Evaluation of STEMI Regionalization on Access, Treatment, and Outcomes Among Adults Living in Nonminority and Minority Communities

Provision of Stroke Care Services by Community Disadvantage Status in the US, 2009-2022

Importance

Stroke center certification is granted to facilities that demonstrate distinct capabilities for treating patients with stroke. A thorough understanding of structural discrimination in the provision of stroke centers is critical for identifying and implementing effective interventions to improve health inequities for socioeconomically disadvantaged populations.

Objective

To determine whether (1) hospitals in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities (defined using the Area Deprivation Index) are less likely to adopt any stroke certification and (2) adoption rates differ between entry-level (acute stroke-ready hospitals) and higher-level certifications (primary, thrombectomy capable, and comprehensive) by community disadvantage status.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study used newly collected stroke center data merged with data from the American Hospital Association, Healthcare Cost Report Information datasets, and the US Census. All general acute hospitals in the continental US between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2022, were included. Data analysis was conducted from July 2023 to May 2024.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the likelihood of hospitals adopting stroke care certification. Cox proportional hazard and competing risk models were used to estimate the likelihood of a hospital becoming stroke certified based on the socioeconomic disadvantage status of the community.

Results

Among the 5055 hospitals studied from 2009 to 2022, 2415 (47.8%) never achieved stroke certification, 602 (11.9%) were certified as acute stroke-ready hospitals, and 2038 (40.3%) were certified as primary stroke centers or higher. When compared with mixed-advantage communities, adoption of any stroke certification was most likely to occur near the most advantaged communities (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% CI, 1.07-1.44) and least likely near the most disadvantaged communities (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.34-0.55). Adoption of acute stroke-ready certification was most likely in mixed-advantage communities, while adoption of higher-level certification was more likely in the most advantaged communities (HR,1.41; 95% CI, 1.22-1.62) and less likely for the most disadvantaged communities (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.21-0.45). After adjusting for population size and hospital capacity, compared with mixed-advantage communities, stroke certification adoption hazard was still 20% lower for relatively disadvantaged communities (adjusted HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73-0.87) and 42% lower for the most disadvantaged communities (adjusted HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.45-0.74).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study examining hospital adoption of stroke services, when compared with mixed-advantage communities, hospitals located in the most disadvantaged communities had a 42% lower hazard of adopting any stroke certification and relatively disadvantaged communities had a 20% lower hazard of adopting any stroke certification. These findings suggest that there is a need to support hospitals in disadvantaged communities to obtain stroke certification as a way to reduce stroke disparities.

Disparities in access to and timing of interventional therapies for pulmonary embolism across the United States

BACKGROUND

Interventional therapies (ITs) are an emerging treatment modality for pulmonary embolism (PE); however, the degree of racial, sex-based, and sociodemographic disparities in access and timing is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate barriers to access and timing of ITs for PE across the United States.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study utilizing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2016-2020 included adult patients with PE. The use of ITs (mechanical thrombectomy and catheter-directed thrombolysis) was identified via International Classification of Diseases 10th revision codes. Early IT was defined as procedure performed within the first 2 days after admission.

RESULTS

A total of 27 805 273 records from the 2016-2020 Nationwide Inpatient Sample database were examined. There were 387 514 (1.4%) patients with PE, with 14 249 (3.6%) of them having undergone IT procedures (11 115 catheter-directed thrombolysis, 2314 thrombectomy, and 780 both procedures). After multivariate adjustment, factors associated with less use of IT included Black race (odds ratio [OR], 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.94; P < .01), Hispanic race (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.68-0.79; P < .01), female sex (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.85-0.91; P < .01), treatment in a rural hospital (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.44-0.54; P < .01), and lack of private insurance (Medicare OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.73-0.80; P < .01; Medicaid OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.61-0.69; P < .01; no coverage OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82-0.93; P < .01). Among the patients who received IT, 11 315 (79%) procedures were conducted within 2 days of admission and 2934 (21%) were delayed. Factors associated with delayed procedures included Black race (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.01-1.26; P = .04), Hispanic race (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.28-1.80; P < .01), weekend admission (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.25-1.51; P < .01), Medicare coverage (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.10-1.40; P < .01), and Medicaid coverage (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.12-1.49; P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Significant racial, sex-based, and geographic barriers exist in overall access to IT for PE in the United States.

