The COVID-19 Pandemic and Associated Inequities in Acute Myocardial Infarction Treatment and Outcomes.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted usual care for emergent conditions, such as acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Understanding whether Black and Hispanic individuals experiencing AMI had greater increases in poor outcomes compared with White individuals during the pandemic has important equity implications. Objective: To investigate whether the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased disparities in treatment and outcomes among Medicare patients hospitalized with AMI. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used Medicare data for patients hospitalized with AMI between January 2016 and November 2020. Patients were categorized as Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, and non-Hispanic White. The association between race and ethnicity and outcomes as a function of the proportion of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was evaluated using interrupted time series. Data were analyzed from October 2022 to June 2023. Exposure: The main exposure was a hospital's proportion of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 on a weekly basis as a proxy for care disruption during the pandemic. Main Outcomes and Measures: Revascularization, 30-day mortality, 30-day readmission, and nonhome discharges. Results: A total of 1 319 273 admissions for AMI (579 817 females [44.0%]; 122 972 Black [9.3%], 117 668 Hispanic [8.9%], and 1 078 633 White [81.8%]; mean [SD] age, 77 [8.4] years) were included. For patients with non-ST segment elevation MI (NSTEMI) overall, the adjusted odds of mortality and nonhome discharges increased by 51% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.51; 95% CI, 1.29-1.76; P < .001) and 32% (aOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.15-1.52; P < .001), respectively, and the odds of revascularization decreased by 27% (aOR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.64-0.83; P < .001) among patients hospitalized during weeks with a high hospital COVID-19 burden (>30%) vs patients hospitalized prior to the pandemic. Black individuals with NSTEMI experienced a clinically insignificant 7% greater increase in the odds of mortality (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.00-1.15; P = .04) for each 10% increase in the COVID-19 hospital burden but no increases in readmissions or nonhome discharges or reductions in revascularization rates compared with White individuals. There were no differential increases in adverse outcomes among Hispanic compared with White patients with NSTEMI based on hospital COVID-19 burden. Increases in hospital COVID-19 burden were not associated with changes in outcomes or the use of revascularization in STEMI overall or by racial or ethnic group. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that while hospital COVID-19 burden was associated with worse treatment and outcomes for NSTEMI, race and ethnicity-associated inequities did not increase significantly during the pandemic. These findings suggest the need for additional efforts to mitigate outcomes associated with the COVID-19 pandemic for patients admitted with AMI when the hospital COVID-19 burden is substantially increased.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Access to Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery.

Importance: Whether people from racial and ethnic minority groups experience disparities in access to minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) is not known. Objective: To investigate racial and ethnic disparities in the utilization of MIMVS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database for patients who underwent mitral valve surgery between 2014 and 2019. Statistical analysis was performed from January 24 to August 11, 2022. Exposures: Patients were categorized as non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic individuals. Main Outcomes and Measures: The association between MIMVS (vs full sternotomy) and race and ethnicity were evaluated using logistic regression. Results: Among the 103 753 patients undergoing mitral valve surgery (mean [SD] age, 62 [13] years; 47 886 female individuals [46.2%]), 10 404 (10.0%) were non-Hispanic Black individuals, 89 013 (85.8%) were non-Hispanic White individuals, and 4336 (4.2%) were Hispanic individuals. Non-Hispanic Black individuals were more likely to have Medicaid insurance (odds ratio [OR], 2.21; 95% CI, 1.64-2.98; P < .001) and to receive care from a low-volume surgeon (OR, 4.45; 95% CI, 4.01-4.93; P < .001) compared with non-Hispanic White individuals. Non-Hispanic Black individuals were less likely to undergo MIMVS (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.58-0.73; P < .001), whereas Hispanic individuals were not less likely to undergo MIMVS compared with non-Hispanic White individuals (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.67-1.75; P = .74). Patients with commercial insurance had 2.35-fold higher odds of undergoing MIMVS (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 2.06-2.68; P < .001) than those with Medicaid insurance. Patients operated by very-high volume surgeons (300 or more cases) had 20.7-fold higher odds (OR, 20.70; 95% CI, 12.7-33.9; P < .001) of undergoing MIMVS compared with patients treated by low-volume surgeons (less than 20 cases). After adjusting for patient risk, non-Hispanic Black individuals were still less likely to undergo MIMVS (adjusted OR [aOR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78-0.99; P = .04) and were more likely to die or experience a major complication (aOR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.16-1.35; P < .001) compared with non-Hispanic White individuals. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely to undergo MIMVS and more likely to die or experience a major complication than non-Hispanic White patients. These findings suggest that efforts to reduce inequity in cardiovascular medicine may need to include increasing access to private insurance and high-volume surgeons.

Development of the Nine-Ball Skills Test to discriminate elite and high-level amateur golfers.

Currently, there is a lack of appropriate skill assessments available for use in golf. The aim of this study was to examine the discriminative validity and the test-retest reliability of the newly developed "Nine-Ball Skills Test". Participants of two ability levels (elite, n = 14; high-level amateur, n = 16) each hit nine golf shots of differing combinations of trajectory (straight, fade, draw) and height (normal, high, low) at an individually determined target area. Each shot was scored on its percent error index from the target and whether it achieved the maximum height as required. Participants completed the test twice using a 5-iron club. The elite group scored significantly higher (P < 0.05) than the amateur group for both the first and second rounds of the test as well as the combined scores. The between-round test-retest reliability was deemed to be not acceptable, thus we propose that the test's protocol should include use of the two rounds as standard. Due to the importance of ball striking and flight control to performance in golf, the Nine-Ball Skills Test is appropriate for providing a measure of this skill component in elite and high-level amateur golfers.