Home Health Care Use and Outcomes After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Among Medicare Beneficiaries

BACKGROUND

Home health care (HHC) has been increasingly used to improve care transitions and avoid poor outcomes, but there is limited data on its use and efficacy following coronary artery bypass grafting. The purpose of this study was to describe HHC use and its association with outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 100% of Medicare fee-for-service files identified 77 331 beneficiaries undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting and discharged to home between July 2016 and December 2018. The primary exposure of HHC use was defined as the presence of paid HHC claims within 30 days of discharge. Hierarchical logistic regression identified predictors of HHC use and the percentage of variation in HHC use attributed to the hospital. Propensity-matched logistic regression compared mortality, readmissions, emergency department visits, and cardiac rehabilitation enrollment at 30 and 90 days after discharge between HHC users and nonusers.

RESULTS

A total of 26 751 (34.6%) of beneficiaries used HHC within 30 days of discharge, which was more common among beneficiaries who were older (72.9 versus 72.5 years), male (79.4% versus 77.4%), White (90.2% versus 89.2%), and not Medicare-Medicaid dual eligible (6.7% versus 8.8%). The median hospital-level rate of HHC use was 31.0% (interquartile range, 13.7%-54.5%) and ranged from 0% to 94.2%. Nearly 30% of the interhospital variation in HHC use was attributed to the discharging hospital (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.296 [95% CI, 0.275-0.318]). Compared with non-HHC users, those using HHC were less likely to have a readmission or emergency department visit, were more likely to enroll in cardiac rehabilitation, and had modestly higher mortality within 30 or 90 days of discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

A third of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting used HHC within 30 days of discharge, with wide interhospital variation in use and mixed associations with clinical outcomes and health care utilization.

Out-of-pocket prescription drug costs for adults with cardiovascular risk factors under Amazon's direct-to-consumer pharmacy service

BACKGROUND

US adults often overpay for generic prescription medications, which can lead to medication nonadherence that negatively impacts cardiovascular outcomes. As a result, new direct-to-consumer online medication services are growing in popularity nationwide. Amazon recently launched a $5/month direct-to-consumer medication subscription service (Amazon RxPass), but it is unclear how many US adults could save on out-of-pocket drug costs by using this new service.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate out-of-pocket savings on generic prescription medications achievable through Amazon's new direct-to-consumer subscription medication service for adults with cardiovascular risk factors and/or conditions.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of adults 18-64 years in the 2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

RESULTS

Of the 25,280,517 (SE ± 934,809) adults aged 18-64 years with cardiovascular risk factors or conditions who were prescribed at least 1 medication available in the Amazon RxPass formulary, only 6.4% (1,624,587 [SE ± 68,571]) would achieve savings. Among those achieving savings, the estimated average out-of-pocket savings would be $140 (SE ± $15.8) per person per year, amounting to a total savings of $228,093,570 (SE ± $26,117,241). In multivariable regression models, lack of insurance coverage (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.5, 95%CI 1.9-6.5) and being prescribed a greater number of RxPass-eligible medications (2-3 medications versus 1 medication: OR 5.6, 95%CI 3.0-10.3; 4+ medications: OR 21.8, 95%CI 10.7-44.3) were each associated with a higher likelihood of achieving out-of-pocket savings from RxPass.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes to the pricing structure of Amazon's direct-to-consumer medication service are needed to expand out-of-pocket savings on generic medications to a larger segment of the working-age adults with cardiovascular risk factors and/or diseases.

Indirect impact of the war in Ukraine on primary percutaneous coronary interventions for ST-elevation myocardial infarction in Poland

INTRODUCTION

The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 resulted in the displacement of approximately 12.5 million refugees to adjacent countries including Poland, that may have strained healthcare service delivery.

OBJECTIVES

Using the ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) data, we aimed to evaluate whether the Russian invasion of Ukraine has indirectly impacted the delivery of acute cardiovascular care in Poland.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We analyzed all adult patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) for STEMI across Poland between 25th February 2017 to 24th May 2022. Centers were allocated to regions of <100km and >100km of the Polish-Ukraine border. Mixed effect generalized linear regression models with random effects per hospital were used to explore the associations between the war in Ukraine starting with several outcomes of interest, and whether these associations differed across regions of 100km from the Polish-Ukraine border.

RESULTS

A total of 90,115 procedures were included in the analysis. The average number of procedures per-month was similar to predicted volume for centers in the >100km region, while the average number of PCI was higher than expected (by an estimated 15 (11-19)) for the <100km region. There was no difference in adjusted fatality rate or quality of care outcomes pre- vs. during-war in both <100 and >100 km regions, with no evidence of a difference-in-difference across regions.

CONCLUSIONS

Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there was only a modest and temporary increase in primary PCI predominantly in centers situated within 100km of the border, although no significant impact on in-hospital fatality rate.

Health Equity Adjustment and Hospital Performance in the Medicare Value-Based Purchasing Program

Importance

Medicare's Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) program will provide a health equity adjustment (HEA) to hospitals that have greater proportions of patients dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid and that offer high-quality care beginning in fiscal year 2026. However, which hospitals will benefit most from this policy change and to what extent are unknown.

Objective

To estimate potential changes in hospital performance after HEA and examine hospital patient mix, structural, and geographic characteristics associated with receipt of increased payments.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study analyzed all 2676 hospitals participating in the HVBP program in fiscal year 2021. Publicly available data on program performance and hospital characteristics were linked to Medicare claims data on all inpatient stays for dual-eligible beneficiaries at each hospital to calculate HEA points and HVBP payment adjustments.

Exposures

Hospital Value-Based Purchasing program HEA.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Reclassification of HVBP bonus or penalty status and changes in payment adjustments across hospital characteristics.

Results

Of 2676 hospitals participating in the HVBP program in fiscal year 2021, 1470 (54.9%) received bonuses and 1206 (45.1%) received penalties. After HEA, 102 hospitals (6.9%) were reclassified from bonus to penalty status, whereas 119 (9.9%) were reclassified from penalty to bonus status. At the hospital level, mean (SD) HVBP payment adjustments decreased by $4534 ($90 033) after HEA, ranging from a maximum reduction of $1 014 276 to a maximum increase of $1 523 765. At the aggregate level, net-positive changes in payment adjustments were largest among safety net hospitals ($28 971 708) and those caring for a higher proportion of Black patients ($15 468 445). The likelihood of experiencing increases in payment adjustments was significantly higher among safety net compared with non-safety net hospitals (574 of 683 [84.0%] vs 709 of 1993 [35.6%]; adjusted rate ratio [ARR], 2.04 [95% CI, 1.89-2.20]) and high-proportion Black hospitals compared with non-high-proportion Black hospitals (396 of 523 [75.7%] vs 887 of 2153 [41.2%]; ARR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.29-1.51]). Rural hospitals (374 of 612 [61.1%] vs 909 of 2064 [44.0%]; ARR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.30-1.58]), as well as those located in the South (598 of 1040 [57.5%] vs 192 of 439 [43.7%]; ARR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.10-1.42]) and in Medicaid expansion states (801 of 1651 [48.5%] vs 482 of 1025 [47.0%]; ARR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.06-1.28]), were also more likely to experience increased payment adjustments after HEA compared with their urban, Northeastern, and Medicaid nonexpansion state counterparts, respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

Medicare's implementation of HEA in the HVBP program will significantly reclassify hospital performance and redistribute program payments, with safety net and high-proportion Black hospitals benefiting most from this policy change. These findings suggest that HEA is an important strategy to ensure that value-based payment programs are more equitable.