Racial and ethnic disparities in emergency department transfers to public hospitals

OBJECTIVE

To examine racial/ethnic differences in emergency department (ED) transfers to public hospitals and factors explaining these differences.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

ED and inpatient data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project for Florida (2010-2019); American Hospital Association Annual Survey (2009-2018).

STUDY DESIGN

Logistic regression examined race/ethnicity and payer on the likelihood of transfer to a public hospital among transferred ED patients. The base model was controlled for patient and hospital characteristics and year fixed effects. Models II and III added urbanicity and hospital referral region (HRR), respectively. Model IV used hospital fixed effects, which compares patients within the same hospital. Models V and VI stratified Model IV by payer and condition, respectively. Conditions were classified as emergency care sensitive conditions (ECSCs), where transfer is protocolized, and non-ECSCs. We reported marginal effects at the means.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We examined 1,265,588 adult ED patients transferred from 187 hospitals.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Black patients were more likely to be transferred to public hospitals compared with White patients in all models except ECSC patients within the same initial hospital (except trauma). Black patients were 0.5-1.3 percentage points (pp) more likely to be transferred to public hospitals than White patients in the same hospital with the same payer. In the base model, Hispanic patients were more likely to be transferred to public hospitals compared with White patients, but this difference reversed after controlling for HRR. Hispanic patients were - 0.6 pp to -1.2 pp less likely to be transferred to public hospitals than White patients in the same hospital with the same payer.

CONCLUSIONS

Large population-level differences in whether ED patients of different races/ethnicities were transferred to public hospitals were largely explained by hospital market and the initial hospital, suggesting that they may play a larger role in explaining differences in transfer to public hospitals, compared with other external factors.

Initial treatment of uninsured patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction by facility percutaneous coronary intervention capabilities

BACKGROUND

Timely reperfusion is necessary to reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Initial care by facilities with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) capabilities reduces time to reperfusion. We sought to examine whether insurance status was associated with initial care at emergency departments (EDs) with PCI capabilities among adult patients with STEMI.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study using Department of Healthcare Access and Information, a nonpublic statewide database reporting ED visits and hospitalizations in California. We included adults initially arriving at EDs with STEMI by diagnostic code (International Classification of Diseases Ninth Revision or 10th Revision) from 2011 to 2019. Multivariable logistic regression modeling included initial care by PCI capable facility as the primary outcome and insurance status (none vs. any) as the primary exposure. Covariates included patient, facility, and temporal factors and we conducted multiple robustness checks.

RESULTS

We analyzed 135,358 eligible visits with STEMI included. In our multivariable model, the odds of uninsured patients being initially treated at a PCI-capable facility were significantly lower than those of insured patients (adjusted odds ratio 0.62, 95% CI 0.54-0.72, p < 0.001) and was unchanged in sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Uninsured patients with STEMI had significantly lower odds of first receiving care at facilities with PCI capabilities. Our results suggest potential disparities in accessing high-quality and time-sensitive treatment for uninsured patients with STEMI.

Factors Responsible for Worse Outcomes in STEMI Patients With Early vs Delayed Treatment Presenting in a Tertiary Care Center in a Third World Country

The aim of the study is to compare the outcomes among ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) cases with early treatment vs delayed treatment. It was a prospective comparative study on 186 patients with consecutive (nonprobability) sampling. Two groups of cases were made as per their time to get admitted to the hospital (ie, within 2 hours of symptom onset = Group A; after 2 hours of symptom onset = Group B). Patients were asked for factors causing a delay in treatment after the onset of symptoms and were monitored for STEMI outcomes. The mean age of all patients was 46.62 ± 9.76 years and there were 140 (75.27%) male and 46 (24.73%) female, and male to female ratio 3:1.Factors significant for delayed treatment vs nondelayed treatment were poor social economic status (65.6% vs 20.4%), history of chronic stable angina (33.3% vs 11.8%), delayed response in the emergency room (20.4% vs 8.6%), delayed ECG acquisition (26.9% vs 8.6%), delayed ECG interpretation (25.8% vs 4.3%), pain at night 12:00-6:00 AM (21.5% vs 9.7%) and belief that the chest pain is noncardiac (26.9% vs 3.2%). Acute heart failure was significantly greater in group B (9.7%) in comparison with group A (2.2%), re-infarction was 18.3% in group B in comparison with 7.5% group A. Similarly sustained ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation and in-hospital mortality were higher in group B (12.9%, 14%, and 12.9% respectively). Due to delayed treatment patients had higher hospital stays, and complications, like acute heart failure, re-infarction, ventricular fibrillation, and in-hospital mortality.

