Socioeconomic Deprivation and Heart Failure Mortality in the United States

2024 Update to the 2020 ACC/AHA Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With Heart Failure: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Performance Measures

This document describes performance measures for heart failure that are appropriate for public reporting or pay-for-performance programs and is meant to serve as a focused update of the "2020 ACC/AHA Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures." The new performance measures are taken from the "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines" and are selected from the strongest recommendations (Class 1 or Class 3). In contrast, quality measures may not have as much evidence base and generally comprise metrics that might be useful for clinicians and health care organizations for quality improvement but are not yet appropriate for public reporting or pay-for-performance programs. New performance measures include optimal blood pressure control in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, and the use of guideline-directed medical therapy in hospitalized patients. New quality measures include the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction, the optimization of guideline-directed medical therapy prior to intervention for chronic secondary severe mitral regurgitation, continuation of guideline-directed medical therapy for patients with heart failure with improved ejection fraction, identifying both known risks for cardiovascular disease and social determinants of health, patient-centered counseling regarding contraception and pregnancy risks for individuals with cardiomyopathy, and the need for a monoclonal protein screen to exclude light chain amyloidosis when interpreting a bone scintigraphy scan assessing for transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis.

2024 Update to the 2020 ACC/AHA Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With Heart Failure: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Performance Measures

This document describes performance measures for heart failure that are appropriate for public reporting or pay-for-performance programs and is meant to serve as a focused update of the "2020 ACC/AHA Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures." The new performance measures are taken from the "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines" and are selected from the strongest recommendations (Class 1 or Class 3). In contrast, quality measures may not have as much evidence base and generally comprise metrics that might be useful for clinicians and health care organizations for quality improvement but are not yet appropriate for public reporting or pay-for-performance programs. New performance measures include optimal blood pressure control in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, and the use of guideline-directed medical therapy in hospitalized patients. New quality measures include the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction, the optimization of guideline-directed medical therapy prior to intervention for chronic secondary severe mitral regurgitation, continuation of guideline-directed medical therapy for patients with heart failure with improved ejection fraction, identifying both known risks for cardiovascular disease and social determinants of health, patient-centered counseling regarding contraception and pregnancy risks for individuals with cardiomyopathy, and the need for a monoclonal protein screen to exclude light chain amyloidosis when interpreting a bone scintigraphy scan assessing for transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis.

Influence of Neighborhood Disadvantage and Individual Sociodemographic Conditions on Heart Failure Self-care

BACKGROUND

Residence in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods and individual sociodemographic conditions contribute to worse heart failure (HF) outcomes and may influence HF self-care. However, associations between neighborhood disadvantage, socioeconomic conditions, and HF self-care are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this secondary analysis was to investigate whether neighborhood disadvantage and individual socioeconomic conditions predicted worse HF self-care.

METHODS

This study was a secondary analysis of baseline data from a mixed-method study of 82 adults with HF. Participant zip codes were assigned a degree of neighborhood disadvantage using the Area Deprivation Index. Those in the top 20% most disadvantaged neighborhoods (Area Deprivation Index ≥ 80) were compared with those in the least disadvantaged neighborhoods. The Self-Care of Heart Failure Index was used to measure self-care maintenance and monitoring. Multiple linear regression was conducted.

RESULTS

Of all participants, 59.8% were male, 59.8% were persons of color, and the mean age was 64.87 years. Residing in a disadvantaged neighborhood and living alone predicted worse HF self-care maintenance and monitoring. Having no college education was also a predictor of worse HF self-care maintenance. Although persons of color were more likely to reside in disadvantaged neighborhoods, race was not associated with HF self-care.

CONCLUSION

Residing in a disadvantaged neighborhood and living alone may be important risk factors for worse HF self-care. Differences in self-care cannot be attributed solely to the individual sociodemographic determinants of race, gender, age, annual household income, or marital status. More research is needed to understand the connection between neighborhood disadvantage and HF self-care.

Race and Socioeconomic Status Impact Diagnosis and Clinical Outcomes in Transthyretin Cardiac Amyloidosis

Background

Transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) is associated with significant mortality. The Val122Ile variant, highly prevalent in Black patients, portends poorer survival compared with other ATTR-CM subtypes. Although Val122Ile is biologically more aggressive, the contribution of race and socioeconomic status (SES) to disease outcomes in patients with ATTR-CM is undefined.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of race and SES on clinical outcomes in patients with ATTR-CM.

