Search

Background: Although many healthcare settings have since returned to pre-pandemic levels of operation, long-term care (LTC) facilities have experienced extended and significant changes to operations, including unprecedented levels of short staffing and facility closures, that may have a detrimental effect on resident outcomes. This study assessed the pandemic's extended effect on outcomes for LTC residents, comparing outcomes 1 and 2 years after the start of the pandemic to pre-pandemic times, with special focus on residents with frailty and dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid., Methods: Using Medicare claims data from January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2022, we ran over-dispersed Poisson models to compare the monthly adjusted rates of emergency department use, hospitalization, and mortality among LTC residents, comparing residents with and without frailty and dually enrolled and non-dually enrolled residents., Results: Two years after the start of the pandemic, adjusted emergency department (ED) and hospitalization rates were lower and adjusted mortality rates were higher compared with pre-pandemic years for all examined subgroups. For example, compared with 2018-2019, 2022 ED visit rates for dually enrolled residents were 0.89 times lower, hospitalization rates were 0.87 times lower, and mortality rates were 1.17 higher; 2022 ED visit rates for frail residents were 0.85 times lower, hospitalization rates were 0.83 times lower, and mortality rates were 1.21 higher., Conclusions: In 2022, emergency department and hospital utilization rates among long-term residents were lower than pre-pandemic levels and mortality rates were higher than pre-pandemic levels. These findings suggest that the pandemic has had an extended impact on outcomes for LTC residents., (© 2024 The American Geriatrics Society.)

Importance: Delaying elective noncardiac surgery after a recent acute myocardial infarction is associated with better outcomes, but current American Heart Association recommendations are based on data that are more than 20 years old., Objective: To examine the association between the time since a non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and the risk of postoperative major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE)., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study examined Medicare claims data between 2015 and 2020 for patients 67 years or older who had major noncardiac surgery. Data were analyzed from September 21, 2023, to February 1, 2024., Exposure: Time elapsed between a prior NSTEMI and surgery., Main Outcomes and Measures: MACCE (30-day mortality, in-hospital myocardial infarction, heart failure, or stroke) and all-cause 30-day mortality. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the association between outcomes and time since a prior NSTEMI., Results: The sample included 5 227 473 surgeries. The mean (SD) age was 75.7 (6.6) years; 2 981 239 (57.0%) were female, and 2 246 234 (43%) were male. There were 42 278 patients (0.81%) with a previous NSTEMI. Compared with patients without a prior NSTEMI, patients with an NSTEMI within 30 days of elective surgery had higher odds of MACCE, regardless of whether they had undergone coronary revascularization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.15; 95% CI, 1.09-4.23; P = .03) or not (aOR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.31-3.16; P = .001). The odds of postoperative MACCE leveled off after 30 days in patients who had undergone any coronary revascularization procedure (and after 90 days in patients with drug-eluting stents) and then increased after 180 days (any revascularization at 181-365 days: aOR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.25-1.71; P < .001; patients with drug-eluting stents at 181-365 days: aOR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.42-2.12; P < .001). The odds of MACCE did not level off for patients who did not have revascularization. Findings for all-cause 30-day mortality were similar to those for MACCE, except that the odds of mortality in patients with previous NSTEMI who had revascularization leveled off after 60 days in elective surgeries and 90 days for nonelective surgeries (elective 30-day: aOR, 2.88; 95% CI, 1.30-6.36; P = .009; elective 61- to 90-day: aOR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.57-1.86; P = .92; nonelective 30-day: aOR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.52-2.40; P < .001; nonelective 91- to 120-day: aOR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.73-1.37; P = .99)., Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that among older patients undergoing noncardiac surgery who had revascularization, the odds of postoperative MACCE and mortality leveled off between 30 and 90 days and then increased after 180 days. The odds did not level off for patients who did not have revascularization. Delaying elective noncardiac surgery to occur between 90 and 180 days after an NSTEMI may be reasonable for patients who have had revascularization.