Differential Treatment and Outcomes for Patients With Heart Attacks in Advantaged and Disadvantaged Communities

Background Racially and ethnically minoritized groups, people with lower income, and rural communities have worse access to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) than their counterparts, but PCI hospitals have preferentially opened in wealthier areas. Our study analyzed disparities in PCI access, treatment, and outcomes for patients with acute myocardial infarction based on the census-derived Area Deprivation Index. Methods and Results We obtained patient-level data on 629 419 patients with acute myocardial infarction in California between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2020. We linked patient data with population characteristics and geographic coordinates, and categorized communities into 5 groups based on the share of the population in low or high Area Deprivation Index neighborhoods to identify differences in PCI access, treatment, and outcomes based on community status. Risk-adjusted models showed that patients in the most advantaged communities had 20% and 15% greater likelihoods of receiving same-day PCI and PCI during the hospitalization, respectively, compared with patients in the most disadvantaged communities. Patients in the most advantaged communities also had 19% and 16% lower 30-day and 1-year mortality rates, respectively, compared with the most disadvantaged, and a 15% lower 30-day readmission rate. No statistically significant differences in admission to a PCI hospital were observed between communities. Conclusions Patients in disadvantaged communities had lower chances of receiving timely PCI and a greater risk of mortality and readmission compared with those in more advantaged communities. These findings suggest a need for targeted interventions to influence where cardiac services exist and who has access to them.

Race-Based Differences in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Process Metrics and Mortality From 2015 Through 2021: An Analysis of 178 062 Patients From the American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-Coronary Artery Disease Registry

BACKGROUND

Systems of care have been developed across the United States to standardize care processes and improve outcomes in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The effect of contemporary STEMI systems of care on racial and ethnic disparities in achievement of time-to-treatment goals and mortality in STEMI is uncertain.

METHODS

We analyzed 178 062 patients with STEMI (52 293 women and 125 769 men) enrolled in the American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-Coronary Artery Disease registry between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2021. Patients were stratified into and outcomes compared among 3 racial and ethnic groups: non-Hispanic White, Hispanic White, and Black. The primary outcomes were the proportions of patients achieving the following STEMI process metrics: prehospital ECG obtained by emergency medical services; hospital arrival to ECG obtained within 10 minutes for patients not transported by emergency medical services; arrival-to-percutaneous coronary intervention time within 90 minutes; and first medical contact-to-device time within 90 minutes. A secondary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Analyses were performed separately in women and men, and all outcomes were adjusted for age, comorbidities, acuity of presentation, insurance status, and socioeconomic status measured by social vulnerability index based on patients' county of residence.

RESULTS

Compared with non-Hispanic White patients with STEMI, Hispanic White patients and Black patients had lower odds of receiving a prehospital ECG and achieving targets for door-to-ECG, door-to-device, and first medical contact-to-device times. These racial disparities in treatment goals were observed in both women and men, and persisted in most cases after multivariable adjustment. Compared with non-Hispanic White women, Hispanic White women had higher adjusted in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.12-1.72]), whereas Black women did not (odds ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.74-1.03]). Compared with non-Hispanic White men, adjusted in-hospital mortality was similar in Hispanic White men (odds ratio, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.82-1.18]) and Black men (odds ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.85-1.09]).

CONCLUSIONS

Race- or ethnicity-based disparities persist in STEMI process metrics in both women and men, and mortality differences are observed in Hispanic White compared with non-Hispanic White women. Further research is essential to evolve systems of care to mitigate racial differences in STEMI outcomes.

