Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
: 20 | 50 | 100
1 - 7 de 7
1.
Am J Cardiol ; 201: 142-147, 2023 08 15.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37385166

Value-based care is the foundation of population health. The Health care Economic Efficiency Ratio (HEERO) scoring system is a promising new tool to measure the cost benefits of care in our Accountable Care Organization. HEERO score compares actual costs spent (utilizing insurance claims) and expected costs spent (estimated using the Centers for Medicare/Medicaid Services Risk score). Scores <1 suggest economic benefit. Sacubitril/valsartan has been shown to decrease readmissions for patients with heart failure (HF) and decrease health care costs. We explored the utility of sacubitril/valsartan in reducing HEERO scores and decreasing overall health care expenditure in patients with HF. Patients with HF in the population health cohort were enrolled. HEERO score was calculated for patients taking sacubitril/valsartan and other HF medications at 3-month intervals up to a year. We compared the average and total health care expenditure and inpatient days for patients on sacubitril/valsartan, spironolactone, ß blocker (BB) along with spironolactone, BB and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker. For patients on sacubitril/valsartan, HEERO scores and inpatient days decreased (decreased health care expenditure) as the number of days of utilization increased (p <0.0001). In total, 270+ days of sacubitril/valsartan decreased health care costs by 22%. This cost reduction was mainly attributed to decreased inpatient days. Additionally, the combination of sacubitril/valsartan, spironolactone, and BB showed decreased HEERO score and inpatient days compared with spironolactone, BB and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker in male patients. Sacubitril/valsartan use beyond 270 days resulted in decreased health care expenditure in a population health cohort compared with other HF medications. This economic benefit is achieved through the reduction in hospitalizations. Sacubitril/valsartan is an integral part of value-based care providing high-value, cost-effective care, and bolstering the economic wellbeing of patient care. Payor sources should consider this in subsidizing the cost of the medicine.


Heart Failure , Spironolactone , Aged , United States , Humans , Male , Spironolactone/therapeutic use , Tetrazoles/therapeutic use , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Stroke Volume , Medicare , Valsartan/therapeutic use , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Aminobutyrates/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Drug Combinations , Health Care Costs
2.
J Investig Med ; 70(2): 449-452, 2022 02.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34848563

Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 must have a safe discharge plan to prevent readmissions. We assessed patients with COVID-19 admitted to hospitals belonging to a single health system between April 2020 and June 2020. Demographics, vitals and laboratory data were obtained by electronic data query and discharge processes were reviewed by manual abstraction. Over the study period, 94 out of 912 (10.3%) patients were readmitted within 14 days of discharge. Readmitted patients were older and spent more time in the intensive care unit (p<0.01). Statistical differences were noted in discharge-day heart rates, temperatures, platelet counts, and neutrophil and lymphocyte percentages between the readmitted and non-readmitted groups. Readmitted patients were less likely to be discharged home and to receive complete discharge instructions or home oxygen (p<0.01). Age, duration of intensive care unit stay, disposition destinations other than home, incomplete discharge planning and no arrangement for home oxygen may be associated with 14-day readmissions in patients with COVID-19. Certain clinical parameters on discharge day, while statistically different, may not reach clinically discriminant thresholds. Structured discharge processes may improve outcomes.


COVID-19 , Patient Readmission , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Oxygen/therapeutic use , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies
3.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(1): e2034266, 2021 01 04.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33464319

