Trends in red blood cell transfusion and 30-day mortality among hospitalized patients.

BACKGROUND: Blood conservation strategies have been shown to be effective in decreasing red blood cell (RBC) utilization in specific patient groups. However, few data exist describing the extent of RBC transfusion reduction or their impact on transfusion practice and mortality in a diverse inpatient population. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using comprehensive electronic medical record data from 21 medical facilities in Kaiser Permanente Northern California. We examined unadjusted and risk-adjusted RBC transfusion and 30-day mortality coincident with implementation of RBC conservation strategies. RESULTS: The inpatient study cohort included 391,958 patients who experienced 685,753 hospitalizations. From 2009 to 2013, the incidence of RBC transfusion decreased from 14.0% to 10.8% of hospitalizations; this change coincided with a decline in pretransfusion hemoglobin (Hb) levels from 8.1 to 7.6 g/dL. Decreased RBC utilization affected broad groups of admission diagnoses and was most pronounced in patients with a nadir Hb level between 8 and 9 g/dL (n = 73,057; 50.8% to 19.3%). During the study period, the standard deviation of risk-adjusted RBC transfusion incidence across hospitals decreased by 44% (p < 0.001). Thirty-day mortality did not change significantly with declines in RBC utilization in patient groups previously studied in clinical trials nor in other subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: After the implementation of blood conservation strategies, RBC transfusion incidence and pretransfusion Hb levels decreased broadly across medical and surgical patients. Variation in RBC transfusion incidence across hospitals decreased from 2010 to 2013. Consistent with clinical trial data, more restrictive transfusion practice did not appear to impact 30-day mortality.

Predicting red blood cell transfusion in hospitalized patients: role of hemoglobin level, comorbidities, and illness severity.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trial evidence supports a restrictive strategy of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, but significant variation in clinical transfusion practice persists. Patient characteristics other than hemoglobin levels may influence the decision to transfuse RBCs and explain some of this variation. Our objective was to evaluate the role of patient comorbidities and severity of illness in predicting inpatient red blood cell transfusion events. METHODS: We developed a predictive model of inpatient RBC transfusion using comprehensive electronic medical record (EMR) data from 21 hospitals over a four year period (2008-2011). Using a retrospective cohort study design, we modeled predictors of transfusion events within 24 hours of hospital admission and throughout the entire hospitalization. Model predictors included administrative data (age, sex, comorbid conditions, admission type, and admission diagnosis), admission hemoglobin, severity of illness, prior inpatient RBC transfusion, admission ward, and hospital. RESULTS: The study cohort included 275,874 patients who experienced 444,969 hospitalizations. The 24 hour and overall inpatient RBC transfusion rates were 7.2% and 13.9%, respectively. A predictive model for transfusion within 24 hours of hospital admission had a C-statistic of 0.928 and pseudo-R2 of 0.542; corresponding values for the model examining transfusion through the entire hospitalization were 0.872 and 0.437. Inclusion of the admission hemoglobin resulted in the greatest improvement in model performance relative to patient comorbidities and severity of illness. CONCLUSIONS: Data from electronic medical records at the time of admission predicts with very high likelihood the incidence of red blood transfusion events in the first 24 hours and throughout hospitalization. Patient comorbidities and severity of illness on admission play a small role in predicting the likelihood of RBC transfusion relative to the admission hemoglobin.

Comparative effectiveness of 2 ß-blockers in hypertensive patients.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the efficacy of selected ß-blockers for preventing cardiovascular (CV) events in patients following myocardial infarction (MI) or with heart failure (HF). However, the effectiveness of ß-blockers for preventing CV events in patients with hypertension has been questioned recently, but it is unclear whether this is a class effect. METHODS: Using electronic medical record and health plan data from the Cardiovascular Research Network Hypertension Registry, we compared incident MI, HF, and stroke in patients who were new ß-blocker users between 2000 and 2009. Patients had no history of CV disease and had not previously filled a prescription for a ß-blocker. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine the associations of atenolol and metoprolol tartrate with incident CV events using both standard covariate adjustment (n = 120,978) and propensity score-matching methods (n = 22,352). RESULTS: During follow-up (median, 5.2 years), there were 3517 incident MI, 3272 incident HF, and 3664 incident stroke events. Hazard ratios for MI, HF, and stroke in metoprolol tartrate users were 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97-1.02), 0.99 (95% CI, 0.96-1.01), and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97-1.02), respectively. An alternative approach using propensity score matching yielded similar results in 11,176 new metoprolol tartrate users, who were similar to 11,176 new atenolol users with regard to demographic and clinical characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: There were no statistically significant differences in incident CV events between atenolol and metoprolol tartrate users with hypertension. Large registries similar to the one used in this analysis may be useful for addressing comparative effectiveness questions that are unlikely to be resolved by randomized trials.

Trends in time to confirmation and recognition of new-onset hypertension, 2002-2006.

