demonstrating substantially better performance than electronic health record data. The limited number of lab results in the collected electronic health record data matched closely with values in the trial database. There were not enough follow-up events in the ancillary study population to draw meaningful conclusions about the performance of real-world data for identification of events. Based on the conduct of this ancillary study, the challenges and opportunities of using real-world data within clinical trials are discussed. CONCLUSION: Based on a subset of participants from the HARMONY Outcomes Trial, our results suggest that electronic health record or claims data, as currently available, are unlikely to be a complete substitute for trial data collection of medical history or baseline lab results, but that Medicare claims were able to identify most medications. The limited size of the study population prevents us from drawing strong conclusions based on these results, and other studies are clearly needed to confirm or refute these findings.

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.

Medical chart validation of inpatient diagnosis codes for transfusion-related acute lung injury 2013-2015.

INTRODUCTION: Transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI), an adverse event occurring during or within 6 hours of transfusion, is a leading cause of transfusion-associated fatalities reported to the US Food and Drug Administration. There is limited information on the validity of diagnosis codes for TRALI recorded in inpatient electronic medical records (EMRs). STUDY DESIGNS AND METHODS: We conducted a validation study to establish the positive predictive value (PPV) of TRALI International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) diagnosis codes recorded within a large hospital system between 2013 and 2015. A physician with critical care expertise confirmed the TRALI diagnosis. As TRALI is likely underdiagnosed, we used the specific code (518.7), and codes for respiratory failure (518.82) in combination with transfusion reaction (999.80, 999.89, E934.7). RESULTS: Among almost four million inpatient stays, we identified 208 potential TRALI cases with ICD-9-CM codes and reviewed 195 medical records; 68 (35%) met clinical definitions for TRALI (26 [38%] definitive, 15 [22%] possible, 27 [40%] delayed). Overall, the PPV for all inpatient TRALI diagnoses was 35% (95% confidence interval (CI), 28-42). The PPV for the TRALI-specific code was 44% (95% CI, 35-54). CONCLUSION: We observed low PPVs (<50%) for TRALI ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes as validated by medical charts, which may relate to inconsistent code use, incomplete medical records, or other factors. Future studies using TRALI diagnosis codes in EMR databases may consider confirming diagnoses with medical records, assessing TRALI ICD, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes, or exploring alternative ways for of accurately identifying TRALI in EMR databases. KEY POINTS: In 169 hospitals, we identified 208 potential TRALI cases, reviewed 195 charts, and confirmed 68 (35%) cases met TRALI clinical definitions. As many potential TRALI cases identified with diagnosis codes did not meet clinical definitions, medical record confirmation may be prudent.

Psychosocial determinants of cardiovascular events among black Americans with chronic kidney disease or associated risk factors in the Jackson heart study.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD), hypertension (HTN), or diabetes mellitus (DM) are at increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). The extent to which psychosocial factors are associated with increased CVD risk within these individuals is unclear. Black individuals experience a high degree of psychosocial stressors due to socioeconomic factors, environment, racism, and discrimination. We examined the association between psychosocial factors and risk of CVD events among Black men and women with CKD and CKD risk factors in the Jackson Heart Study. METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified 1919 participants with prevalent CKD or CKD risk factors at baseline. We used rotated principal component analysis - a form of unsupervised machine learning that may identify constructs not intuitively identified by a person - to describe five groups of psychosocial components (including negative moods, religiosity, discrimination, negative outlooks, and negative coping resources) based on a battery of questionnaires. Multiple imputation by chained equation (MICE) was used to impute missing covariate data. Cox models were used to quantify the association between psychosocial components and incident CVD, defined as a fatal coronary heart disease event, myocardial infarction, cardiac procedure (angiography or revascularization procedure), or stroke. Of the 929 participants in the analysis, 67% were female, 28% were current/former smokers with mean age of 56 years and mean BMI of 33 kg/m2. Over a median follow-up of 8 years, 6% had an incident CVD event. In multivariable models, each standard deviation (SD) increase in the religiosity component was associated with an increased hazard for CVD event (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.09-2.13). CONCLUSIONS: Religiosity was associated with CVD among participants with prevalent CKD or CKD risk factors. Studies to better understand the mechanisms of this relationship are needed.