Methods

Patients with ATTR-CM who received care at Johns Hopkins Hospital between 2006 and 2022 were included. SES was assessed using area deprivation index (ADI). Associations of race and ADI with heart failure (HF) hospitalization and/or death were measured using multivariable logistic or Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

Of 282 patients, 225 (80%) were men, and 129 (46%) were Black. Black vs White patients disproportionately constituted the highest ADI (most deprived) category (66% vs 28%; P = 0.004), and Black patients were more likely to have HF hospitalization or death over 5 years compared with White patients (log-rank P < 0.001). Among those with ADI >25, Black patients had a significantly greater hazard of HF hospitalization or death compared with White patients, independent of disease stage at diagnosis (HR: 2.77; 95% CI: 1.45-5.32; P = 0.002).

Conclusions

Black patients with low SES may be at greater risk for underdiagnosis and adverse outcomes compared with White patients. Ongoing efforts are needed to improve outcomes in this subset of patients with ATTR-CM.

Neighborhood-level social determinants of health measures independently predict receipt of living donor liver transplantation in the United States

Disparities exist in the access to living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in the United States. However, the association of neighborhood-level social determinants of health (SDoH) on the receipt of LDLT is not well-established. This was a retrospective cohort study of adult liver transplant recipients between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2021 at centers performing LDLT using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, which was linked through patients' ZIP code to a set of 24 neighborhood-level SDoH measures from different data sources. Temporal trends and center differences in neighborhood Social Deprivation Index (SDI), a validated scale of socioeconomic deprivation ranging from 0 to 100 (0=least disadvantaged), were assessed by transplant type. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the association of increasing SDI on receipt of LDLT [vs. deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT)]. There were 51,721 DDLT and 4026 LDLT recipients at 59 LDLT-performing centers during the study period. Of the 24 neighborhood-level SDoH measures studied, the SDI was most different between the 2 transplant types, with LDLT recipients having lower SDI (ie, less socioeconomic disadvantage) than DDLT recipients (median SDI 37 vs. 47; p < 0.001). The median difference in SDI between the LDLT and DDLT groups significantly decreased from 13 in 2005 to 3 in 2021 ( p = 0.003). In the final model, the SDI quintile was independently associated with transplant type ( p < 0.001) with a threshold SDI of ~40, above which increasing SDI was significantly associated with reduced odds of LDLT (vs. reference SDI 1-20). As a neighborhood-level SDoH measure, SDI is useful for evaluating disparities in the context of LDLT. Center outreach efforts that aim to reduce disparities in LDLT could preferentially target US ZIP codes with SDI > 40.

Association of Environmental Injustice and Cardiovascular Diseases and Risk Factors in the United States

BACKGROUND

While the impacts of social and environmental exposure on cardiovascular risks are often reported individually, the combined effect is poorly understood.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using the 2022 Environmental Justice Index, socio-environmental justice index and environmental burden module ranks of census tracts were divided into quartiles (quartile 1, the least vulnerable census tracts; quartile 4, the most vulnerable census tracts). Age-adjusted rate ratios (RRs) of coronary artery disease, strokes, and various health measures reported in the Prevention Population-Level Analysis and Community Estimates data were compared between quartiles using multivariable Poisson regression. The quartile 4 Environmental Justice Index was associated with a higher rate of coronary artery disease (RR, 1.684 [95% CI, 1.660-1.708]) and stroke (RR, 2.112 [95% CI, 2.078-2.147]) compared with the quartile 1 Environmental Justice Index. Similarly, coronary artery disease 1.057 [95% CI,1.043-1.0716] and stroke (RR, 1.118 [95% CI, 1.102-1.135]) were significantly higher in the quartile 4 than in the quartile 1 environmental burden module. Similar results were observed for chronic kidney disease, hypertension, diabetes, obesity, high cholesterol, lack of health insurance, sleep <7 hours per night, no leisure time physical activity, and impaired mental and physical health >14 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of CVD and its risk factors is highly associated with increased social and environmental adversities, and environmental exposure plays an important role independent of social factors.

Impact of Residential Social Deprivation on Prediction of Heart Failure in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: External Validation and Recalibration of the WATCH-DM Score Using Real World Data

BACKGROUND

Patients with type 2 diabetes are at risk of heart failure hospitalization. As social determinants of health are rarely included in risk models, we validated and recalibrated the WATCH-DM score in a diverse patient-group using their social deprivation index (SDI).