Racial Disparities and Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Patients Above 65 Years in America: A Systematic Review

This systematic review aims to examine the racial disparities and outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in patients above 65 years in America. The review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines 2020 and includes a comprehensive search strategy, study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. The search strategy identified 10 relevant articles that were included in the review. The findings indicate that racial disparities exist in access to PCI, door-to-balloon (DTB) time, procedure utilization, and outcomes among elderly patients. African American and Hispanic patients were found to experience longer door-to-balloon time and lower rates of PCI utilization compared to White patients. Moreover, racial and ethnic minorities had worse clinical outcomes, including higher mortality rates and increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events. The review also highlights the impact of Medicaid expansion on reducing disparities in access, treatment, and outcomes for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, limitations in data availability and representation of racial and ethnic minorities in clinical trials were identified. The discussion section provides a robust analysis of the findings, exploring potential underlying factors contributing to the observed disparities. The review concludes that addressing racial disparities in PCI outcomes among elderly patients is crucial for achieving equitable healthcare delivery and improving cardiovascular health outcomes in America.

Interfacility Transfer of Uninsured vs Insured Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in California

Importance

Insurance status has been associated with whether patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) presenting to emergency departments are transferred to other facilities, but whether the facility's percutaneous coronary intervention capabilities mediate this association is unknown.

Objective

To examine whether uninsured patients with STEMI were more likely than patients with insurance to experience interfacility transfer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This observational cohort study compared patients with STEMI with and without insurance who presented to California emergency departments between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2019, using the Patient Discharge Database and Emergency Department Discharge Database from the California Department of Health Care Access and Information. Statistical analyses were completed in April 2023.

Exposures

Primary exposures were lack of insurance and facility percutaneous coronary intervention capabilities.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was transfer status from the presenting emergency department of a percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospital, defined as a facility performing 36 percutaneous coronary interventions per year. Multivariable logistic regression models with multiple robustness checks were performed to determine the association of insurance status with the odds of transfer.

Results

This study included 135 358 patients with STEMI, of whom 32 841 patients (24.2%) were transferred (mean [SD] age, 64 [14] years; 10 100 women [30.8%]; 2542 Asian individuals [7.7%]; 2053 Black individuals [6.3%]; 8285 Hispanic individuals [25.2%]; 18 650 White individuals [56.8%]). After adjusting for time trends, patient factors, and transferring hospital characteristics (including percutaneous coronary intervention capabilities), patients who were uninsured had lower odds of experiencing interfacility transfer than those with insurance (adjusted odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88-0.98; P = .01).

Conclusions and Relevance

After accounting for a facility's percutaneous coronary intervention capabilities, lack of insurance was associated with lower odds of emergency department transfer for patients with STEMI. These findings warrant further investigation to understand the characteristics of facilities and outcomes for uninsured patients with STEMI.

Do PCI Facility Openings and Closures Affect AMI Outcomes Differently in High- vs Average-Capacity Markets?

BACKGROUND

Disparities in access to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with acute myocardial infarction may result from openings and closures of PCI-providing hospitals, potentially leading to low hospital PCI volume, which is associated with poor outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to determine whether openings and closures of PCI hospitals have differentially impacted patient health outcomes in high- vs average-capacity PCI markets.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, the authors identified PCI hospital availability within a 15-minute driving time of zip code communities. The authors categorized communities by baseline PCI capacity and identified changes in outcomes associated with PCI-providing hospital openings and closures using community fixed-effects regression models.

RESULTS

From 2006 to 2017, 20% and 16% of patients in average- and high-capacity markets, respectively, experienced a PCI hospital opening within a 15-minute drive. In average-capacity markets, openings were associated with a 2.6 percentage point decrease in admission to a high-volume PCI facility; high-capacity markets saw an 11.6 percentage point decrease. After an opening, patients in average-capacity markets experienced a 5.5% and 7.6% relative increase in likelihood of same-day and in-hospital revascularization, respectively, as well as a 2.5% decrease in mortality. PCI hospital closures were associated with a 10.4% relative increase in admission to high-volume PCI hospitals and a 1.4 percentage point decrease in receipt of same-day PCI. There was no change observed in high-capacity PCI markets.

CONCLUSIONS

After openings, patients in average-capacity markets derived significant benefits, whereas those in high-capacity markets did not. This suggests that past a certain threshold, facility opening does not improve access and health outcomes.