Importance: Although strain on hospital capacity has been associated with increased mortality in nonpandemic settings, studies are needed to examine the association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) critical care capacity and mortality. Objective: To examine whether COVID-19 mortality was associated with COVID-19 intensive care unit (ICU) strain. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted among veterans with COVID-19, as confirmed by polymerase chain reaction or antigen testing in the laboratory from March through August 2020, cared for at any Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital with 10 or more patients with COVID-19 in the ICU. The follow-up period was through November 2020. Data were analyzed from March to November 2020. Exposures: Receiving treatment for COVID-19 in the ICU during a period of increased COVID-19 ICU load, with load defined as mean number of patients with COVID-19 in the ICU during the patient's hospital stay divided by the number of ICU beds at that facility, or increased COVID-19 ICU demand, with demand defined as mean number of patients with COVID-19 in the ICU during the patient's stay divided by the maximum number of patients with COVID-19 in the ICU. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause mortality was recorded through 30 days after discharge from the hospital. Results: Among 8516 patients with COVID-19 admitted to 88 VA hospitals, 8014 (94.1%) were men and mean (SD) age was 67.9 (14.2) years. Mortality varied over time, with 218 of 954 patients (22.9%) dying in March, 399 of 1594 patients (25.0%) dying in April, 143 of 920 patients (15.5%) dying in May, 179 of 1314 patients (13.6%) dying in June, 297 of 2373 patients (12.5%) dying in July, and 174 of 1361 (12.8%) patients dying in August (P < .001). Patients with COVID-19 who were treated in the ICU during periods of increased COVID-19 ICU demand had increased risk of mortality compared with patients treated during periods of low COVID-19 ICU demand (ie, demand of ≤25%); the adjusted hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.81-1.22; P = .93) for patients treated when COVID-19 ICU demand was more than 25% to 50%, 1.19 (95% CI, 0.95-1.48; P = .13) when COVID-19 ICU demand was more than 50% to 75%, and 1.94 (95% CI, 1.46-2.59; P < .001) when COVID-19 ICU demand was more than 75% to 100%. No association between COVID-19 ICU demand and mortality was observed for patients with COVID-19 not in the ICU. The association between COVID-19 ICU load and mortality was not consistent over time (ie, early vs late in the pandemic). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that although facilities augmented ICU capacity during the pandemic, strains on critical care capacity were associated with increased COVID-19 ICU mortality. Tracking COVID-19 ICU demand may be useful to hospital administrators and health officials as they coordinate COVID-19 admissions across hospitals to optimize outcomes for patients with this illness.


COVID-19/mortality , Critical Illness/mortality , Hospitals, Veterans/organization & administration , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Veterans/statistics & numerical data , Cohort Studies , Humans , United States , United States Department of Veterans Affairs
5.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 38(6): 721-723, 2017 06.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28473007

The antimicrobial use (AU) option within the National Healthcare Safety Network summarizes antimicrobial prescribing data as a standardized antimicrobial administration ratio (SAAR). A hospital's antimicrobial stewardship program found that greater involvement of an infectious disease physician in prospective audit and feedback procedures was associated with reductions in SAAR values across multiple antimicrobial categories. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:721-723.


Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antimicrobial Stewardship/methods , Infectious Disease Medicine , Medical Audit/organization & administration , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Feedback , Humans , Tertiary Care Centers
6.
AIDS Res Treat ; 2012: 978790, 2012.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23193466

Background. Liver fibrosis is accelerated in HIV and hepatitis C coinfection, mediated by profibrotic effects of angiotensin. The objective of this study was to determine if angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is) attenuate liver fibrosis in coinfection. Methods. A retrospective review of 156 coinfected subjects was conducted to analyze the association between exposure to ACE-Is and liver fibrosis. Noninvasive indices of liver fibrosis (APRI, FIB-4, Forns indices) were compared between subjects who had taken ACE-Is and controls who had not taken them. Linear regression was used to evaluate ACE-I use as an independent predictor of fibrosis. Results. Subjects taking ACE-Is for three years were no different than controls on the APRI and the FIB-4 but had significantly higher scores than controls on the Forns index, indicating more advanced fibrosis. The use of ACE-Is for three years remained independently associated with an elevated Forns score when adjusted for age, race, and HIV viral load (P < 0.001). There were significant associations between all of the indices and significant fibrosis, as determined clinically and radiologically. Conclusions. There was not a protective association between angiotensin inhibition and liver fibrosis in coinfection. These noninvasive indices may be useful for ruling out significant fibrosis in coinfection.

7.
J Clin Outcomes Manag ; 17(6): 273-286, 2010 Jun 01.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23761953

OBJECTIVE: To review diagnosis and treatment in patients with HIV and hepatitis B virus (HBV) coinfection. METHODS: Review of the literature in the context of a clinical case. RESULTS: All patients with HIV should be screened for the presence of coinfection with HBV. Following diagnosis with HBV infection, the level of HBV activity should be assessed with testing for HBeAg, HBV DNA, and potentially a biopsy for staging the degree of fibrosis present. Based on the results of this workup, a decision regarding the role of anti-hepatitis treatment should be made. According to the latest chronic hepatitis B and HIV treatment guidelines, coinfected patients who require treatment for chronic hepatitis B should be started on a regimen that is fully active against both HIV and HBV. A first-line regimen for coinfected patients is generally composed of tenofovir and emtricitabine, plus one other agent active against HIV. In coinfected patients, durable responses are rare, and therefore patients are usually required to remain on therapy indefinitely. CONCLUSION: Intensification of surveillance techniques and education programs should be developed to help prevent transmission of infection and integrate coinfected patients into the health care system. Once engaged in care, coinfected patients should receive treatment for both HIV and chronic hepatitis B with the goal of a decrease in liver failure, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and chronic hepatitis B-related mortality.

...