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) and its treatment: an NIH Collaboratory study of claims data.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a disabling complication of many chemotherapies. We investigated the feasibility of using health plan claims and administrative data to identify CIPN occurrence by comparing patients who received neurotoxic and non-neurotoxic chemotherapies. METHODS: The sample included over 53,000,000 patients from two regional and one national insurer in the USA (> 400,000 exposed to chemotherapy). Peripheral neuropathy was identified using a broad definition (definition 1) and a specific definition (i.e., drug-induced polyneuropathy code) (definition 2). RESULTS: CIPN incidence as measured by definition 1 within 6 months of chemotherapy initiation was 18.1% and 6.2% for patients who received neurotoxic and non-neurotoxic chemotherapy, respectively (relative risk neurotoxic vs. non-neurotoxic (RR), 2.93 (95% CI, 2.87-2.98)). For definition 2, these incidences were 3.6% and 0.1% (RR, 25.2 (95% CI, 22.8-27.8)). The incidences of new analgesic prescriptions for neurotoxic and non-neurotoxic groups were as follows: gabapentin, 7.1%/1.7%; pregabalin, 0.69%/0.31%; and duloxetine, 0.78%/0.76%. The incidence of CIPN as defined by definitions 1 and 2 was low compared with that of published research studies, but the relative risk of CIPN among patients who received neurotoxic chemotherapies compared with those who received non-neurotoxic chemotherapies was high using definition 2. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that as used currently by clinicians, administrative codes likely underestimate CIPN incidence. Thus, studies using administrative data to estimate CIPN incidence are not currently feasible. However, the drug-induced polyneuropathy code is a specific indicator of CIPN in administrative data and may be useful for investigating predictors or potentially preventive therapies of CIPN.

Association Between Prompt Defibrillation and Epinephrine Treatment With Long-Term Survival After In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have reported higher in-hospital survival with prompt defibrillation and epinephrine treatment in patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). Whether this survival benefit persists after discharge is unknown. METHODS: We linked data from a national IHCA registry with Medicare files and identified 36 961 patients ≥65 years of age with an IHCA at 517 hospitals between 2000 and 2011. Patients with IHCA caused by pulseless ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation were stratified by prompt (≤2 minutes) versus delayed (>2 minutes) defibrillation, whereas patients with IHCA caused by asystole or pulseless electric activity were stratified by prompt (≤5 minutes) versus delayed (>5 minutes) epinephrine treatment. The association between prompt treatment and long-term survival for each rhythm type was assessed with multivariable hierarchical modified Poisson regression models. RESULTS: Of 8119 patients with an IHCA caused by ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation, the rate of 1-year survival was higher in those treated with prompt defibrillation than with delayed defibrillation (25.7% [1466 of 5714] versus 15.5% [373 of 2405]; adjusted relative risk [RR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32-1.69; P<0.0001). This survival advantage persisted at 3 years (19.1% versus 11.0%; adjusted RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.23-1.69; P<0.0001) and at 5 years (14.7% versus 7.9%; adjusted RR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.22-1.83; P<0.0001). Of 28 842 patients with an IHCA caused by asystole/pulseless electric activity, the rate of 1-year survival with prompt epinephrine treatment was higher than with delayed treatment (5.4% [1341 of 24 885] versus 4.3% [168 of 3957]; adjusted RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.41; P=0.02), but this survival benefit was no longer present at 3 years (3.5% versus 2.9%; adjusted RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.95-1.45; P=0.15) and at 5 years (2.3% versus 1.9%; adjusted RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.88-1.58; P=0.27). CONCLUSIONS: Prompt defibrillation for IHCA caused by ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation was associated with higher rates of long-term survival throughout 5 years of follow-up, whereas prompt epinephrine treatment for asystole/pulseless electric activity was associated with greater survival at 1 year but not at 3 or 5 years. By quantifying the greater survival associated with timely defibrillation and epinephrine administration, these findings provide important insights into the durability of survival benefits for 2 process-of-care measures in current resuscitation guidelines.