Community Socioeconomic Status, Acute Cardiovascular Hospitalizations, and Mortality in Medicare, 2003 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Socioeconomically disadvantaged communities in the United States disproportionately experience poor cardiovascular outcomes. Little is known about how hospitalizations and mortality for acute cardiovascular conditions have changed among Medicare beneficiaries in socioeconomically disadvantaged and nondisadvantaged communities over the past 2 decades.

METHODS

Medicare files were linked with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's social vulnerability index to examine age-sex standardized hospitalizations for myocardial infarction, heart failure, ischemic stroke, and pulmonary embolism among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries ≥65 years of age residing in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities (highest social vulnerability index quintile nationally) and nondisadvantaged communities (all other quintiles) from 2003 to 2019, as well as risk-adjusted 30-day mortality among hospitalized beneficiaries.

RESULTS

A total of 10 942 483 Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years of age were hospitalized for myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, or pulmonary embolism (mean age, 79.2 [SD, 8.7] years; 53.9% female). Although age-sex standardized myocardial infarction hospitalizations declined in socioeconomically disadvantaged (990-650 per 100 000) and nondisadvantaged communities (950-570 per 100 000) from 2003 to 2019, the gap in hospitalizations between these groups significantly widened (adjusted odds ratio 2003, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.02-1.04]; adjusted odds ratio 2019, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.13-1.16]). There was a similar decline in hospitalizations for heart failure in socioeconomically disadvantaged (2063-1559 per 100 000) and nondisadvantaged communities (1767-1385 per 100 000), as well as for ischemic stroke, but the relative gap did not change for both conditions. In contrast, pulmonary embolism hospitalizations increased in both disadvantaged (146-184 per 100 000) and nondisadvantaged communities (153-184 per 100 000). By 2019, risk-adjusted 30-day mortality was similar between hospitalized beneficiaries from socioeconomically disadvantaged and nondisadvantaged communities for myocardial infarction, heart failure, and ischemic stroke but was higher for pulmonary embolism (odds ratio, 1.10 [95% CI, 1.01-1.20]).

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past 2 decades, hospitalizations for most acute cardiovascular conditions decreased in both socioeconomically disadvantaged and nondisadvantaged communities, although significant disparities remain, while 30-day mortality is now similar across most conditions.

Cardiovascular Health, Lifestyle Factors, and Social Determinants in Asian Subpopulations in the United States

Asian Americans are often aggregated in national public health surveillance efforts, which may conceal important differences in the health status of subgroups that are included in this highly diverse population. Little is known about how cardiovascular health varies across Asian subpopulations and the extent to which lifestyle and social risk factors contribute to any observed differences. This national study used data from the National Health Interview Survey to evaluate the burden of cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus) and cardiovascular diseases (heart attack, coronary heart disease, angina, stroke) across Asian groups (Chinese, Asian Indian, Filipino, Other Asian), and determine whether differences are related to lifestyle factors and/or social determinants of health. The weighted study population included 13,592,178 Asian adults. Filipino adults were more likely to have hypertension than Chinese adults (29.4% vs 15.4%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.40, 95% confidence interval [1.91 to 3.02]), as were Asian Indians (15.7%; OR 1.59 [1.25 to 2.02]). These patterns were similar for hyperlipidemia and diabetes mellitus. For cardiovascular diseases, Filipino adults were significantly more likely to have coronary heart disease (4.2% vs 1.9%; OR 2.19 [1.32 to 3.56]), heart attack (2.6% vs 0.9%; OR 2.79 [1.44 to 5.41]), angina (1.8% vs 0.9%; OR 2.15 [1.06 to 4.32]), and stroke (2.1% vs 0.8%; OR 2.54 [1.42 to 4.55]) compared with Chinese adults, whereas there were no differences compared with Asian Indian adults. Adjustments for lifestyle factors and social determinants completely attenuated differences in coronary heart disease, heart attack, and angina among subpopulations. In conclusion, these findings demonstrate that cardiovascular risk factors and diseases vary significantly across Asian subpopulations, with Filipino adults experiencing the highest burden and Chinese adults the lowest, and that differences in cardiovascular disease are largely attenuated after adjustment for lifestyle and social determinants.

Cardiovascular hospitalizations and mortality among adults aged 25-64 years in the USA

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Declines in cardiovascular mortality have stagnated in the USA since 2011. There is growing concern that these patterns reflect worsening cardiovascular health in younger adults. However, little is known about how the burden of acute cardiovascular hospitalizations and mortality has changed in this population. Changes in cardiovascular hospitalizations and mortality among adults aged 25-64 years were evaluated, overall and by community-level income.

METHODS

Using the National Inpatient Sample, age-standardized annual hospitalization and in-hospital mortality rates for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure, and ischaemic stroke were determined among adults aged 25-64 years. Quasi-Poisson and quasi-binominal regression models were fitted to compare outcomes between individuals residing in low- and higher-income communities.

RESULTS

Between 2008 and 2019, age-standardized hospitalization rates for AMI increased among younger adults from 155.0 (95% confidence interval: 154.6, 155.4) per 100 000 to 160.7 (160.3, 161.1) per 100 000 (absolute change +5.7 [5.0, 6.3], P < .001). Heart failure hospitalizations also increased (165.3 [164.8, 165.7] to 225.3 [224.8, 225.8], absolute change +60.0 (59.3, 60.6), P < .001), as ischaemic stroke hospitalizations (76.3 [76.1, 76.7] to 108.1 [107.8, 108.5], absolute change +31.7 (31.2, 32.2), P < .001). Across all conditions, hospitalizations rates were significantly higher among younger adults residing in low-income compared with higher-income communities, and disparities did not narrow between groups. In-hospital mortality decreased for all conditions over the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

There was an alarming increase in cardiovascular hospitalizations among younger adults in the USA from 2008 to 2019, and disparities between those residing in low- and higher-income communities did not narrow.

Bundled Payments for Care Improvement and Quality of Care and Outcomes in Heart Failure

Importance

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) program was launched in 2013 with a goal to improve care quality while lowering costs to Medicare.

Objective

To compare changes in the quality and outcomes of care for patients hospitalized with heart failure according to hospital participation in the BPCI program.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used a difference-in-difference approach to evaluate the BPCI program in 18 BPCI hospitals vs 211 same-state non-BPCI hospitals for various process-of-care measures and outcomes using American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry and CMS Medicare claims data from November 1, 2008, to August 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from May 2022 to May 2023.

Exposures

Hospital participation in CMS BPCI Model 2 Heart Failure, which paid hospitals in a fee-for-service process and then shared savings or required reimbursement depending on how the total cost of an episode of care compared with a target price.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary end points included 7 quality-of-care measures. Secondary end points included 9 outcome measures, including in-hospital mortality and hospital-level risk-adjusted 30-day and 90-day all-cause readmission rate and mortality rate.

Results

During the study period, 8721 patients were hospitalized in the 23 BPCI hospitals and 94 530 patients were hospitalized in the 224 same-state non-BPCI hospitals. Less than a third of patients (30 723 patients, 29.8%) were 75 years or younger; 54 629 (52.9%) were female, and 48 622 (47.1%) were male. Hospital participation in BPCI Model 2 was not associated with significant differential changes in the odds of various process-of-care measures, except for a decreased odds of evidence-based β-blocker at discharge (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41-0.98; P = .04). Participation in the BPCI was not associated with a significant differential change in the odds of receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors at discharge, receiving an aldosterone antagonist at discharge, having a cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT)-defibrillator or CRT pacemaker placed or prescribed at discharge, having implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) counseling or an ICD placed or prescribed at discharge, heart failure education being provided among eligible patients, or having a follow-up visit within 7 days or less. Participation in the BPCI was associated with a significant decrease in odds of in-hospital mortality (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51-0.86; P = .002). Participation was not associated with a significant differential change in hospital-level risk-adjusted 30-day or 90-day all-cause readmission rate and 30-day or 90-day all-cause mortality rate.