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation dissemination and integration with organ preservation in the USA: ethical and logistical considerations

Use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in cardiopulmonary resuscitation, termed eCPR, offers the prospect of improving survival with good neurological function after cardiac arrest. After death, ECMO can also be used for enhanced preservation of abdominal and thoracic organs, designated normothermic regional perfusion (NRP), before organ recovery for transplantation. To optimize resuscitation and transplantation outcomes, healthcare networks in Portugal and Italy have developed cardiac arrest protocols that integrate use of eCPR with NRP. Similar dissemination of eCPR and its integration with NRP in the USA raise novel ethical issues due to a non-nationalized health system and an opt-in framework for organ donation, as well as other legal and cultural factors. Nonetheless, eCPR investigations are ongoing, and both eCPR and NRP are selectively employed in clinical practice. This paper delineates the most pressing relevant ethical considerations and proposes recommendations for implementation of protocols that aim to promote public trust and reduce conflicts of interest. Transparent policies should rely on protocols that separate lifesaving from organ preservation considerations; robust, centralized eCPR data to inform equitable and evidence-based allocations; uniform practices concerning clinical decision-making and resource utilization; and partnership with community stakeholders, allowing patients to make decisions about emergency care that align with their values. Proactively addressing these ethical and logistical challenges could enable eCPR dissemination and integration with NRP protocols in the USA, with the potential to maximize lives saved through both improved resuscitation with good neurological outcomes and increased organ donation opportunities when resuscitation is unsuccessful or not in accordance with individuals' wishes.

A Conceptual Framework for Optimizing the Equity of Hospital-Based Emergency Care: The Structure of Hospital Transfer Networks

Policy Points Current pay-for-performance and other payment policies ignore hospital transfers for emergency conditions, which may exacerbate disparities. No conceptual framework currently exists that offers a patient-centered, population-based perspective for the structure of hospital transfer networks. The hospital transfer network equity-quality framework highlights the external and internal factors that determine the structure of hospital transfer networks, including structural inequity and racism.

CONTEXT

Emergency care includes two key components: initial stabilization and transfer to a higher level of care. Significant work has focused on ensuring that local facilities can stabilize patients. However, less is understood about transfers for definitive care. To better understand how transfer network structure impacts population health and equity in emergency care, we proposea conceptual framework, the hospital transfer network equity-quality model (NET-EQUITY). NET-EQUITY can help optimize population outcomes, decrease disparities, and enhance planning by supporting a framework for understanding emergency department transfers.

METHODS

To develop the NET-EQUITY framework, we synthesized work on health systems and quality of health care (Donabedian, the Institute of Medicine, Ferlie, and Shortell) and the research framework of the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities with legal and empirical research.

FINDINGS

The central thesis of our framework is that the structure of hospital transfer networks influences patient outcomes, as defined by the Institute of Medicine, which includes equity. The structure of hospital transfer networks is shaped by internal and external factors. The four main external factors are the regulatory, economic environment, provider, and sociocultural and physical/built environment. These environments all implicate issues of equity that are important to understand to foster an equitable population-based system of emergency care. The framework highlights external and internal factors that determine the structure of hospital transfer networks, including structural racism and inequity.

CONCLUSIONS

The NET-EQUITY framework provides a patient-centered, equity-focused framework for understanding the health of populations and how the structure of hospital transfer networks can influence the quality of care that patients receive.

Does Hypothetical Centralization of Revision THA and TKA Exacerbate Existing Geographic or Demographic Disparities in Access to Care by Increased Patient Travel Distances or Times? A Large-database Study

BACKGROUND

Higher hospital volume is associated with lower rates of adverse outcomes after revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Centralizing revision TJA care to higher-volume hospitals might reduce early complication and readmission rates after revision TJA; however, the effect of centralizing revision TJA care on patient populations who are more likely to experience challenges with access to care is unknown.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does a hypothetical policy of transferring patients undergoing revision TJA from lower-to higher-volume hospitals increase patient travel distance and time? (2) Does a hypothetical policy of transferring patients undergoing revision TJA from lower- to higher-volume hospitals disproportionately affect travel distance or time in low income, rural, or racial/ethnic minority populations?