Neck circumference and cardiovascular outcomes: Insights from the Jackson Heart Study.

BACKGROUND: Emerging data suggest that neck circumference (NC) is associated with cardiometabolic risk factors. Limited research is available regarding the association between NC and cardiovascular outcomes in African Americans. METHODS: Using data from the Jackson Heart Study, we included participants with recorded NC measurements at baseline (2000-2004). Baseline characteristics for the included population were summarized by tertiles of NC. We then calculated age- and sex-adjusted cumulative incidence of clinical cardiovascular outcomes and performed Cox proportional-hazards with stepwise models. RESULTS: Overall, 5,290 participants were categorized into tertiles of baseline NC defined as ≤37 cm (n = 2179), 38-40 cm (n = 1552), and >40 cm (n = 1559). After adjusting for age and sex, increasing NC was associated with increased risk of heart failure (HF) hospitalization (cumulative incidence = 13.4% [99% CI, 10.7-16.7] in the largest NC tertile vs 6.5% [99% CI, 4.7-8.8] in the smallest NC tertile), but not mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, or coronary heart disease (all P ≥ .1). Following full risk adjustment, there was a nominal increase in the risk of HF hospitalization with increasing NC, but this was not statistically significant (hazard ratio per 1-cm increase, 1.04 [99% CI, 0.99-1.10], P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of African American individuals, a larger NC was associated with increased risk for HF hospitalization following adjustment for age and sex, but this risk was not statistically significant after adjusting for other clinical variables. Although NC is not independently associated with increased risk for cardiovascular events, it may offer prognostic information particularly related to HF hospitalization.

Claims-based cardiovascular outcome identification for clinical research: Results from 7 large randomized cardiovascular clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Medicare insurance claims may provide an efficient means to ascertain follow-up of older participants in clinical research. We sought to determine the accuracy and completeness of claims- versus site-based follow-up with clinical event committee (+CEC) adjudication of cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study using linked Medicare and Duke Database of Clinical Trials data. Medicare claims were linked to clinical data from 7 randomized cardiovascular clinical trials. Of 52,476 trial participants, linking resulted in 5,839 (of 10,497 linkage-eligible) Medicare-linked trial participants with fee-for-service A and B coverage. Death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and revascularization incidences were compared using Medicare inpatient claims only, site-reported events (+CEC) only, or a combination of the 2. Randomized treatment effects were compared as a function of whether claims-based, site-based (+CEC), or a combined system was used for event detection. RESULTS: Among the 5,839 study participants, the annual event rates were similar between claims- and site-based (+CEC) follow-up: death (overall rate 5.2% vs 5.2%; adjusted κ 0.99), MI (2.2% vs 2.3%; adjusted κ 0.96), stroke (0.7% vs 0.7%; adjusted κ 0.99), and any revascularization (7.4% vs 7.9%; adjusted κ 0.95). Of events detected by claims yet not reported by CEC, a minority were reported by sites but negatively adjudicated by CEC (39% of MIs and 18% of strokes). Differences in individual case concordance led to higher event rates when claims- and site-based (+CEC) systems were combined. Randomized treatment effects were similar among the 3 approaches for each outcome of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Claims- versus site-based (+CEC) follow-up identified similar overall cardiovascular event rates despite meaningful differences in the events detected. Randomized treatment effects were similar using the 2 methods, suggesting claims data could be used to support clinical research leveraging routinely collected data. This approach may lead to more effective evidence generation, synthesis, and appraisal of medical products and inform the strategic approaches toward the National Evaluation System for Health Technology.

Addressing guideline and policy changes during pragmatic clinical trials.