Conclusion and Relevance

In this study, hospital participation in the BPCI Model 2 Heart Failure program was not associated with improvement in process-of-care quality measures or 30-day or 90-day risk-adjusted all-cause mortality and readmission rates.

Changes in Health Care Access and Preventive Health Screenings by Race and Ethnicity

Importance

The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented disruptions in health care. Little is known about whether health care access and preventive health screenings among US adults have recovered to prepandemic levels, and how patterns varied by race and ethnicity.

Objective

To evaluate health care access and preventive health screenings among eligible US adults in 2021 and 2022 compared with prepandemic year 2019, overall and by race and ethnicity.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used data from US adults aged 18 years or older who participated in the National Health Interview Survey in 2021 and 2022. Survey weights provided by the National Health Interview Survey were used to generate nationally representative estimates. Data were analyzed from May 23 to November 13, 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Measures of health care access included the proportion of adults with a usual place for care, those with a wellness visit, and those who delayed or did not receive medical care due to cost within the past year. Preventive health screening measures included eligible adults who received blood pressure, cholesterol, or blood glucose screening within the past year (2021), as well as colorectal, cervical, breast, and prostate cancer screenings based on US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines.

Results

The unweighted study population included 89 130 US adults. The weighted population included 51.6% females; 16.8% Hispanic, 5.9% non-Hispanic Asian (hereafter, Asian), 11.8% non-Hispanic Black (hereafter, Black), 62.8% non-Hispanic White (hereafter, White) individuals; and 2.9% individuals of other races and ethnicities (including American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, or multiracial). After adjusting for age and sex, having a usual place for health care did not differ among adults in 2021 or 2022 vs 2019 (adjusted rate ratio [ARR] for each year, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.99-1.01). However, fewer participants had wellness visits in 2022 compared with 2019 (ARR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99), with the most pronounced decline among Asian adults (ARR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92-0.98). In addition, adults were less likely to delay medical care (ARR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.73-0.87) or to not receive care (ARR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69-0.83) due to cost in 2022 vs 2019. Preventive health screenings in 2021 remained below 2019 levels (blood pressure: ARR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.94-0.96]; blood glucose: ARR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.93-0.96]; and cholesterol: ARR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.92-0.94]). Eligible adults were also significantly less likely to receive colorectal cancer screening (ARR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.81-0.94), cervical cancer screening (ARR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.83-0.89), breast cancer screening (ARR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.97), and prostate cancer screening (ARR, 0.86 [0.78-0.94]) in 2021 vs 2019. Asian adults experienced the largest relative decreases across most preventive screenings, while Black and Hispanic adults experienced large declines in colorectal cancer screening (ARR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67-0.91) and breast cancer screening (ARR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.91), respectively. Differences in preventive screening rates across years persisted after additional adjustment for socioeconomic factors (income, employment status, and insurance coverage).

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this cohort study suggest that, in the US, wellness visits and preventive health screenings have not returned to prepandemic levels. These findings support the need for public health efforts to increase the use of preventive health screenings among eligible US adults.

Neighborhood Environmental Burden and Cardiovascular Health in the US

Importance

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in the US. However, little is known about the association between cumulative environmental burden and cardiovascular health across US neighborhoods.

Objective

To evaluate the association of neighborhood-level environmental burden with prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and diseases, overall and by levels of social vulnerability.

Design, Settings, and Participants

This was a national cross-sectional study of 71 659 US Census tracts. Environmental burden (EBI) and social vulnerability indices from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry were linked to the 2020 CDC PLACES data set. Data were analyzed from March to October 2023.

Exposures

The EBI, a measure of cumulative environmental burden encompassing 5 domains (air pollution, hazardous or toxic sites, built environment, transportation infrastructure, and water pollution).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Neighborhood-level prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, diabetes, and obesity) and cardiovascular diseases (coronary heart disease and stroke).

Results

Across the US, neighborhoods with the highest environmental burden (top EBI quartile) were more likely than those with the lowest environmental burden (bottom EBI quartile) to be urban (16 626 [92.7%] vs 13 414 [75.4%]), in the Midwest (5191 [28.9%] vs 2782 [15.6%]), have greater median (IQR) social vulnerability scores (0.64 [0.36-0.85] vs 0.42 [0.20-0.65]), and have higher proportions of adults in racial or ethnic minority groups (median [IQR], 34% [12-73] vs 12% [5-30]). After adjustment, neighborhoods with the highest environmental burden had significantly higher rates of cardiovascular risk factors than those with the lowest burden, including hypertension (mean [SD], 32.83% [7.99] vs 32.14% [6.99]; adjusted difference, 0.84%; 95% CI, 0.71-0.98), diabetes (mean [SD], 12.19% [4.33] vs 10.68% [3.27]; adjusted difference, 0.62%; 95% CI, 0.53-0.70), and obesity (mean [SD], 33.57% [7.62] vs 30.86% [6.15]; adjusted difference, 0.77%; 95% CI, 0.60-0.94). Similarly, neighborhoods with the highest environmental burden had significantly higher rates of coronary heart disease (mean [SD], 6.66% [2.15] vs 6.82% [2.41]; adjusted difference, 0.28%; 95% CI, 0.22-0.33) and stroke (mean [SD], 3.65% [1.47] vs 3.31% [1.12]; adjusted difference, 0.19%; 95% CI, 0.15-0.22). Results were consistent after matching highest and lowest environmentally burdened neighborhoods geospatially and based on other covariates. The associations between environmental burden quartiles and cardiovascular risk factors and diseases were most pronounced among socially vulnerable neighborhoods.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study of US neighborhoods, cumulative environmental burden was associated with higher rates of cardiovascular risk factors and diseases, although absolute differences were small. The strongest associations were observed in socially vulnerable neighborhoods. Whether initiatives that address poor environmental conditions will improve cardiovascular health requires additional prospective investigations.

IV Diuresis in Alternative Treatment Settings for the Management of Heart Failure: Implications for Mortality, Hospitalizations and Cost

BACKGROUND

Recent advances in heart failure (HF) care have sought to shift management from inpatient to outpatient and observation settings. We evaluated the association among HF treatment in the (1) inpatient; (2) observation; (3) emergency department (ED); and (4) outpatient settings with 30-day mortality, hospitalizations and cost.

METHODS

Using 100% Medicare inpatient, outpatient and Part B files from 2011-2018, 1,534,708 unique patient encounters in which intravenous (IV) diuretics were received for a primary diagnosis of HF were identified. Encounters were sorted into mutually exclusive settings: (1) inpatient; (2) observation; (3) ED; or (4) outpatient IV diuretic clinic. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included 30-day hospitalization and total 30-day costs. Multivariable logistic and linear regression were used to examine the association between treatment location and the primary and secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Patients treated in observation and outpatient settings had lower 30-day mortality rates (observation OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.66-0.69; P < 0.001; outpatient OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.51-0.55; P < 0.001) compared to those treated in inpatient settings. Observation and outpatient treatment were also associated with decreased 30-day total cost compared to inpatient treatment. Observation relative cost -$5528.77, 95% CI -$5613.63 to -$5443.92; outpatient relative cost -$7005.95; 95% CI -$7103.94 to -$6907.96). Patients treated in the emergency department and discharged had increased mortality rates (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.13-1.17; P < 0.001) and increased rates of hospitalization (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.70-1.73; P < 0.001) compared to patients treated as inpatients.

CONCLUSIONS

Medicare beneficiaries who received IV diuresis for acute HF in the outpatient and observation settings had lower mortality rates and decreased costs of care compared to patients treated as inpatients. Outpatient and observation management of acute decompensated HF, when available, is a safe and cost-effective strategy in certain populations of patients with HF.

