Health Care Use Before First Heart Failure Hospitalization

Equity in the Setting of Heart Failure Diagnosis: An Analysis of Differences Between and Within Clinician Practices

BACKGROUND

Timely heart failure (HF) diagnosis can lead to earlier intervention and reduced morbidity. Among historically marginalized patients, new-onset HF diagnosis is more likely to occur in acute care settings (emergency department or inpatient hospitalization) than outpatient settings. Whether inequity within outpatient clinician practices affects diagnosis settings is unknown.

METHODS

We determined the setting of incident HF diagnosis among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries between 2013 and 2017. We identified sociodemographic and medical characteristics associated with HF diagnosis in the acute care setting. Within each outpatient clinician practice, we compared acute care diagnosis rates across sociodemographic characteristics: female versus male sex, non-Hispanic White versus other racial and ethnic groups, and dual Medicare-Medicaid eligible (a surrogate for low income) versus nondual-eligible patients. Based on within-practice differences in acute diagnosis rates, we stratified clinician practices by equity (high, intermediate, and low) and compared clinician practice characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 315 439 Medicare patients with incident HF, 173 121 (54.9%) were first diagnosed in acute care settings. Higher adjusted acute care diagnosis rates were associated with female sex (6.4% [95% CI, 6.1%-6.8%]), American Indian (3.6% [95% CI, 1.1%-6.1%]) race, and dual eligibility (4.1% [95% CI, 3.7%-4.5%]). These differences persisted within clinician practices. With clinician practice adjustment, dual-eligible patients had a 4.9% (95% CI, 4.5%-5.4%) greater acute care diagnosis rate than nondual-eligible patients. Clinician practices with greater equity across dual eligibility also had greater equity across sex and race and ethnicity and were more likely to be composed of predominantly primary care clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in HF diagnosis rates in the acute care setting between and within clinician practices highlight an opportunity to improve equity in diagnosing historically marginalized patients.

Association of a Heart Failure Management Incentive in Primary Care With Clinical Outcomes: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

We aim to examine the association between primary care physicians' billing of Q050A, a pay-for-performance heart failure (HF) management incentive fee code, and the composite outcome of mortality, hospitalization, and emergency department visits.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This population-based cohort study linked administrative health databases in Ontario, Canada, for patients with HF aged >66 years between January 1, 2008, and March 31, 2020. Cases were patients with HF who had a Q050A fee code billed. Cases and controls were matched 1:1 on age, sex, patient status on being rostered to a primary care physician, cardiologist, or internist visit in the 6 months before study enrollment, Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Group resource use bands, days between HF diagnosis and study enrollment (±2 years), and the logit of the propensity score. A Cox proportional hazards model assessed the association of Q050A with the outcome. A total of 59 664 cases had a Q050A billed, whereas 244 883 patients did not. Before matching, patients who had a Q050A billed were more likely to be men (52% versus 49%), were rostered to a primary care physician (100% versus 96%), had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, and had higher health care costs. The mean follow-up was 481 days for cases and 530 days for controls. The composite outcome (hazard ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.09-1.12]) was significantly higher for cases than controls.

CONCLUSIONS

The Q050A incentive improved financial compensation for primary care physicians managing patients with HF but was not associated with improvements in the outcome. Research on promoting evidence-based HF management is warranted.

Association of neighbourhood-level material deprivation with adverse outcomes and processes of care among patients with heart failure in a single-payer healthcare system: A population-based cohort study

AIM

We studied the association between neighbourhood material deprivation, a metric estimating inability to attain basic material needs, with outcomes and processes of care among incident heart failure patients in a universal healthcare system.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In a population-based retrospective study (2007-2019), we examined the association of material deprivation with 1-year all-cause mortality, cause-specific hospitalization, and 90-day processes of care. Using cause-specific hazards regression, we quantified the relative rate of events after multiple covariate adjustment, stratifying by age ≤65 or ≥66 years. Among 395 763 patients (median age 76 [interquartile range 66-84] years, 47% women), there was significant interaction between age and deprivation quintile for mortality/hospitalization outcomes (p ≤ 0.001). Younger residents (age ≤65 years) of the most versus least deprived neighbourhoods had higher hazards of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.29]) and cardiovascular hospitalization (HR 1.29 [95% CI 1.19-1.39]). Older individuals (≥66 years) in the most deprived neighbourhoods had significantly higher hazard of death (HR 1.11 [95% CI 1.08-1.14]) and cardiovascular hospitalization (HR 1.13 [95% CI 1.09-1.18]) compared to the least deprived. The magnitude of the association between deprivation and outcomes was amplified in the younger compared to the older age group. More deprived individuals in both age groups had a lower hazard of cardiology visits and advanced cardiac imaging (all p < 0.001), while the most deprived of younger ages were less likely to undergo implantable cardioverter-defibrillator/cardiac resynchronization therapy-pacemaker implantation (p = 0.023), compared to the least deprived.