METHODS

We identified US Veterans with type 2 diabetes without heart failure that received outpatient care during 2010 at Veterans Affairs medical centers nationwide, linked them to their SDI using residential ZIP codes and grouped them as SDI <20%, 21% to 40%, 41% to 60%, 61% to 80%, and >80% (higher values represent increased deprivation). Accounting for all-cause mortality, we obtained the incidence for heart failure hospitalization at 5 years follow-up; overall and in each SDI group. We evaluated the WATCH-DM score using the C statistic, the Greenwood Nam D'Agostino test χ2 test and calibration plots and further recalibrated the WATCH-DM score for each SDI group using a statistical correction factor.

RESULTS

In 1 065 691 studied patients (mean age 67 years, 25% Black and 6% Hispanic patients), the 5-year incidence of heart failure hospitalization was 5.39%. In SDI group 1 (least deprived) and 5 (most deprived), the 5-year heart failure hospitalization was 3.18% and 11%, respectively. The score C statistic was 0.62; WATCH-DM systematically overestimated heart failure risk in SDI groups 1 to 2 (expected/observed ratios, 1.38 and 1.36, respectively) and underestimated the heart failure risk in groups 4 to 5 (expected/observed ratios, 0.95 and 0.80, respectively). Graphical evaluation demonstrated that the recalibration of WATCH-DM using an SDI group-based correction factor improved predictive capabilities as supported by reduction in the χ2 test results (801-27 in SDI groups I; 623-23 in SDI group V).

CONCLUSIONS

Including social determinants of health to recalibrate the WATCH-DM score improved risk prediction highlighting the importance of including social determinants in future clinical risk prediction models.

Racial Disparities in Hospitalization Rates During Long-Term Follow-Up After Deceased-Donor Kidney Transplantation

OBJECTIVE

To compare hospitalization rates between African American (AA) and European American (EA) deceased-donor (DD) kidney transplant (KT) recipients during over a10-year period.

METHOD

Data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and social determinants of health (SDoH), measured by the Social Deprivation Index, were used. Hospitalization rates were estimated for kidney recipients from AA and EA DDs who had one kidney transplanted into an AA and one into an EA, leading to four donor/recipient pairs (DRPs): AA/AA, AA/EA, EA/AA, and EA/EA. Poisson-Gamma models were fitted to assess post-transplant hospitalizations.

RESULT

Unadjusted hospitalization rates (95% confidence interval) were higher among all DRP involving AA, 131.1 (122.5, 140.3), 134.8 (126.3, 143.8), and 102.4 (98.9, 106.0) for AA/AA, AA/EA, and EA/AA, respectively, compared to 97.1 (93.7, 100.6) per 1000 post-transplant person-years for EA/EA pairs. Multivariable analysis showed u-shaped relationships across SDoH levels within each DRP, but findings varied depending on recipients' race, i.e., AA recipients in areas with the worst SDoH had higher hospitalization rates. However, EA recipients in areas with the best SDoH had higher hospitalization rates than their counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS

Relationship between healthcare utilization and SDoH depends on DRP, with higher hospitalization rates among AA recipients living in areas with the worst SDoH and among EA recipients in areas with the best SDoH profiles. SDoH plays an important role in driving disparities in hospitalizations after kidney transplantation.

Characteristics of heart failure in the Amsterdam metropolitan area (AMSTERDAM-HF): Data from a dynamic general practice cohort (2011-2021)

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) is a common cardiac syndrome with a high disease burden and poor prognosis in our aging populations. Understanding the characteristics of patients with newly diagnosed HF is essential for improving care and outcomes. The AMSTERDAM-HF study is aimed to examine the population characteristics of patients with incident HF.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective dynamic cohort study in the Amsterdam general practice network consisting of 904,557 individuals. Incidence HF rates, geographical demographics, patient characteristics, risk factors, symptoms prior to HF diagnosis, and prognosis were reported.

RESULTS

The study identified 10,067 new cases of HF over 6,816,099 person-years. The median age of patients was 77 years (25th-75th percentile: 66-85), and 48% were male. The incidence rate of HF was 213.44 per 100,000 patient-years, and was higher in male versus female patients (incidence rate ratio: 1.08, 95%-CI:1.04-1.13). Hypertension (men 46.3% and women 55.8%), coronary artery disease (men 36% and women 25%) and diabetes mellitus (men 30.5% and women 26.8%) were the most common risk factors. Dyspnoea and oedema were key reported symptoms prior to HF diagnosis. Survival rates at 10-year follow-up were poor, particularly in men (36.4%) compared to women (39.7%). Incidence rates, comorbidity burden and prognosis were worse in city districts with high ethnic diversity and low socio-economic position.