Medicare's Value-Based Purchasing And 30-Day Mortality At Hospitals Caring For High Proportions Of Black Adults

The care of Black adults is highly concentrated at a limited set of US hospitals that often have limited resources. In 2011, the Medicare Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program began financially penalizing or rewarding hospitals based on thirty-day mortality rates for target conditions (myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia). Because the VBP Program has disproportionately penalized resource-constrained hospitals caring for high proportions of Black adults since its implementation in 2011, clinicians, health system leaders, and policy makers have worried that the program may unintentionally be widening racial disparities in health outcomes. Using Medicare claims for beneficiaries ages sixty-five and older who were hospitalized for three target conditions at 2,908 US hospitals participating in the VBP Program, we found that thirty-day mortality rates were consistently higher for two of three conditions at hospitals with high proportions of Black adults compared with other hospitals. There was no evidence of a differential change in thirty-day mortality among all Medicare beneficiaries with targeted conditions at high-proportion Black hospitals versus other hospitals seven years after the implementation of the VBP Program. However, gaps in mortality between these sites did widen in the subgroup of Black adults with pneumonia. These findings highlight that important concerns remain about the regressive nature and equity implications of national pay-for-performance programs.

Impact of Intensity of Vascular Care Preceding Major Amputation Among Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia

BACKGROUND

Lower-limb amputation rates in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia vary across the United States, with marked disparities in amputation rates by gender, race, and income status. We evaluated the association of patient, hospital, and geographic characteristics with the intensity of vascular care received the year before a major lower-limb amputation and how intensity of care associates with outcomes after amputation.

METHODS

Using Medicare claims data (2016-2019), beneficiaries diagnosed with chronic limb-threatening ischemia who underwent a major lower-limb amputation were identified. We examined patient, hospital, and geographic characteristics associated with the intensity of vascular care received the year before amputation. Secondary objectives evaluated all-cause mortality and adverse events following amputation.

RESULTS

Of 33 036 total Medicare beneficiaries undergoing major amputation, 7885 (23.9%) were due to chronic limb-threatening ischemia; of these, 4988 (63.3%) received low-intensity and 2897 (36.7%) received high-intensity vascular care. Mean age, 76.6 years; women, 38.9%; Black adults, 24.5%; and of low income, 35.2%. After multivariable adjustment, those of low income (odds ratio, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.58-0.72]; P<0.001), and to a lesser extent, men (odds ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.81-0.98]; P=0.019), and those who received care at a safety-net hospital (odds ratio, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.78-0.97]; P=0.012) were most likely to receive low intensity of care before amputation. High-intensity care was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality 2 years following amputation (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.74-0.85]; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who were of low-income status, and to a lesser extent, men, or those cared for at safety-net hospitals were most likely to receive low-intensity vascular care. Low-intensity care was associated with worse long-term event-free survival. These data emphasize the continued disparities that exist in contemporary vascular practice.

Health Care Access and Cardiovascular Risk Factor Management Among Working-Age US Adults During the Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Low-income working-age US adults disproportionately experienced health care disruptions at the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Little is known about how health care access and cardiovascular risk factor management changed as the pandemic went on or if patterns differed by state Medicaid expansion status.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data from the behavioral risk factor surveillance system were used to compare self-reported measures of health care access and cardiovascular risk factor management among US adults aged 18 to 64 years in 2021 (pandemic) to 2019 (prepandemic) using multivariable Poisson regression models. We assessed differential changes between low-income (<138% federal poverty level) and high-income (>400% federal poverty level) working-age adults by including an interaction term for income group and year. We then evaluated changes among low-income adults in Medicaid expansion versus nonexpansion states using a similar approach.

RESULTS

The unweighted study population included 80 767 low-income and 184 136 high-income adults. Low-income adults experienced improvements in insurance coverage (relative risk [RR], 1.10 [95% CI, 1.08-1.12]), access to a provider (RR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.09-1.14]), and ability to afford care (RR, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.05-1.09]) in 2021 compared with 2019. While these measures also improved for high-income adults, gains in coverage and ability to afford care were more pronounced among low-income adults. However, routine visits (RR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.94-0.98]) and cholesterol testing (RR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.91-0.96]) decreased for low-income adults, while diabetes screening (RR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.95-1.08]) remained stable. Treatment for hypertension (RR, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.02-1.08]) increased, and diabetes-focused visits and insulin use remained stable. These patterns were similar for high-income adults. Across most outcomes, there were no differential changes between low-income adults residing in Medicaid expansion versus nonexpansion states.

CONCLUSIONS

In this national study of working-age adults in the United States, measures of health care access improved for low- and high-income adults in 2021. However, routine outpatient visits and cardiovascular risk factor screening did not return to prepandemic levels, while risk factor treatment remained stable. As many coronavirus disease-era safety net policies come to an end, targeted strategies are needed to protect health care access and improve cardiovascular risk factor screening for working-age adults.

Cardiovascular Health of Middle-Aged U.S. Adults by Income Level, 1999 to March 2020 : A Serial Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Although cardiovascular mortality has increased among middle-aged U.S. adults since 2011, how the burden of cardiovascular risk factors has changed for this population by income level over the past 2 decades is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate trends in the prevalence, treatment, and control of cardiovascular risk factors among low-income and higher-income middle-aged adults and how social determinants contribute to recent associations between income and cardiovascular health.

DESIGN

Serial cross-sectional study.

SETTING

NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey), 1999 to March 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

Middle-aged adults (aged 40 to 64 years).

MEASUREMENTS

Age-standardized prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, obesity, and cigarette use; treatment rates for hypertension, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia; and rates of blood pressure, glycemic, and cholesterol control.

RESULTS

The study population included 20 761 middle-aged adults. The prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, and cigarette use was consistently higher among low-income adults between 1999 and March 2020. Low-income adults had an increase in hypertension over the study period (37.2% [95% CI, 33.5% to 40.9%] to 44.7% [CI, 39.8% to 49.5%]) but no changes in diabetes or obesity. In contrast, higher-income adults did not have a change in hypertension but had increases in diabetes (7.8% [CI, 5.0% to 10.6%] to 14.9% [CI, 12.4% to 17.3%]) and obesity (33.0% [CI, 26.7% to 39.4%] to 44.0% [CI, 40.2% to 47.7%]). Cigarette use was high and stagnant among low-income adults (33.2% [CI, 28.4% to 38.0%] to 33.9% [CI, 29.6% to 38.3%]) but decreased among their higher-income counterparts (18.6% [CI, 13.5% to 23.7%] to 11.5% [CI, 8.7% to 14.3%]). Treatment and control rates for hypertension were unchanged in both groups (>80%), whereas diabetes treatment rates improved only among the higher-income group (58.4% [CI, 44.4% to 72.5%] to 77.4% [CI, 67.6% to 87.1%]). Income-based disparities in hypertension, diabetes, and cigarette use persisted in more recent years even after adjustment for insurance coverage, health care access, and food insecurity.

LIMITATION

Sample size limitations could preclude detection of small changes in treatment and control rates.

CONCLUSION

Over 2 decades in the United States, hypertension increased in low-income middle-aged adults, whereas diabetes and obesity increased in their higher-income counterparts. Income-based disparities in hypertension, diabetes, and smoking persisted even after adjustment for other social determinants of health.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health.

The Inflation Reduction Act and Access to High-Cost Cardiovascular Therapies

This Viewpoint discusses how the price negotiation for certain drugs under the Inflation Reduction Act will provide a unique opportunity to enhance access to therapies for older patients with cardiovascular conditions and diabetes.