CONCLUSION

Patients with newly-diagnosed heart failure residing in the most deprived neighbourhoods had worse outcomes and reduced access to care than those less deprived.

Canadian Cardiovascular Society-Canadian Heart Failure Society Focused Clinical Practice Update of Patients With Differing Heart Failure Phenotypes

A number of societies produce heart failure (HF) management guidelines, comprising official recommendations on the basis of recent research discoveries, but their applicability to specific situations encountered in daily practice might be difficult. In this clinical practice update we aim to provide responses to fundamental questions that face health care providers, like appropriate timing for the introduction and optimization of different classes of medication according to specific patient phenotypes, when second-line therapies and valvular interventions should be considered, and management of difficult clinical scenarios such as cardiorenal syndrome and frailty. A consensus-based methodology was used. Approaches to 5 different phenotypes are presented: (1) The wet HF phenotype is the easiest to manage, decongestion being performed alongside introduction of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT); (2) The de novo HF phenotype requires the introduction of the 4 pillars of GDMT, personalizing the order on the basis of the individuals' biological and physiological characteristics; (3) The worsening HF phenotype is a marker of poor prognosis, and therefore should motivate optimization of GDMT, start second-line therapies, and/or reevaluate goals of care/advanced HF therapies; (4) The cardiorenal phenotypes require correct volume assessment, because renal function usually improves with decongestion; and (5) The frail HF phenotype require special attention, careful drug titration, and consideration of cardiac rehabilitation programs. In conclusion, specific common HF phenotypes call for a personalized approach to improve adoption of the HF guidelines into clinical practice.

Increased Mortality in Patients With Acutely Decompensated Heart Failure During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Toronto, Canada

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Comparison of machine learning and the regression-based EHMRG model for predicting early mortality in acute heart failure

BACKGROUND

Although risk stratification of patients with acute decompensated heart failure (HF) is important, it is unknown whether machine learning (ML) or conventional statistical models are optimal. We developed ML algorithms to predict 7-day and 30-day mortality in patients with acute HF and compared these with an existing logistic regression model at the same timepoints.

METHODS

Patients presenting to one of 86 hospitals, who were either admitted to hospital or discharged home directly from the emergency department, were randomly selected using stratified random sampling. ML approaches, including neural networks, random forest, XGBoost, and the Lasso, were compared with a validated logistic regression model for discrimination and calibration.

RESULTS

Among 12,608 patients in our analysis, lasso regression (c-statistic 0.774; 95% CI, 0.743, 0.806) performed better than other ML models for 7-day mortality but did not outperform the baseline logistic regression model (0.794; 95% CI, 0.789, 0.800). For 30-day mortality, XGBoost performed better than other ML models (c-statistic 0.759; 95% CI; 0.740, 0.779), but was not significantly better than logistic regression (c-statistic 0.755; 95% CI, 0.750, 0.762). Logistic regression demonstrated better calibration at 7 days (calibration-in-the-large 0.017; 95% CI, -0.657, 0.692, and calibration slope 0.954; 95% CI,0.769, 1.139) and at 30 days (-0.026; 95% CI, -0.374, 0.322 and 0.964; 95% CI, 0.831, 1.098), and best Brier scores, compared to ML approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Logistic regression was comparable to ML in discrimination, but was superior to ML algorithms in calibration overall. ML algorithms for prognosis should routinely report calibration metrics in addition to discrimination.

Trends in glucose testing among individuals without diabetes in Ontario between 2010 and 2017: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Early identification of people with diabetes or prediabetes enables greater opportunities for glycemic control and management strategies to prevent related complications. To identify gaps in screening for these conditions, we examined population trends in receipt of timely glucose testing overall and in specific clinical subgroups.

METHODS

Using linked administrative databases, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of people aged 40 years and older without diabetes at baseline. Our primary outcome was up-to-date glucose testing, defined as having received testing at least once in the 3 years before each index year from 2010 to 2017, using linked administrative databases of people residing in Ontario, Canada. We calculated rates of up-to-date testing by age group, sex, ethnicity (South Asian, Chinese, general population) and comorbidities (hypertension, hyperlipidemia, cardiovascular disease).

RESULTS

Over the 8-year study period, up-to-date glucose testing rates were stable at 67% for men and 77% for women (both relative risk 1.00 per year; 95% confidence interval 1.00-1.00). Testing rates were significantly lower in men than in women (all age groups p < 0.001) and lower in younger than older age groups (except those aged ≥ 80 yr). South Asian people had the highest testing rates, although among people aged 70 years or older, testing was highest in the general population (p < 0.001). Among people with hypertension, hyperlipidemia and cardiovascular disease, annual testing rates were also stable, but only 58% overall among people with hypertension.

INTERPRETATION

We found lower glucose testing rates in younger men and people with hypertension. Our findings reinforce the need for initiatives to increase awareness of glycemic testing.