Importance: Female patients have higher mortality rates after high-risk surgery than male patients. It is unknown whether this mortality gap is due to different rates of postoperative complications or if complications are addressed differently by sex, causing complications to lead to death-so-called failure to rescue., Objective: To evaluate sex differences in failure to rescue across high-risk surgical procedures., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from Medicare beneficiaries from October 2015 to February 2020 who underwent high-risk vascular or cardiac surgical procedures, including abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, coronary artery bypass grafting, aortic valve replacement, and mitral valve replacement or repair. Data analysis was performed from August 2023 to March 2024., Exposures: The primary exposure was patient sex., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were risk-adjusted rates of complications, 30-day mortality, and failure to rescue, which was defined as a death occurring after a serious complication. Categorical variables are presented as frequencies and proportions and compared using χ2 analysis. Continuous variables were tested for normality and compared using a t test., Results: A total of 863 305 Medicare beneficiaries were included in this study cohort, of whom 304 176 (35.2%) were female. Mean (SD) age was slightly higher in female patients (74.8 [9.3] years) than male patients (73.4 [8.5] years), and female patients had more comorbidities than male patients (≥2 Elixhauser comorbidities, female: 262 809 [86.4%] vs male: 465 231 [83.2%]). Female patients were more likely to receive care at large hospitals and hospitals with a higher surgical case volume. Overall, female and male patients had similar rates of complications (female: 14.98% vs male: 14.37%; adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.04; 95% CI, 1.03-1.05; P < .001). However, female patients had higher rates of 30-day mortality (female: 4.22% vs male: 3.34%; aRR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.23-1.29; P < .001) and higher rates of failure to rescue (female: 10.71% vs male: 8.58%; aRR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.22-1.28; P < .001). A similar pattern was observed when stratified by each procedure., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing high-risk surgery, male and female patients experienced similar rates of serious complications, but female patients with complications were more likely to die. In other words, clinicians fail to rescue female patients with complications after high-risk surgery more often than male patients. Improving the recognition and management of female patients' complications postoperatively may narrow the sex disparity after high-risk surgery.

Importance: Marginalized populations have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Critically ill patients belonging to racial and ethnic minority populations treated in hospitals operating under crisis or near-crisis conditions may have experienced worse outcomes than White individuals., Objective: To examine whether hospital strain was associated with worse outcomes for older patients hospitalized with sepsis and whether these increases in poor outcomes were greater for members of racial and ethnic minority groups compared with White individuals., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, multivariable regression analysis was conducted to assess differential changes in all-cause 30-day mortality and major morbidity among older racial and ethnic minoritized individuals hospitalized with sepsis compared with White individuals and changes in hospital strain using Medicare claims data. Data were obtained on patients hospitalized between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2021, and analyzed between December 16, 2023, and July 11, 2024., Exposure: Time-varying weekly hospital percentage of inpatients with COVID-19., Main Outcomes and Measures: Composite of all-cause 30-day mortality and major morbidity., Results: Among the 5 899 869 hospitalizations for sepsis (51.5% women; mean [SD] age, 78.2 [8.8] years), there were 177 864 (3.0%) Asian, 664 648 (11.3%) Black, 522 964 (8.9%) Hispanic, and 4 534 393 (76.9%) White individuals. During weeks when the hospital COVID-19 burden was greater than 40%, the risk of death or major morbidity increased nearly 2-fold (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.90; 95% CI, 1.80-2.00; P < .001) for White individuals compared with before the pandemic. Asian, Black, and Hispanic individuals experienced 44% (AOR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.28-1.61; P < .001), 21% (AOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11-1.33; P < .001), and 45% (AOR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.32-1.59; P < .001) higher risk of death or morbidity, respectively, compared with White individuals when the hospital weekly COVID-19 burden was greater than 40%., Conclusion and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, older adults hospitalized with sepsis were more likely to die or experience major morbidity as the hospital COVID-19 burden increased. These increases in adverse outcomes were greater in magnitude among members of minority populations than for White individuals.

Competing Interests: Disclosures: Disclosure forms are available with the article online.

Background: Disparities in guideline-based quality measures likely contribute to differences in heart failure (HF) outcomes. We evaluated between- and within-hospital differences in the quality of care across sex, race, ethnicity, and insurance for patients hospitalized for HF., Methods: This retrospective analysis included patients hospitalized for HF across 596 hospitals in the Get With the Guidelines-HF registry between 2016 and 2021. We evaluated performance across 7 measures stratified by patient sex, race, ethnicity, and insurance. We evaluated differences in performance with and without adjustment for the treating hospital. We also measured variation in hospital-specific disparities., Results: Among 685 227 patients, the median patient age was 72 (interquartile range, 61-82) and 47.2% were women. Measure performance was significantly lower (worse) for women compared with men for all 7 measures before adjustment. For 4 of 7 measures, there were no significant sex-related differences after patient-level adjustment. For 20 of 25 other comparisons, racial and ethnic minorities and Medicaid/uninsured patients had similar or higher (better) adjusted measure performance compared with White and Medicare/privately insured patients, respectively. Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor measure performance was significantly lower for Asian, Hispanic, and Medicaid/uninsured patients, and cardiac resynchronization therapy implant/prescription was lower among women and Black patients after hospital adjustment, indicating within-hospital differences. There was hospital-level variation in these differences. For cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation/prescription, 278 hospitals (46.6%) had ≥2% lower implant/prescription for Black versus White patients compared with 109 hospitals (18.3%) with the same or higher cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation/prescription for Black patients., Conclusions: HF quality measure performance was equitable for most measures. There were within-hospital differences in angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor and cardiac resynchronization therapy implant/prescription for historically marginalized groups. The magnitude of hospital-specific disparities varied across hospitals., Competing Interests: Dr Sandhu has received research support from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (grant 1K23HL151672), the American Heart Association, the Gordon & Betty Moore Foundation, and Sanofi. Dr Sandhu serves as a consultant for Lexicon Pharmaceuticals and Reprieve Cardiovascular. Dr Greene has received research support from the Duke University Department of Medicine Chair’s Research Award, the American Heart Association (929502), the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; has served on advisory boards for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, scPharmaceuticals, and Sanofi; serves as a consultant for Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Corteria Pharmaceuticals, CSL Vifor, Merck, PharmaIN, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Tricog Health, and Urovant Pharmaceuticals; and has received speaker fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Fonarow reports consulting for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer. The other authors report no conflicts.