Cardiovascular hospitalizations for Medicare advantage beneficiaries in the United States, 2009 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Federal programs measuring hospital quality of care for acute cardiovascular conditions are based solely on Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries, and exclude Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries. In this study we characterize the proportion of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in MA at the time of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), and ischemic stroke hospitalization.

METHODS

Retrospective cross-sectional study of short-term acute care hospitals using Medicare claims in 2009 and 2019.

RESULTS

There were 2,653 hospitals in 2009 and 2,732 hospitals in 2019. Across hospitals, the proportion of Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for AMI who were enrolled in MA increased between 2009 (hospital-level median 14.4% [IQR 5.1%-26.0%]) and 2019 (33.3% [IQR 20.6%-45.2%]), with substantial variation across hospitals. Similar patterns were observed for HF (13.0% [IQR 5.3%-24.3%] to 31.0% [IQR 20.2%-42.3%]) and ischemic stroke (14.6% [IQR 5.3%-26.7%] to 33.3% [IQR 20.9%-46.0%]). Within each hospital referral region, hospital size (large 36.3% vs small 24.5%; adjusted difference 6.7%, 95% CI, 4.5%-8.8%), teaching status (teaching 34.5% vs nonteaching 28.2%; 2.8%, 1.4%-4.1%), and ownership status (private nonprofit 32.3% vs public 24.5%; 5.2%, 3.5%-6.9%) were each associated with a higher hospital MA proportion.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for AMI, HF, and ischemic stroke enrolled in MA doubled between 2009 and 2019, with substantial variation across hospitals. These findings have implications for federal efforts to measure and improve quality, which currently focus only on FFS beneficiaries.

Pharmaco-disparities in heart failure: a survey of the affordability of guideline recommended therapy in 10 countries

AIMS

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is treatable but guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) may not be affordable or accessible to people living with the disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this cross-sectional survey, we investigated the price, affordability, and accessibility of four pivotal classes of HFrEF GDMT: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) or angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI); beta-blockers; mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA); and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). We sampled online or community pharmacies in 10 countries across a range of World Bank income groups, assessing mean 30 day retail prescription prices, affordability relative to gross national income per capita per month, and accessibility. We reported median price ratios relative to the International Reference Standard. We performed a literature review to evaluate accessibility to GDMT classes through publicly funded drug programmes in each country. HFrEF GDMT prices, both absolute and relative to the international reference, were highest in the United States and lowest in Pakistan and Bangladesh. The most expensive drug was the ARNI, sacubitril/valsartan, with a mean (standard deviation, SD) 30 day price ranging from $11.06 (0.81) in Pakistan to $611.50 (3.54) in United States. The least expensive drug was the MRA, spironolactone, with a mean (SD) 30 day price ranging from $0.18 (0.00) in Pakistan to $12.32 (0.00) in England. Affordability (SD) of quadruple therapy-ARNI, beta-blockers, MRA, and SGLT2i-was best in high-income and worst in low-income countries, ranging from 1.49 (0.00)% of gross national income per capita per month in England to 232.47 (31.47)% in Uganda. Publicly funded drug programmes offset costs for eligible patients, but ARNI and SGLT2i were inaccessible through these programmes in low- and middle-income countries. Price, affordability, and access were substantially improved in all countries by substituting ARNI for ACEi/ARB.

CONCLUSIONS

There was marked variation between countries in the retail price of HFrEF GDMT. Despite higher prices in high-income countries, GDMT was more accessible and affordable than in low- and middle-income countries. Publicly funded drug programmes in lower income countries increased affordability but limited access to newer HFrEF GDMT classes. Pharmaco-disparities must be addressed to improve HFrEF outcomes globally.

Long term risk of death and readmission after hospital admission with covid-19 among older adults: retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To characterize the long term risk of death and hospital readmission after an index admission with covid-19 among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, and to compare these outcomes with historical control patients admitted to hospital with influenza.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

United States.

PARTICIPANTS

883 394 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries age ≥65 years discharged alive after an index hospital admission with covid-19 between 1 March 2020 and 31 August 2022, compared with 56 409 historical controls discharged alive after a hospital admission with influenza between 1 March 2018 and 31 August 2019. Weighting methods were used to account for differences in observed characteristics.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

All cause death within 180 days of discharge. Secondary outcomes included first all cause readmission and a composite of death or readmission within 180 days.

RESULTS

The covid-19 cohort compared with the influenza cohort was younger (77.9 v 78.9 years, standardized mean difference -0.12) and had a lower proportion of women (51.7% v 57.3%, -0.11). Both groups had a similar proportion of black beneficiaries (10.3% v 8.1%, 0.07) and beneficiaries with dual Medicaid-Medicare eligibility status (20.1% v 19.2%; 0.02). The covid-19 cohort had a lower comorbidity burden, including atrial fibrillation (24.3% v 29.5%, -0.12), heart failure (43.4% v 49.9%, -0.13), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (39.2% v 52.9%, -0.27). After weighting, the covid-19 cohort had a higher risk (ie, cumulative incidence) of all cause death at 30 days (10.9% v 3.9%; standardized risk difference 7.0%, 95% confidence interval 6.8% to 7.2%), 90 days (15.5% v 7.1%; 8.4%, 8.2% to 8.7%), and 180 days (19.1% v 10.5%; 8.6%, 8.3% to 8.9%) compared with the influenza cohort. The covid-19 cohort also experienced a higher risk of hospital readmission at 30 days (16.0% v 11.2%; 4.9%, 4.6% to 5.1%) and 90 days (24.1% v 21.3%; 2.8%, 2.5% to 3.2%) but a similar risk at 180 days (30.6% v 30.6%;-0.1%, -0.5% to 0.3%). Over the study period, the 30 day risk of death for patients discharged after a covid-19 admission decreased from 17.9% to 7.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Medicare beneficiaries who were discharged alive after a covid-19 hospital admission had a higher post-discharge risk of death compared with historical influenza controls; this difference, however, was concentrated in the early post-discharge period. The risk of death for patients discharged after a covid-19 related hospital admission substantially declined over the course of the pandemic.

Value-Based Payment for Clinicians Treating Cardiovascular Disease: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association

Clinician payment is transitioning from fee-for-service to value-based payment, with reimbursement tied to health care quality and cost. However, the overarching goals of value-based payment-to improve health care quality, lower costs, or both-have been largely unmet. This policy statement reviews the current state of value-based payment and provides recommended best practices for future design and implementation. The policy statement is divided into sections that detail different aspects of value-based payment: (1) key program design features (patient population, quality measurement, cost measurement, and risk adjustment), (2) the role of equity during design and evaluation, (3) adjustment of payment, and (4) program implementation and evaluation. Each section introduces the topic, describes important considerations, and lists examples from existing programs. Each section includes recommended best practices for future program design. The policy statement highlights 4 key themes for successful value-based payment. First, programs should carefully weigh the incentives between lowering cost and improving quality of care and ensure that there is adequate focus on quality of care. Second, the expansion of value-based payment should be a tool for improving equity, which is central to quality of care and should be a focal point of program design and evaluation. Third, value-based payment should continue to move away from fee for service toward more flexible funding that allows clinicians to focus resources on the interventions that best help patients. Last, successful programs should find ways to channel clinicians' intrinsic motivation to improve their performance and the care for their patients. These principles should guide the future development of clinician value-based payment models.

Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes for Patients With Heart Failure at Hospitals Caring for a High Proportion of Black Adults: Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure Registry

Importance

Black adults with heart failure (HF) disproportionately experience higher population-level mortality than White adults with HF. Whether quality of care for HF differs at hospitals with high proportions of Black patients compared with other hospitals is unknown.

Objective

To compare quality and outcomes for patients with HF at hospitals with high proportions of Black patients vs other hospitals.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Patients hospitalized for HF at Get With The Guidelines (GWTG) HF sites from January 1, 2016, through December 1, 2019. These data were analyzed from May 2022 through November 2022.