Rationale and design of the comparison of outcomes and access to care for heart failure (COACH) trial: A stepped wedge cluster randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) is an ambulatory care sensitive condition and a leading reason for emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations. Improved decision-making and care may enhance safety and efficiency for patients presenting to the ED with acute HF.

OBJECTIVES

We will evaluate an intervention comprised of 2 complementary components: (1) the Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade simultaneous 7- and 30-day (EHMRG30-ST) risk scores, which will inform admission-discharge decisions, and (2) a rapid outpatient follow-up (RAPID-HF) clinic for low-to-intermediate risk patients on cardiovascular readmissions or death.

STUDY DESIGN

Stepped wedge cluster randomized trial with cross-sectional measurement at 10 acute care hospitals in Ontario, Canada. Patients presenting during control and intervention periods are eligible if they have a primary ED diagnosis of HF. In the intervention periods, access to the EHMRG30-ST web calculator will become available to hospitals' internet protocol (IP) addresses, and referral to the RAPID-HF clinic will be facilitated by a study nurse navigator. Patients with a high risk EHMRG30-ST score will be admitted to hospital. The RAPID-HF clinic will accept referrals for patients: (1) with low risk 7- and 30-day EHMRG30-ST scores who are discharged directly from the ED, or (2) intermediate risk patients with hospital length of stay < 72 hours. The RAPID-HF clinic, staffed by a nurse-clinician and cardiologist, will provide care during the 30-day transition after hospital separation.

CONCLUSION

This trial will determine whether novel risk stratification coupled with rapid ambulatory care achieves better outcomes than conventional decision-making and care for patients with HF.

Outcomes and healthcare resource utilization in adult congenital heart disease patients with heart failure

AIMS

While heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of death in adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD), few studies report contemporary outcomes after the first HF hospitalization. We examined outcomes of ACHD patients newly admitted for HF compared with ACHD patients without HF and the general HF population without ACHD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using population databases from a single-payer health system from 1994 to 2018, ACHD patients newly admitted for HF were matched 1:1 to ACHD patients without HF (n = 4030 matched pairs). Similarly, ACHD patients newly admitted for HF were matched 1:1 to HF patients without ACHD (n = 4336 matched pairs). Patients with ACHD and HF (median age 68 years, 45% women) experienced higher mortality in short-term [30 day adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 4.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.06, 5.43, P < 0.001], near-term (1 year HR 3.87, 95% CI 3.77, 4.92, P < 0.001), and long-term (24 year HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.13, 2.36, P = 0.008) follow-up. Patients with ACHD and HF had fewer baseline cardiovascular comorbidities than non-ACHD HF but demonstrated higher 30 day (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.41, 1.73, P < 0.001), 1 year (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.20, 1.40, P < 0.001), and 24 year (HR 2.40, 95% CI 1.73, 3.38, P < 0.001) mortality. Those with ACHD and HF also exhibited higher cardiovascular readmission rates at 30 days with HRs 9.15 (95% CI; 8.00, 10.48, P < 0.001) vs. ACHD without HF, and 1.71 (95% CI; 1.54, 1.85, P < 0.001) vs. HF without ACHD, and the higher readmission risk extended to 10 year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Adults with congenital heart disease patients with new HF have high risks of death and cardiovascular hospitalization, and preventative strategies to improve outcomes are urgently needed.

Disparity in the Setting of Incident Heart Failure Diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Early heart failure (HF) recognition can reduce morbidity, yet HF is often initially diagnosed only after a patient clinically worsens. We sought to identify characteristics that predict diagnosis in the acute care setting versus the outpatient setting.

METHODS

We estimated the proportion of incident HF diagnosed in the acute care setting (inpatient hospital or emergency department) versus outpatient setting based on diagnostic codes from a claims database covering commercial insurance and Medicare Advantage between 2003 and 2019. After excluding new-onset HF potentially caused by a concurrent acute cause (eg, acute myocardial infarction), we identified demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic predictors of diagnosis setting. Patients were linked to their primary care clinicians to evaluate diagnosis setting variation across clinicians.

RESULTS

Of 959 438 patients with new HF, 38% were diagnosed in acute care. Of these, 46% had potential HF symptoms in the prior 6 months. Over time, the relative odds of acute care diagnosis increased by 3.2% annually after adjustment for patient characteristics (95% CI, 3.1%-3.3%). Acute care diagnosis setting was more likely for women compared with men (adjusted odds ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.10-1.12]) and for Black patients compared with White patients (adjusted odds ratio, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.16-1.19]). The proportion of acute care diagnosis varied substantially (interquartile range: 24%-39%) among clinicians after adjusting for patient-level risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

A large proportion of first HF diagnoses occur in the acute care setting, particularly among women and Black patients, yet many had potential HF symptoms in the months before acute care visits. These results raise concerns that many HF diagnoses are missed in the outpatient setting. Earlier diagnosis could allow for timelier high-value interventions, addressing disparities and reducing the progression of HF.