While conducting a set of large-scale multi-site pragmatic clinical trials involving high-impact public health issues such as end-stage renal disease, opioid use, and colorectal cancer, there were substantial changes to both policies and guidelines relevant to the trials. These external changes gave rise to unexpected challenges for the trials, including decisions regarding how to respond to new clinical practice guidelines, increased difficulty in implementing trial interventions, achieving separation between treatment groups, and differential responses across sites. In this article, we describe these challenges and the approaches used to address them. When deliberating appropriate action in the face of external changes during a pragmatic clinical trial, we recommend considering the well-being of the participants, clinical equipoise, and the strength and quality of the evidence associated with the change; involving those charged with data and safety monitoring; and where possible, planning for potential external changes as the trial is being designed. Any solution must balance the primary obligation to protect the well-being of participants with the secondary obligation to protect the integrity of the trial in order to gain meaningful answers to important public health questions.

Why Should the FDA Focus on Pragmatic Clinical Research?

This Viewpoint from the FDA discusses how pragmatic clinical research­assessment that uses real-world data, often in combination with research data, after initial marketing approval­can help in evaluation of new technologies, benefit research sites in underresourced settings, and better inform regulatory decisions and clinical practice.

The Learning Healthcare System and Cardiovascular Care: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

The learning healthcare system uses health information technology and the health data infrastructure to apply scientific evidence at the point of clinical care while simultaneously collecting insights from that care to promote innovation in optimal healthcare delivery and to fuel new scientific discovery. To achieve these goals, the learning healthcare system requires systematic redesign of the current healthcare system, focusing on 4 major domains: science and informatics, patient-clinician partnerships, incentives, and development of a continuous learning culture. This scientific statement provides an overview of how these learning healthcare system domains can be realized in cardiovascular disease care. Current cardiovascular disease care innovations in informatics, data uses, patient engagement, continuous learning culture, and incentives are profiled. In addition, recommendations for next steps for the development of a learning healthcare system in cardiovascular care are presented.

Permanent pacemaker use among patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: Findings from the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry (ADHERE) National Registry.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction may be associated with chronotropic incompetence, but little is known about the incidence and prevalence of permanent pacemaker use in this population or factors associated with its use. METHODS: We analyzed patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (ie, left ventricular ejection fraction greater than 40%) from the ADHERE registry (2001-2006) linked with Medicare claims. We described the use of both prevalent and incident permanent pacemakers in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and determined factors associated with pacemaker use with logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among 13,881 patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, 3136 (22.6%) had a permanent pacemaker, and of these patients, 636 had a permanent pacemaker implanted during hospitalization. Permanent pacemaker use was more common among older patients (81 vs 79 years; P < .001), men (38% vs 34%; P < .001), patients with atrial fibrillation (58% vs 36%; P < .001), and patients with wider QRS duration (140 ms vs 94 ms; P < .001). Rates of digoxin, aldosterone antagonist, and loop diuretic use were slightly higher in patients with a permanent pacemaker compared with patients with no permanent pacemaker. Factors associated with both prevalent and incident pacemaker use included age, fast or slow heart rate, atrial fibrillation, and lower body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: Use of permanent pacemakers is relatively common among patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