METHODS

Using the Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Groups 466-468, we identified 37,147 patients with inpatient stays undergoing revision TJA from 2008 to 2016 in the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System administrative database for New York State. Revisions with missing or out-of-state patient identifiers (3474 of 37,147) or those associated with closed or merged facilities (180 of 37,147) were excluded. We chose this database for our study because of relative advantages to other available databases: comprehensive catchment of all surgical procedures in New York State, regardless of payer; each patient can be followed across episodes of care and hospitals in New York State; and New York State has an excellent cross-section of hospital types for TJA, including rural and urban hospitals, critical access hospitals, and some of the highest-volume centers for TJA in the United States. We divided hospitals into quartiles based on the mean revision TJA volume. Overall, 80% (118 of 147) of hospitals were not for profit, 18% (26 of 147) were government owned, 78% (115 of 147) were located in urban areas, and 48% (70 of 147) had fewer than 200 beds. The mean patient age was 66 years old, 59% (19,888 of 33,493) of patients were females, 79% (26,376 of 33,493) were white, 82% (27,410 of 33,493) were elective admissions, and 56% (18,656 of 33,493) of admissions were from government insurance. Three policy scenarios were evaluated: transferring patients from the lowest 25% by volume hospitals, transferring patients in the lowest 50% by volume hospitals, and transferring patients in the lowest 75% by volume hospitals to the nearest higher-volume institution by distance. Patients who changed hospitals and travelled more than 60 miles or longer than 60 minutes with consideration for average traffic patterns after the policy was enacted were considered adversely affected. The secondary outcome of interest was the impact of the three centralization policies, as defined above, on lower-income, nonwhite, rural versus urban counties, and Hispanic ethnicity.

RESULTS

Transferring patients from the lowest 25% by volume hospitals resulted in only one patient stay that was affected by an increase in travel distance and travel time. Transferring patients from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals resulted in 9% (3050 of 33,493) of patients being transferred, with only 1% (312 of 33,493) of patients affected by either an increased travel distance or travel time. Transferring patients from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals resulted in 28% (9323 of 33,493) of patients being transferred, with 2% (814 of 33,493) of patients affected by either an increased travel distance or travel time. Nonwhite patients were less likely to encounter an increased travel distance or time after being transferred from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals (odds ratio 0.31 [95% CI 0.15 to 0.65]; p = 0.002) or being transferred from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals (OR 0.10 [95% CI 0.07 to 0.15]; p < 0.001) than white patients were. Hispanic patients were more likely to experience increased travel distance or time after being transferred from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals (OR 12.3 [95% CI 5.04 to 30.2]; p < 0.001) and being transferred from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals (OR 3.24 [95% CI 2.24 to 4.68]; p < 0.001) than non-Hispanic patients were. Patients from a county with a lower median income were more likely to experience increased travel distances or time after being transferred from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals (OR 69.5 [95% CI 17.0 to 283]; p < 0.001) and being transferred from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals (OR 3.86 [95% CI 3.21 to 4.64]; p < 0.001) than patients from counties with a higher median income. Patients from rural counties were more likely to be affected after being transferred from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals (OR 98 [95% CI 49.6 to 192.2]; p < 0.001) and being transferred from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals (OR 11.7 [95% CI 9.89 to 14.0]; p < 0.001) than patients from urban counties.

CONCLUSION

Although centralizing revision TJA care to higher-volume institutions in New York State did not appear to increase the travel burden for most patients, policies that centralize revision TJA care will need to be carefully designed to minimize the disproportionate impact on patient populations that already face challenges with access to healthcare. Further studies should examine the feasibility of establishing centers of excellence designations for revision TJA, the effect of best practices adoption by lower volume institutions to improve revision TJA care, and the potential role of care-extending technology such as telemedicine to improve access to care to reduce the effects of travel distances on affected patient populations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, prognostic study.

Structural Discrimination in Emergency Care: How a Sick System Affects Us All

Drawing on evidence of socioeconomic disparities in emergency care, we show how structural discrimination is the most pervasive driver of these disparities, largely because of an inequitable distribution of healthcare services and unequal benefits derived from scientific advancement. We analyze how the market-based healthcare system in the U.S. has created a scenario in which the allocation of emergency care resources does not match community demand for emergency care, resulting in disproportionately poor access, treatment, and outcomes among historically underserved populations. Without fundamental reform, there is little hope for decreasing the health outcome gaps between the "haves" and "have-nots" in the United States.