CONCLUSION

Our study provides insights into incident HF in a contemporary Western European, multi-ethnic, urban population. It highlights notable sex, age, and geographical differences in incidence rates, risk factors, symptoms and prognosis.

Neighbourhood-level social deprivation and the risk of recurrent heart failure hospitalizations in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

The importance of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) in heart failure hospitalizations (HFH) is acknowledged. As information on the prevalence and influence of social deprivation on HFH is limited, we studied this issue in a racially diverse cohort.

METHODS

Linking data from US Veterans with stable T2D (without prevalent HF) with a zip-code derived population-level social deprivation index (SDI), we grouped them according to increasing SDI as follows: SDI: group I: ≤20; II: 21-40; III: 41-60; IV: 61-80; and V (most deprived) 81-100. Over a 10-year follow-up period, we identified the total (first and recurrent) number of HFH episodes for each patient and calculated the age-adjusted HFH rate [per 1000 patient-years (PY)]. We analysed the incident rate ratio between SDI groups and HFH using adjusted analyses.

RESULTS

In 1 012 351 patients with T2D (mean age 67.5 years, 75.7% White), the cumulative incidence of first HFH was 9.4% and 14.2% in SDI groups I and V respectively. The 10-year total HFH rate was 54.8 (95% CI: 54.5, 55.2)/1000 PY. Total HFH increased incrementally from SDI group I [43.3 (95% CI: 42.4, 44.2)/1000 PY] to group V [68.6 (95% CI: 67.8, 69.9)/1000 PY]. Compared with group I, group V patients had a 53% higher relative risk of HFH. The negative association between SDI and HFH was stronger in Black patients (SDI × Race pinteraction  < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Social deprivation is associated with increased HFH in T2D with a disproportionate influence in Black patients. Strategies to reduce social disparity and equalize racial differences may help to bridge this gap.

Neighborhood-level Social Vulnerability and Prevalence of Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Coronary Heart Disease

Social determinants of health are implicated in the geographic variation in cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). The social vulnerability index (SVI) is an estimate of a neighborhood's potential for deleterious outcomes when faced with natural disasters or disease outbreaks. We sought to investigate the association of the SVI with cardiovascular risk factors and the prevalence of coronary heart disease (CHD) in the United States at the census tract level. We linked census tract SVI with prevalence of census tract CVD risk factors (smoking, high cholesterol, diabetes, high blood pressure, low physical activity and obesity), and prevalence of CHD obtained from the behavioral risk factor surveillance system. We evaluated the association between SVI, its sub-scales, CVD risk factors and CHD prevalence using linear regression. Among 72,173 census tracts, prevalence of all cardiovascular risk factors increased linearly with SVI. A higher SVI was associated with a higher CHD prevalence (R2 = 0.17, P < 0.0001). The relationship between SVI and CHD was stronger when accounting for census-tract median age (R2 = 0.57, P < 0.0001). A multivariable linear regression model including 4 SVI themes separately explained considerably more variation in CHD prevalence than the composite SVI alone (50.0% vs 17.3%). Socioeconomic status and household composition and disability were the SVI themes most closely associated with cardiovascular risk factors and CHD prevalence. In the United States, social vulnerability can explain significant portion of geographic variation in CHD, and its risk factors. Neighborhoods with high social vulnerability are at disproportionately increased risk of CHD and its risk factors. Social determinants of health are implicated in the geographic variation in cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). We investigated the association of social vulnerability index (SVI) with cardiovascular risk factors and the prevalence of coronary heart disease (CHD) in the United States at the census tract level. We show that cardiovascular risk factors and CHD were more common with higher SVI. A multivariable linear regression model including 4 SVI themes separately explained considerably more variation in CHD prevalence than the composite SVI alone (50.0% vs 17.3%). Socioeconomic status and household composition and/or disability were the SVI themes most closely associated with cardiovascular risk factors and CHD prevalence.

Air Pollution, Built Environment, and Early Cardiovascular Disease

As the world's population becomes increasingly urbanized, there is growing concern about the impact of urban environments on cardiovascular health. Urban residents are exposed to a variety of adverse environmental exposures throughout their lives, including air pollution, built environment, and lack of green space, which may contribute to the development of early cardiovascular disease and related risk factors. While epidemiological studies have examined the role of a few environmental factors with early cardiovascular disease, the relationship with the broader environment remains poorly defined. In this article, we provide a brief overview of studies that have examined the impact of the environment including the built physical environment, discuss current challenges in the field, and suggest potential directions for future research. Additionally, we highlight the clinical implications of these findings and propose multilevel interventions to promote cardiovascular health among children and young adults.