Exposures

Hospitals caring for high proportions of Black patients.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Quality of HF care based on 14 evidence-based measures, overall defect-free HF care, and 30-day readmissions and mortality in Medicare patients.

Results

This study included 422 483 patients (224 270 male [53.1%] and 284 618 White [67.4%]) with a mean age of 73.0 years. Among 480 hospitals participating in GWTG-HF, 96 were classified as hospitals with high proportions of Black patients. Quality of care was similar between hospitals with high proportions of Black patients compared with other hospitals for 11 of 14 GWTG-HF measures, including use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors for left ventricle systolic dysfunction (high-proportion Black hospitals: 92.7% vs other hospitals: 92.4%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.65-1.27), evidence-based β-blockers (94.7% vs 93.7%; OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.82-1.28), angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors at discharge (14.3% vs 16.8%; OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.54-1.02), anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation/flutter (88.8% vs 87.5%; OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.76-1.45), and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator counseling/placement/prescription at discharge (70.9% vs 71.0%; OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.50-1.13). Patients at high-proportion Black hospitals were less likely to be discharged with a follow-up visit made within 7 days or less (70.4% vs 80.1%; OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53-0.86), receive cardiac resynchronization device placement/prescription (50.6% vs 53.8%; OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42-0.95), or an aldosterone antagonist (50.4% vs 53.5%; OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50-0.97). Overall defect-free HF care was similar between both groups of hospitals (82.6% vs 83.4%; OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.67-1.19) and there were no significant within-hospital differences in quality for Black patients vs White patients. Among Medicare beneficiaries, the risk-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for 30-day readmissions was higher at high-proportion Black vs other hospitals (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.02-1.26), but similar for 30-day mortality (HR 0.92; 95% CI,0.84-1.02).

Conclusions and Relevance

Quality of care for HF was similar across 11 of 14 measures at hospitals caring for high proportions of Black patients compared with other hospitals, as was overall defect-free HF care. There were no significant within-hospital differences in quality for Black patients vs White patients.

Association of Prescription Co-payment With Adherence to Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist and Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitor Therapies in Patients With Heart Failure and Diabetes

Importance

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and heart failure (HF) prevalence are rising in the US. Although glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) improve outcomes for these conditions, high out-of-pocket costs may be associated with reduced medication adherence.

Objective

To compare 1-year adherence to GLP1-RA and SGLT2i therapies by prescription co-payment level in individuals with T2D and/or HF.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used deidentified data from Optum Insight's Clinformatics Data Mart Database of enrollees with commercial and Medicare health insurance plans. Individuals aged 18 years or older with T2D and/or HF who had a prescription claim for a GLP1-RA or SLGT2i from January 1, 2014, to September 30, 2020, were included.

Exposures

Prescription co-payment, categorized as low (<$10), medium ($10 to<$50), and high (≥$50).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was medication adherence, defined as a proportion of days covered (PDC) of 80% or greater at 1 year. Logistic regression models were used to examine the association between co-payment and adherence, adjusting for patient demographics, medical comorbidities, and socioeconomic factors.

Results

A total of 94 610 individuals (mean [SD] age, 61.8 [11.4] years; 51 226 [54.1%] male) were prescribed GLP1-RA or SGLT2i therapy. Overall, 39 149 individuals had a claim for a GLP1-RA, of whom 25 557 (65.3%) had a PDC of 80% or greater at 1 year. In fully adjusted models, individuals with a medium (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.58-0.67) or high (AOR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.44-0.51) co-payment were less likely to have a PDC of 80% or greater with a GLP1-RA compared with those with a low co-payment. Overall, 51 072 individuals had a claim for an SGLT2i, of whom 37 339 (73.1%) had a PDC of 80% or greater at 1 year. Individuals with a medium (AOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.63-0.72) or high (AOR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.63-0.72) co-payment were less likely to have a PDC of 80% or greater with an SGLT2i compared with those with a low co-payment.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of individuals with T2D and/or HF, 1-year adherence to GLP1-RA or SGLT2i therapies was highest among individuals with a low co-payment. Improving adherence to guideline-based therapies may require interventions that reduce out-of-pocket prescription costs.

The Inflation Reduction Act and Out-of-Pocket Drug Costs for Medicare Beneficiaries With Cardiovascular Disease

BACKGROUND

High out-of-pocket costs can impede access to guideline-directed cardiovascular drugs. The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) will eliminate catastrophic coinsurance and cap annual out-of-pocket costs for Medicare Part D patients by 2025.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to estimate the IRA's impact on out-of-pocket costs for Part D beneficiaries with cardiovascular disease.

METHODS

The investigators chose 4 cardiovascular conditions that frequently require high-cost guideline-recommended drugs: severe hypercholesterolemia; heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF); HFrEF with atrial fibrillation (AF); and cardiac transthyretin amyloidosis. This study included 4,137 Part D plans nationwide and compared projected annual out-of-pocket drug costs for each condition in 2022 (baseline), 2023 (rollout), 2024 (5% catastrophic coinsurance eliminated), and 2025 ($2,000 cap on out-of-pocket costs).

RESULTS

In 2022, mean projected annual out-of-pocket costs were $1,629 for severe hypercholesterolemia, $2,758 for HFrEF, $3,259 for HFrEF with AF, and $14,978 for amyloidosis. In 2023, the initial IRA rollout will not significantly change out-of-pocket costs for the 4 conditions. In 2024, elimination of 5% catastrophic coinsurance will lower out-of-pocket costs for the 2 costliest conditions: HFrEF with AF ($2,855, 12% reduction) and amyloidosis ($3,468, 77% reduction). By 2025, the $2,000 cap will lower out-of-pocket costs for all 4 conditions to $1,491 for hypercholesterolemia (8% reduction), $1,954 for HFrEF (29% reduction), $2,000 for HFrEF with AF (39% reduction), and $2,000 for cardiac transthyretin amyloidosis (87% reduction).

CONCLUSIONS

The IRA will reduce Medicare beneficiaries' out-of-pocket drug costs for the selected cardiovascular conditions by 8% to 87%. Future studies should assess the IRA's impact on adherence to guideline-directed cardiovascular therapies and health outcomes.

Effect of Medicare Advantage on Hospital Readmission and Mortality Rankings

BACKGROUND

Medicare links hospital performance on readmissions and mortality to payment solely on the basis of outcomes among fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries. Whether including Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries, who account for nearly half of all Medicare beneficiaries, in the evaluation of hospital performance affects rankings is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if the inclusion of MA beneficiaries in readmission and mortality measures reclassifies hospital performance rankings compared with current measures.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

SETTING

Population-based.

PARTICIPANTS

Hospitals participating in the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program or Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program.

MEASUREMENTS

Using the 100% Medicare files for FFS and MA claims, the authors calculated 30-day risk-adjusted readmissions and mortality for acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and pneumonia on the basis of only FFS beneficiaries and then both FFS and MA beneficiaries. Hospitals were divided into quintiles of performance based on FFS beneficiaries only, and the proportion of hospitals that were reclassified to a different performance group with the inclusion of MA beneficiaries was calculated.

RESULTS

Of the hospitals in the top-performing quintile for readmissions and mortality based on FFS beneficiaries, between 21.6% and 30.2% were reclassified to a lower-performing quintile with the inclusion of MA beneficiaries. Similar proportions of hospitals were reclassified from the bottom performance quintile to a higher one across all measures and conditions. Hospitals with a higher proportion of MA beneficiaries were more likely to improve in performance rankings.

LIMITATION

Hospital performance measurement and risk adjustment differed slightly from those used by Medicare.