Race and Ethnicity Considerations in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and Stroke: JACC Focus Seminar 3/9

Notable racial and ethnic differences and disparities exist in coronary artery disease (CAD) and stroke epidemiology and outcomes despite substantial advances in these fields. Racial and ethnic minority subgroups remain underrepresented in population data and clinical trials contributing to incomplete understanding of these disparities. Differences in traditional cardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension and diabetes play a role; however, disparities in care provision and process, social determinants of health including socioeconomic position, neighborhood environment, sociocultural factors, and racial discrimination within and outside of the health care system also drive racial and ethnic CAD and stroke disparities. Improved culturally congruent and competent communication about risk factors and symptoms is also needed. Opportunities to achieve improved and equitable outcomes in CAD and stroke must be identified and pursued.

Potential bypassing of nearest emergency department by EMS transports

OBJECTIVE

Guidelines recommend emergency medical services (EMS) patients to be transported to the nearest appropriate emergency department (ED). Our objective was to estimate the prevalence of EMS transport to an ED other than the nearest ED ("potential bypassing").

DATA SOURCES

Illinois Prehospital Patient Care Report Data of EMS transports (July 2019 to December 2019).

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We identified all EMS ground transports with an advanced life-support (ALS) paramedic to an ED for patients aged 21 years and older. Using street address of incident location, we performed geocoding and driving route analyses and obtained estimated driving distance and time to the destination ED and alternative EDs.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES

Our main outcomes were dichotomous indicators of potential bypassing of the nearest ED based on distance and time. As secondary outcomes we examined potential bypassing indicators based on excess driving distance and time.

STUDY DESIGN

We used Poisson regression models to obtain adjusted relative rates of potential bypassing indicators by acuity level, primary impression, patient demographics and geographic characteristics.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Our study cohort of 361,051 EMS transports consisted of 5.8% critical, 37.2% emergent and 57.0% low acuity cases transported to 222 EDs. The observed rate of potential bypassing was approximately 34% of cases for each acuity level. Treating the cardiovascular primary impression code group as the reference case, we found small to no differences in potential bypassing rates across other primary impression code groups of all acuity levels, with the exception of critical acuity trauma cases for which potential bypassing rate was 64% higher (incidence rate ratio = 1.64, 95% confidence interval, 1.54-1.74). Compared to zip codes with one ED within a 5-mile vicinity, potential bypassing was higher in areas with no ED or multiple EDs within a 5-mile vicinity.

CONCLUSION

Approximately one-third of EMS transports potentially bypassed the nearest ED. EMS transport destination may be motivated by factors other than proximity.

Differential benefits of cardiac care regionalization based on driving time to percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) require timely reperfusion, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) decreases morbidity and mortality. Regionalization of STEMI care has increased timeliness and use of PCI, but it is unknown whether benefits to regionalization depend on a community's distance from its nearest PCI center. We sought to determine whether STEMI regionalization benefits, measured by access to PCI centers, timeliness of treatment (same-day or in-hospital PCI), and mortality, differ by baseline distance to nearest PCI center.

METHODS

Using a difference-in-difference-in-differences model, we examined access to PCI-capable hospitals, receipt of PCI either on the day of admission or during the care episode, and health outcomes for patients hospitalized from January 1, 2006, to September 30, 2015.

RESULTS

Of 139,408 patients (2006 to 2015), 51% could reach the nearest PCI center in <30 minutes, and 49% required ≥30 minutes driving time. For communities with baseline access ≥30 minutes, regionalization increased the probability of admission to a PCI-capable hospital by 9.4% and also increased the likelihood of receiving same-day PCI (by 11.2%) and PCI during the hospitalization (by 7.4%). Patients living within 30 minutes did not accrue significant benefits (measured by admission to a PCI-capable hospital or receipt of PCI) from regionalization initiatives. Regionalization more than halved access disparities and completely eliminated treatment disparities between communities ≥30 minutes and communities <30 minutes from the nearest PCI hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

Measured by likelihood of admission to a PCI-capable facility and receipt of PCI, benefits of STEMI regionalization in California accrued only to patients whose nearest PCI center was ≥30 minutes away. We found no mortality benefits of regionalization based on distance from PCI center. Our results suggest that policymakers focus STEMI regionalization efforts in communities that are not already well serviced by PCI-capable hospitals.