Heart failure, the global pandemic: A call to action consensus statement from the global presidential conclave at the platinum jubilee conference of cardiological society of India 2023.

Heart failure (HF) is emerging as a major public health problem both in high- and low - income countries. The mortality and morbidity due to HF is substantially higher in low-middle income countries (LMICs). Accessibility, availability and affordability issues affect the guideline directed therapy implementation in HF care in those countries. This call to action urges all those concerned to initiate preventive strategies as early as possible, so that we can reduce HF-related morbidity and mortality. The most important step is to have better prevention and treatment strategies for diseases such as hypertension, ischemic heart disease (IHD), type-2 diabetes, and rheumatic heart disease (RHD) which predispose to the development of HF. Setting up dedicated HF-clinics manned by HF Nurses, can help in streamlining HF care. Subsidized in-patient care, financial assistance for device therapy, use of generic medicines (including polypill strategy) will be helpful, along with the use of digital technologies.

The direct costs of coronary CT angiography relative to contrast-enhanced thoracic CT: Time-driven activity-based costing.

BACKGROUND: Coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and contrast-enhanced thoracic CT (CECT) are distinctly different diagnostic procedures that involve intravenous contrast-enhanced CT of the chest. The technical component of these procedures is reimbursed at the same rate by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). This study tests the hypothesis that the direct costs of performing these exams are significantly different. METHODS: Direct costs for both procedures were measured using a time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) model. The exams were segmented into four phases: preparation, scanning, post-scan monitoring, and image processing. Room occupancy and direct labor times were collected for scans of 54 patients (28 CCTA and 26 CECT studies), in seven medical facilities within the USA and used to impute labor and equipment cost. Contrast material costs were measured directly. Cost differences between the exams were analyzed for significance and variability. RESULTS: Mean CCTA duration was 3.2 times longer than CECT (121 and 37 â€‹min, respectively. p â€‹< â€‹0.01). Mean CCTA direct costs were 3.4 times those of CECT ($189.52 and $55.28, respectively, p â€‹< â€‹0.01). Both labor and capital equipment costs for CCTA were significantly more expensive (6.5 and 1.8-fold greater, respectively, p â€‹< â€‹0.001). Segmented by procedural phase, CCTA was both longer and more expensive for each (p â€‹< â€‹0.01). Mean direct costs for CCTA exceeded the standard CMS technical reimbursement of $182.25 without accounting for indirect or overhead costs. CONCLUSION: The direct cost of performing CCTA is significantly higher than CECT, and thus reimbursement schedules that treat these procedures similarly undervalue the resources required to perform CCTA and possibly decrease access to the procedure.

Implementing a Cardio-oncology Center of Excellence: Nuts and Bolts, Including Coding and Billing.

Cardio-oncology is rapidly expanding as part of cancer therapy in both the acute phase and later stages after treatment. The shifting paradigm of cancer becoming a chronic disease requires long-term follow-up for ongoing cardiac toxicity. As more cancer patients enter the survivorship phase, there needs to be identification of those at risk and strategies for how best to monitor long-term cancer therapy-related cardiac disease. This article serves as a template decide if a cardio-oncology program should be started and expanded as a center of excellence for the discipline as well as to help in implementing and financially sustaining a program.

2015 ACC Health Policy Statement on Cardiovascular Team-Based Care and the Role of Advanced Practice Providers.

The mission of the American College of Cardiology is "to transform cardiovascular care and improve heart health." Cardiovascular team-based care is a paradigm for practice that can transform care, improve heart health, and help meet the demands of the future. One strategic goal of the College is to help members successfully transition their clinical practices to the future, with all its complexity, challenges, and opportunities. The ACC's strategic plan is aligned with the triple aim of improved care, improved population health, and lower costs per capita. The traditional understanding of quality, access, and cost is that you cannot improve one component without diminishing the others. With cardiovascular team-based care, it is possible to achieve the triple aim of improving quality, access, and cost simultaneously to also improve cardiovascular health. Striving to serve the best interests of patients is the true north of our guiding principles. Cardiovascular team-based care is a model that can improve care coordination and communication and allow each team member to focus more on the quality of care. In addition, the cardiovascular team-based care model increases access to cardiovascular care and allows expansion of services to populations and geographic areas that are currently underserved. This document will increase awareness of the important components of cardiovascular team-based care and create an opportunity for more discussion about the most creative and effective means of implementing it. We hope that this document will stimulate further discussions and activities within the ACC and beyond about team-based care. We have identified areas that need improvement, specifically in APP education and state regulation. The document encourages the exploration of collaborative care models that should enable team members to optimize their education, training, experience, and talent. Improved team leadership, coordination, collaboration, engagement, and efficiency will enable the delivery of higher-value care to the betterment of our patients and society.

Use of multidetector computed tomography after mildly abnormal myocardial perfusion stress testing in a large single-specialty cardiology practice.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited on using 64-slice multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) as a gatekeeper to cardiac catheterization in patients with mild abnormalities on myocardial perfusion stress imaging (MPI). OBJECTIVE: We compared the rate of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) within 6 months after finding mildly abnormal MPI results before and after implementing 64-slice MDCT. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients referred for follow-up based on a mildly abnormal MPI. Pre- and post-MDCT cohorts were matched according to age, sex, prior history of coronary artery disease (CAD), and presence of clinical symptoms (chest pain or exertional dyspnea or both). Case matching resulted in 154 patients in each cohort. The primary endpoint was the rate of ICA. RESULTS: From the clinical evaluation or MDCT results, 87 patients were referred for ICA, 60 (39%) in the pre-MDCT cohort and 27 (18%) in the post-MDCT cohort. Among those referred for ICA, 22 (14%) in the pre-MDCT cohort and 17 (11%) in the post-MDCT cohort underwent revascularization. Given the similar rate of revascularizations in both cohorts, we estimate that patients in the post-MDCT cohort were 86% less likely to receive ICA compared with patients in the pre-MDCT cohort (odds ratio = 0.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.33). During 6 months of follow-up, no clinical events were observed in either cohort for patients not referred to ICA. CONCLUSION: For patients with mildly abnormal MPI followed by clinical evaluation, MDCT examination was associated with a significant reduction in rate of referral to ICA.