Socioeconomic Deprivation and Premature Cardiovascular Mortality in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To determine the variability in county cardiovascular (CV) premature mortality explained by integrated metrics of socioeconomic deprivation and to explore temporal trends in CV mortality by county socioeconomic deprivation.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional analysis of US county-level death certificate data from 1999 to 2018 of age-adjusted premature (25 to 64 years) CV mortality. Integrated metrics of socioeconomic deprivation (Social Deprivation Index [SDI] and county Area Deprivation Index [ADI]) were associated with mortality using linear regression analysis. Relative change in county CV mortality from 1999 to 2018 was associated with indices using linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

Counties with higher quartile SDI and ADI had significantly higher total, non-Hispanic Black/African American, and female premature CV mortality (P<.001). Both SDI and ADI were significantly associated with CV mortality by linear regression (P<.001) explaining 40% and 44% of county variability in CV mortality, respectively. Counties with lower deprivation indices experienced a larger decreased in premature CV mortality (P<.001).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates an association between multiple integrated metrics of socioeconomic deprivation and premature cardiovascular mortality and shows potentially worsening disparities.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021.

STRUCTURE

Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

The impact of socioeconomic status in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs)

BACKGROUND

Socioeconomic status (SES) can be a powerful predictor of adverse outcomes among heart failure patients but its impact on survival and readmission following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation surgery is poorly understood. We investigated if the LVAD recipients from more deprived neighborhoods experienced higher mortality and readmission rate after device implantation as compared to those from less deprived areas.

METHODS

This is a single center, retrospective analysis evaluating adults who received Heartmate III and Heartware HVAD implants between 2009 and 2018. SES indicators were area of deprivation index (ADI), race and income. Our cohort was grouped by ADI quartiles from least deprived (Q1), Q2, Q3 to the most deprived (Q4). Outcomes included overall mortality and readmission following surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 191 patients were included in the study. Demographics by SES indicators demonstrated that least deprived (Q1) patients were older than the most deprived (65 vs. 57, p < .01), African-American patients originated from more deprived neighborhoods than Caucasians (ADI 87 vs. 62, p < .001), and high-income patients had higher preoperative BUN and creatinine. Outcome differences included a decreased risk of death in most deprived patients (Q4) compared to the least deprived (Q1), however after adjusting for age, LVAD indication, and INTERMACS profile this was no longer significant. No differences in survival or readmission by race or income was observed CONCLUSION: SES does not independently impact survival and readmission after Heartware HVAD and Heartmate III LVAD implantation. More studies are needed to evaluate if other SES factors affect these outcomes.

Out-of-Pocket Annual Health Expenditures and Financial Toxicity From Healthcare Costs in Patients With Heart Failure in the United States

Background

Heart failure (HF) poses a major public health burden in the United States. We examined the burden of out‐of‐pocket healthcare costs on patients with HF and their families.

Methods and Results

In the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we identified all families with ≥1 adult member with HF during 2014 to 2018. Total out‐of‐pocket healthcare expenditures included yearly care‐specific costs and insurance premiums. We evaluated 2 outcomes of financial toxicity: (1) high financial burden—total out‐of‐pocket healthcare expense to postsubsistence income ratio of >20%, and (2) catastrophic financial burden with the ratio of >40%—a bankrupting expense defined by the World Health Organization. There were 788 families in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey with a member with HF representing 0.54% (95% CI, 0.48%–0.60%) of all families nationally. The overall mean annual out‐of‐pocket healthcare expenses were $4423 (95% CI, $3908–$4939), with medications and health insurance premiums representing the largest categories of cost. Overall, 14% (95% CI, 11%–18%) of families experienced a high burden and 5% (95% CI, 3%–6%) experienced a catastrophic burden. Among the two‐fifths of families considered low income, 24% (95% CI, 18%–30%) experienced a high financial burden, whereas 10% (95% CI, 6%–14%) experienced a catastrophic burden. Low‐income families had 4‐fold greater risk‐adjusted odds of high financial burden (odds ratio [OR] , 3.9; 95% CI, 2.3–6.6), and 14‐fold greater risk‐adjusted odds of catastrophic financial burden (OR, 14.2; 95% CI, 5.1–39.5) compared with middle/high‐income families.

Conclusions

Patients with HF and their families experience large out‐of‐pocket healthcare expenses. A large proportion encounter financial toxicity, with a disproportionate effect on low‐income families.