CONCLUSION

Approximately 1 in 4 top-performing hospitals is reclassified to a lower performance group when MA beneficiaries are included in the evaluation of hospital readmissions and mortality. These findings suggest that Medicare's current value-based programs provide an incomplete picture of hospital performance.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Laura and John Arnold Foundation.

Cardiovascular Risk Factor Prevalence, Treatment, and Control in US Adults Aged 20 to 44 Years, 2009 to March 2020

Importance

Declines in cardiovascular mortality have stagnated in the US over the past decade, in part related to worsening risk factor control in older adults. Little is known about how the prevalence, treatment, and control of cardiovascular risk factors have changed among young adults aged 20 to 44 years.

Objective

To determine if the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, obesity, and tobacco use), treatment rates, and control changed among adults aged 20 to 44 years from 2009 through March 2020, overall and by sex and race and ethnicity.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Serial cross-sectional analysis of adults aged 20 to 44 years in the US participating in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2009-2010 to 2017-March 2020).

Main Outcomes and Measures

National trends in the prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, obesity, and smoking history; treatment rates for hypertension and diabetes; and blood pressure and glycemic control in those receiving treatment.

Results

Among 12 924 US adults aged 20 to 44 years (mean age, 31.8 years; 50.6% women), the prevalence of hypertension was 9.3% (95% CI, 8.1%-10.5%) in 2009-2010 and 11.5% (95% CI, 9.6%-13.4%) in 2017-2020. The prevalence of diabetes (from 3.0% [95% CI, 2.2%-3.7%] to 4.1% [95% CI, 3.5%-4.7%]) and obesity (from 32.7% [95% CI, 30.1%-35.3%] to 40.9% [95% CI, 37.5%-44.3%]) increased from 2009-2010 to 2017-2020, while the prevalence of hyperlipidemia decreased (from 40.5% [95% CI, 38.6%-42.3%] to 36.1% [95% CI, 33.5%-38.7%]). Black adults had high rates of hypertension across the study period (2009-2010: 16.2% [95% CI, 14.0%-18.4%]; 2017-2020: 20.1% [95% CI, 16.8%-23.3%]), and significant increases in hypertension were observed among Mexican American adults (from 6.5% [95% CI, 5.0%-8.0%] to 9.5% [95% CI, 7.3%-11.7%]) and other Hispanic adults (from 4.4% [95% CI, 2.1%-6.8%] to 10.5% [95% CI, 6.8%-14.3%]), while Mexican American adults had a significant rise in diabetes (from 4.3% [95% CI, 2.3%-6.2%] to 7.5% [95% CI, 5.4%-9.6%]). The percentage of young adults treated for hypertension who achieved blood pressure control did not significantly change (from 65.0% [95% CI, 55.8%-74.2%] in 2009-2010 to 74.8% [95% CI, 67.5%-82.1%] in 2017-2020], while glycemic control among young adults receiving treatment for diabetes remained suboptimal throughout the study period (2009-2010: 45.5% [95% CI, 27.7%-63.3%]) to 2017-2020: 56.6% [95% CI, 39.2%-73.9%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

In the US, diabetes and obesity increased among young adults from 2009 to March 2020, while hypertension did not change and hyperlipidemia declined. There was variation in trends by race and ethnicity.

Effects of Medicare eligibility and enrollment at age 65 years on the use of high-value and low-value care

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effects of Medicare eligibility and enrollment on the use of high-value and low-value care services.

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

The 2002-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

STUDY DESIGN

We employed a regression discontinuity design, which exploits the discontinuity in eligibility for Medicare at age 65 and compares individuals just before and after age 65. Our primary outcomes included the use of high-value care services (eight services) and low-value care services (seven services). To examine the effects of Medicare eligibility, we conducted a regression discontinuity analysis. To examine the effects of Medicare enrollment, we used the discontinuity in the probability of having Medicare coverage around the age eligibility cutoff and conducted an instrumental variable analysis.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

N/A.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Medicare eligibility and enrollment led to statistically significant increases in the use of only two high-value services: cholesterol measurement [2.1 percentage points (95%: 0.4-3.7) (2.2% relative change) and 2.4 percentage points (95%: 0.4-4.4)] and receipt of the influenza vaccine [3.0 percentage points (95%: 0.3-5.6) (6.0% relative change) and 3.6 percentage points (95%: 0.4-6.8)]. Medicare eligibility and enrollment led to statistically significant increases in the use of two low-value services: antibiotics for acute upper respiratory infections [6.9 percentage points (95% CI: 0.8-13.0) (24.0% relative change) and 8.2 percentage points (95% CI: 0.8-15.5)] and radiographs for back pain [4.6 percentage points (95% CI: 0.1-9.2) (36.8% relative change) and 6.2 percentage points (95% CI: 0.1-12.3)]. However, there was no significant change in the use of other high-value and low-value care services.

CONCLUSION

Medicare eligibility and enrollment at age 65 years led to increases in the use of some high-value and low-value care services, but there were no changes in the use of the majority of other services. Policymakers should consider refining the Medicare program to enhance the value of care delivered.

Out-of-Pocket Drug Costs for Medicare Beneficiaries with Cardiovascular Risk Factors/Conditions Under the Inflation Reduction Act

BACKGROUND

High out-of-pocket prescription drug costs contribute to financial toxicity, medication nonadherence, and adverse cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. Policymakers recently passed the Inflation Reduction Act, which will cap Medicare out-of-pocket drug costs at $2,000/year and expand full low-income subsidies (LIS). It is unclear how these provisions will affect Medicare beneficiaries with CV risk factors and/or conditions.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to characterize the population of Medicare beneficiaries with CV risk factors/conditions experiencing out-of-pocket prescription drug costs >$2,000/year and estimate their potential savings under the Inflation Reduction Act's spending cap; identify sociodemographic characteristics associated with out-of-pocket costs >$2,000/year; and characterize beneficiaries newly eligible for LIS under the Inflation Reduction Act.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years with ≥1 CV risk factor/condition from 2016 to 2019.

RESULTS

An annual estimated 34,056,335 ± 855,653 Medicare beneficiaries (mean ± SE) had ≥1 CV risk factor/condition, of whom 1,020,484 ± 77,055 experienced out-of-pocket drug costs >$2,000/year. The likelihood of experiencing out-of-pocket drug costs >$2,000/year was lower among adults ≥75 years vs 65 to 74 years (adjusted OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.49-0.93) and for low-income vs higher-income adults. Among beneficiaries currently spending >$2,000/year, estimated median out-of-pocket drug savings would be $855/year and total annual savings $1,723,031,307 ± $91,150,609 under the Inflation Reduction Act. An estimated 1,289,861 beneficiaries would also become newly eligible for LIS.

CONCLUSIONS

More than 1 million older adults with CV risk factors and/or conditions spend >$2,000/year out-of-pocket on prescription drugs and will likely benefit from the Inflation Reduction Act's cap, with estimated total out-of-pocket savings of $1.7 billion/year, while another 1.3 million will also become newly eligible for LIS.

Association of Clinical Setting With Sociodemographics and Outcomes Following Endovascular Femoropopliteal Artery Revascularization in the United States

BACKGROUND

After the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services modified reimbursement rates for outpatient peripheral vascular intervention in 2008 with the intent of improving access to care, providers began to increasingly perform peripheral vascular interventions in privately owned office-based clinics. Little is known about the characteristics of patients treated in this setting and their long-term outcomes as compared with those treated in hospital-based centers.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, Medicare beneficiaries ≥66 years undergoing outpatient femoropopliteal peripheral vascular interventions in office-based clinics and hospital-based centers from 2015 to 2017 were identified. Sociodemographics, comorbidities, and institutional characteristics were compared across sites. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the adjusted associations between practice site location and outcomes. The primary outcome was the composite of major amputation or death analyzed through the end of follow-up.