Access to routine care and risks for 30-day readmission in patients with cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that access to routine medical care is associated with the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of chronic diseases. However, studies have not examined whether patient-reported difficulties in access to care are associated with rehospitalization in patients with cardiovascular disease. METHODS: Electronic medical records and a standardized survey were used to examine cardiovascular patients admitted to a large medical center from January 1, 2015 through January 10, 2017 (n=520). All-cause readmission within 30 days of discharge was the primary outcome for analysis. Logistic regression models were used to examine the association between access to care and 30-day readmission while adjusting for patient demographics, socioeconomic status, healthcare utilization, and health status. RESULTS: Nearly 1-in-6 patients (15.7%) reported difficulty in accessing routine medical care; and those who were younger, male, non-white, uninsured, with heart failure, and had low social support were significantly more likely to report difficulty. Patients who reported difficulty in accessing care had significantly higher rates of 30-day readmission than patients who did not report difficulty (33.3% vs. 17.9%; P=.001); and the risks remained largely unchanged after accounting for nearly two dozen covariates (unadjusted odds ratio [OR]=2.29; 95% CI, 1.46-3.60 vs. adjusted OR=2.17; 95% CI, 1.29-3.66). Risks for readmission were especially high for patients who reported issues with transportation (OR=3.24; 95% CI, 1.28-8.16) and scheduling appointments (OR=3.56; 95% CI, 1.43-8.84), but not for other reasons (OR=1.47; 95% CI, 0.61-3.54). CONCLUSIONS: Cardiovascular patients who reported difficulty in accessing routine care had substantial risks of readmission within 30 days after discharge. These findings have important implications for identifying high-risk patients and developing interventions to improve access to routine medical care.

Early impact of guideline publication on angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor use among patients hospitalized for heart failure.

BACKGROUND: On May 20, 2016, US professional organizations in cardiology published joint treatment guidelines recommending the use of angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) for eligible patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Using data from the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry, we evaluated the early impact of this update on temporal trends in ARNI prescription. METHODS: We analyzed patients with HFrEF who were eligible for ARNI prescription (EF ≤40%, no contraindications) and hospitalized from February 20, 2016, through August 19, 2016-allowing for 13weeks before and after guideline publication. We quantified trends in ARNI use associated with guidelines publication with an interrupted time-series design using logistic regression and accounting for correlations within hospitals using general estimating equation methods. RESULTS: Of 7,200 eligible patient hospitalizations, 51.9% were discharged in the period directly preceding publication of the guidelines, and 48.1% were discharged after. Odds ratios of ARNI prescription at discharge were significantly higher in the postguideline period compared with the preguideline period in adjusted models (adjusted odds ratio 1.29, 95% CI 1.06-1.57, P=.01). However, there was no significant interaction between observed and expected ARNI use after guideline publication (Pinteraction=.14). Results were consistent using a 6-month before and after time frame. CONCLUSIONS: The model suggested a small increase in ARNI use in HF patients being discharged from the hospital immediately after guideline release. However, the publication of national guidelines recommending ARNI use seemed to have little influence on the adoption of this evidence-based medication in the first 3 to 6months.

Intentional and unintentional medication non-adherence in African Americans: Insights from the Jackson Heart Study.

BACKGROUND: Non-adherence to medications is common and leads to suboptimal outcomes. Non-adherence can be intentional (e.g., deciding to skip dosages) or unintentional (e.g., forgetting), yet few studies have distinguished these reasons. An improved understanding of the reasons for non-adherence could inform the development of effective interventions. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed data from African Americans in the Jackson Heart Study who were prescribed medications for one or more chronic conditions. Participants were grouped by patient-reported adherence with non-adherence categorized as being intentional, unintentional or both. We used modified Poisson regression models to examine the factors associated with types of non-adherence. Of 2933 participants taking medication, 2138 (72.9%) reported non-adherence with 754 (35.3%) reporting only unintentional non-adherence, 263 (12.3%) only intentional non-adherence, and 1121 (52.4%) both. Factors independently associated with intentional non-adherence included female sex and depressive symptoms while factors associated with unintentional non-adherence included younger age and separated relationship status. Unintentional and intentional non-adherence was more common among participants taking anti-arrhythmic and anti-asthmatic medications, respectively. Higher levels of global perceived stress was associated with both types of non-adherence. The adjusted models for intentional and unintentional non-adherence had c-statistics of 0.65 and 0.66, respectively, indicating modest discrimination. CONCLUSION: Specific patient factors and individual medication classes were associated with distinct patterns of intentional and unintentional non-adherence, yet the overall modest discrimination of the models suggests contributions from other unmeasured factors. These findings provide a construct for understanding reasons for non-adherence and provide rationale to assess whether personalized interventions can improve adherence.