Achieving full benefits of blood pressure control in populations requires prompt recognition of previously undetected hypertension. In 2003, the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure provided definitions of hypertension and recommended that single elevated readings be confirmed within 1 to 2 months. We sought to determine whether the time required to confirm and recognize (ie, diagnose and/or treat) new-onset hypertension decreased from 2002 to 2006 for adult members of 2 large integrated healthcare delivery systems, Kaiser Permanente Northern California and Colorado. Using electronically stored office blood pressure readings, physician diagnoses, and pharmacy prescriptions, we identified 200 587 patients with new-onset hypertension (2002-2006) marked by 2 consecutive elevated blood pressure readings in previously undiagnosed, untreated members. Mean confirmation intervals (time from the first to second consecutive elevated reading) declined steadily from 103 to 89 days during this period. For persons recognized within 12 months after confirmation, the mean interval to recognition declined from 78 to 61 days. However, only 33% of individuals were recognized within 12 months. One third were never recognized during observed follow-up. For these patients, most subsequent blood pressure recordings were not elevated. Higher initial blood pressure levels, history of previous cardiovascular disease, and older age were associated with shorter times to recognition. Times to confirmation and recognition of new-onset hypertension have become shorter in recent years, especially for patients with higher cardiovascular disease risk. Variability in office-based blood pressure readings suggests that further improvements in recognition and treatment may be achieved with more specific automated approaches to identifying hypertension.

Barriers to insulin initiation: the translating research into action for diabetes insulin starts project.

OBJECTIVE: Reasons for failing to initiate prescribed insulin (primary nonadherence) are poorly understood. We investigated barriers to insulin initiation following a new prescription. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We surveyed insulin-naïve patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes, already treated with two or more oral agents who were recently prescribed insulin. We compared responses for respondents prescribed, but never initiating, insulin (n = 69) with those dispensed insulin (n = 100). RESULTS: Subjects failing to initiate prescribed insulin commonly reported misconceptions regarding insulin risk (35% believed that insulin causes blindness, renal failure, amputations, heart attacks, strokes, or early death), plans to instead work harder on behavioral goals, sense of personal failure, low self-efficacy, injection phobia, hypoglycemia concerns, negative impact on social life and job, inadequate health literacy, health care provider inadequately explaining risks/benefits, and limited insulin self-management training. CONCLUSIONS: Primary adherence for insulin may be improved through better provider communication regarding risks, shared decision making, and insulin self-management training.

Medicare Part D coverage gap and diabetes beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE: To examine drug costs and entry and exit rates into the Part D coverage gap for beneficiaries with diabetes in Medicare Advantage managed care plans. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study. METHODS: Study patients were Medicare Advantage Part D beneficiaries with diabetes from 2 large California health plans who were continuously enrolled in 2006 and had a drug coverage gap starting at $2250. Entry and exit into the gap, total drug costs, and out-of-pocket drug costs were determined using pharmacy databases. RESULTS: In 2006, 26% of the 42,801 beneficiaries with diabetes reached the coverage gap; 2% of beneficiaries exited the gap and qualified for catastrophic coverage. Beneficiaries incurred a mean of $2182 in total drug costs during 2006. Drug expenditures remained stable over the year for beneficiaries who did not enter the gap. For beneficiaries who entered the gap, total drug costs were higher overall and decreased at year's end as out-of-pocket expenses increased. CONCLUSIONS: Fewer diabetes patients in this study entered the coverage gap than had been previously estimated, but the entry rate was much higher than that of the general Medicare Advantage Part D population. Patients entering the gap had lower subsequent monthly drug expenditures; this may be due to lower-than-expected drug prices and greater use of generics in managed care, or it may potentially signal poorer drug adherence. Future work should examine these hypotheses and explore risk factors for entering the Part D coverage gap.

Understanding the gap between good processes of diabetes care and poor intermediate outcomes: Translating Research into Action for Diabetes (TRIAD).

BACKGROUND: Performance of diabetes clinical care processes has improved recently, but control of hemoglobin A1c (A1c) and other vascular disease risk factors has improved more slowly. OBJECTIVES: To identify patient factors associated with control of vascular disease risk factors among diabetes patients receiving recommended care processes. POPULATION: Managed care enrollees who participated in the TRIAD (Translating Research into Action for Diabetes) Study and received at least 5 of 7 recommended care processes during the 12 months before the second survey (2002-2003). METHODS: Comparison of 1003 patients with good control of A1c (<8%), systolic blood pressure (<140 mm Hg) and LDL-cholesterol (<130 mg/dL) versus 812 patients with poor control for at least 2 of these factors. RESULTS: Poorly controlled patients were younger, more frequently female, African American, with lower education and income (P < 0.001 for each). General health status was lower, body mass index higher, and insulin treatment more frequent; history of prior coronary heart disease was less frequent. They were more likely to indicate depression and hopelessness and to identify costs as a barrier to self-care; less likely to report trust in their regular physician; and more likely to smoke cigarettes and be physically inactive. Adjusting for demographic and clinical variables, concerns about costs, low trust in one's physician, current smoking, and physical inactivity remained associated with poor control. However, inclusion of these 4 variables in a single model did not diminish associations of race/ethnicity or education with control. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical, socioeconomic, psychosocial, and behavioral factors were independently associated with poor control. However, these factors did not fully explain observed racial and socioeconomic disparities in control.