RESULTS

Among 134 869 patients, 29.9% were treated in office-based clinics and 70.1% in hospital-based centers. Patients treated in office-based clinics were more often Black (16.9% versus 11.9%), dually enrolled in Medicaid (26.3% versus 19.6%), and residents of lower-resourced regions (32.6% versus 25.6%). Over a median follow-up time of 800 days (interquartile range, 531-1119 days), patients treated in office-based clinics had reduced risks of major amputation or death compared with outpatients treated in hospital-based centers (hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.89-0.95]). They also had lower adjusted all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.90-0.96]), major lower extremity amputation (hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.79-0.89]), and all-cause hospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.84-0.88]). These findings persisted after stratification by critical limb ischemia, race, dual enrollment, and regional socioeconomic status, as well as among operators treating patients in both clinical settings.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large nationwide analysis of Medicare beneficiaries, office-based clinics treated a more socioeconomically disadvantaged population compared with hospital-based centers. Long-term outcomes were comparable between locations. As such, these clinics appear to be selecting lower-risk patients for outpatient peripheral vascular interventions, although there remains the possibility of unmeasured confounding.

Has the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic reversed the trends in CV mortality between 1999-2019 in the United States?

Aims

Although cardiovascular (CV) mortality increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, little is known about how these patterns varied across key subgroups, include age, sex, and race and ethnicity, as well as by specific cause of CV death.

Methods and Results

The Centers for Disease Control WONDER database was used to evaluate trends in age-adjusted CV mortality between 1999 and 2020 among US adults aged 18 and older. Overall, there was a 4.6% excess CV mortality in 2020 compared to 2019, which represents an absolute excess of 62 802 deaths. The relative CV mortality increase between 2019 and 2020 was higher for adults under 55 years of age (11.9% relative increase), versus adults aged 55–74 (7.9% increase) and adults 75 and older (2.2% increase). Hispanic adults experienced a 9.4% increase in CV mortality (7 400 excess deaths) versus 4.3% for non-Hispanic adults (56 760 excess deaths). Black adults experienced the largest % increase in CV mortality at 10.6% (15 477 excess deaths) versus 3.5% increase (42 907 excess deaths) for White adults. Among individual causes of CV mortality, there was an increase between 2019 and 2020 of 4.3% for ischemic heart disease (32 293 excess deaths), 15.9% for hypertensive disease (13 800 excess deaths), 4.9% for cerebrovascular disease (11 218 excess deaths), but a decline of 1.4% for heart failure mortality.

Conclusion

The first year of the COVID pandemic in the United States was associated with a reversal in prior trends of improved CV mortality. Increases in CV mortality were most pronounced among Black and Hispanic adults.

Primary Care Physician Supply by County-Level Characteristics, 2010-2019

This study evaluates and compares US trends between 2010 and 2019 in per-capita primary care physician supply by county-level racial and ethnic minority concentration, poverty, rurality, and region.

Characterizing the Accuracy of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision Administrative Claims for Aortic Valve Disease

BACKGROUND

Administrative claims for aortic stenosis (AS) regurgitation may be useful, but their accuracy and ability to identify individuals at risk for valve-related outcomes have not been well characterized.

METHODS

Using echocardiographic (transthoracic echocardiogram [TTE]) reports linked to US Medicare claims, 2017 to 2018, the performance of candidate International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision claims to ascertain AS/aortic regurgitation was evaluated. The optimal performing algorithm was tested against outcomes at 1-year after TTE in a separate 100% sample of US Medicare claims, 2017 to 2019.

RESULTS

Of those included in the derivation (N=5497, mean age 74.4±11.0 years, 49.7% female), any AS or aortic regurgitation was present in 24% and 38.8%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision code I35.0 for identification of any AS was 53.1% and 94.8%, respectively. Among those with an I35.0 code, 40.3% had severe AS. Claims were unable to distinguish disease severity (ie, severe versus nonsevere) or subtype (eg, bicuspid or rheumatic AS), and were insensitive and nonspecific for aortic regurgitation of any severity. Among all beneficiaries who received a TTE (N=4 033 844), adjusting for age, sex, and 27 comorbidities, those with an I35.0 code had a higher adjusted risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.31-1.34]), heart failure hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.37 [95% CI, 1.34-1.41]), and aortic valve replacement (adjusted hazard ratio, 34.96 [95% CI, 33.74-36.22]).

CONCLUSIONS

Among US Medicare beneficiaries receiving a TTE, International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision claims, though identifying a population at significant greater risk of valve-related outcomes, failed to identify nearly half of individuals with AS and were unable to distinguish disease severity or subtype. These results argue against the widespread use of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision claims to screen for patients with AS and suggests the need for improved coding algorithms and alternative systems to extract TTE data for quality improvement and hospital benchmarking.

Medicare eligibility and healthcare access, affordability, and financial strain for low- and higher-income adults in the United States: A regression discontinuity analysis

BACKGROUND

US policymakers are debating whether to expand the Medicare program by lowering the age of eligibility. The goal of this study was to determine the association of Medicare eligibility and enrollment with healthcare access, affordability, and financial strain from medical bills in a contemporary population of low- and higher-income adults in the US.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We used cross-sectional data from the National Health Interview Survey (2019) to examine the association of Medicare eligibility and enrollment with outcomes by income status using a local randomization-based regression discontinuity approach. After weighting to account for survey sampling, the low-income group consisted of 1,660,188 adults age 64 years and 1,488,875 adults age 66 years, with similar baseline characteristics, including distribution of sex (59.2% versus 59.7% female) and education (10.8% versus 12.5% with bachelor's degree or higher). The higher-income group consisted of 2,110,995 adults age 64 years and 2,167,676 adults age 66 years, with similar distribution of baseline characteristics, including sex (40.0% versus 49.4% female) and education (41.0% versus 41.6%). The share of adults age 64 versus 66 years enrolled in Medicare differed within low-income (27.6% versus 87.8%, p < 0.001) and higher-income groups (8.0% versus 85.9%, p < 0.001). Medicare eligibility at 65 years was associated with a decreases in the percentage of low-income adults who delayed (14.7% to 6.2%; -8.5% [95% CI, -14.7%, -2.4%], P = 0.007) or avoided medical care (15.5% to 5.9%; -9.6% [-15.9%, -3.2%], P = 0.003) due to costs, and a larger decrease in the percentage who were worried about (66.5% to 51.1%; -15.4% [-25.4%, -5.4%], P = 0.003) or had problems (33.9% to 20.6%; -13.3% [-23.0%, -3.6%], P = 0.007) paying medical bills. In contrast, there were no significant associations between Medicare eligibility and measures of cost-related barriers to medication use. For higher-income adults, there was a large decrease in worrying about paying medical bills (40.5% to 27.5%; -13.0% [-21.4%, -4.5%], P = 0.003), a more modest decrease in avoiding medical care due to cost (3.5% to 0.6%; -2.9% [-5.3%, -0.5%], P = 0.02), and no significant association between eligibility and other measures of healthcare access and affordability. All estimates were stronger when examining the association of Medicare enrollment with outcomes for low and higher-income adults. Additional analyses that adjusted for clinical comorbidities and employment status were largely consistent with the main findings, as were analyses stratified by levels of educational attainment. Study limitations include the assumption adults age 64 and 66 would have similar outcomes if both groups were eligible for Medicare or if eligibility were withheld from both.

CONCLUSIONS

Medicare eligibility and enrollment at age 65 years were associated with improvements in healthcare access, affordability, and financial strain in low-income adults and, to a lesser extent, in higher-income adults. Our findings provide evidence that lowering the age of eligibility for Medicare may improve health inequities in the US.