Competing Interests: None.

Objectives: Hospitals in the US operate under various value-based payment programs, but little is known regarding the strategies they use in this context to improve quality and reduce costs, overall or in voluntary programs including Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced (BPCI-A)., Study Design: A survey was administered to hospital leaders at 588 randomly selected acute care hospitals, with oversampling of BPCI-A participants, from November 2020 to June 2021. Twenty strategies and 20 barriers were queried in 4 domains: inpatient, postacute, outpatient, and community resources for vulnerable patients., Methods: Summary statistics were tabulated, and responses were adjusted for sampling strategy and nonresponse., Results: There were 203 respondents (35%), of which 159 (78%) were BPCI-A participants and 44 (22%) were nonparticipants. On average, respondents reported implementing 89% of queried strategies in the inpatient domain, such as care pathways or predictive analytics; 65% of postacute strategies, such as forming partnerships with skilled nursing facilities; 84% of outpatient strategies, such as scheduling close follow-up to prevent emergency department visits/hospitalizations; and 82% of strategies aimed at high-risk populations, such as building connections with community resources. There were no differences between BPCI-A and non-BPCI-A hospitals in 19 of 20 care redesign strategies queried. However, 78.3% of BPCI-A-participating hospitals reported programs aimed at reducing utilization of skilled nursing and inpatient rehabilitation facilities compared with 37.6% of non-BPCI-A hospitals (P < .0001)., Conclusions: Hospitals pursue a broad range of efforts to improve quality. BPCI-A hospitals have attempted to reduce use of postacute care, but otherwise the strategies they pursue are similar to other hospitals.

Importance: Shifting care to alternative sites when clinically appropriate may be associated with reduced US health care spending, improved access, and, in some cases, improved care outcomes., Objective: To fill 2 main gaps in the current literature on site-of-care shifts: (1) understanding the clinician perspective on appropriateness of alternative care sites, given the central role they play in referrals and patient trust and (2) considering all potential sites where care could shift and calculating net savings potential., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this survey study, physicians (MDs and DOs), nurse practitioners, physician assistants, nurse anesthetists, radiology and imaging technicians, and psychologists were surveyed from September 17 to November 22, 2021, about potential shifts of care from the hospital setting to alternative sites. Participants were selected by the survey firm Intellisurvey to provide broad representation across all specialties of interest. A minimum of 34 clinicians responded to each question. Data were analyzed from April 2022 through October 2023., Exposure: More than 5000 individual diagnostic and procedural codes were reviewed and sorted into 312 distinct care activities by an expert panel of physicians. Survey respondents were then provided with the 2019 claims-based distribution across sites of care for each care activity and were asked, "based on your clinical judgment, what portion of [care activity] could safely occur in each of the following sites of care, without compromising clinical outcomes?", Main Outcomes and Measures: Based on clinician-reported distributions, the total potential shift of volume from hospital-based settings to alternative sites and the associated net savings were estimated., Results: Survey respondents included 1069 practicing clinicians (386 female [36.1%]; mean [SD] years since residency of physicians, 21.0 [9.7] years; mean [SD] age of nonphysicians, 45.3 [9.4] years) across specialties, all of whom practiced more than 20 clinical hours per week. There were 794 physicians (74.3%), and the remaining 275 respondents were midlevel professionals, such as physician assistants. Among 312 care activities surveyed, respondents indicated that 10.3 percentage points (95% CI, 10.0-10.5 percentage points) of commercial and 10.9 percentage points (95% CI, 10.7-11.1 percentage points) of Medicare volume currently taking place in hospital-based settings could shift to alternative sites with today's technology without compromising clinical outcomes. Across the entire US health care system, these shifts could be associated with a reduction in overall health care consumption spending ($3 562 339 000 000 000) by approximately $113.8 billion ($113 767 446 087 174 [3.2%]) to $147.7 billion ($147 661 672 284 263 [4.1%]) annually., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, a substantial net savings opportunity was estimated. However, realizing this potential will require ongoing alignment among organizations, clinicians, and policymakers to overcome barriers to these shifts.

Background: Little is known regarding differences in cause-specific costs between heart failure (HF) with ejection fraction (EF) ≤40% vs >40%, and potential cost implications of sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) therapy., Objectives: This study sought to compare cause-specific health care costs following hospitalization for HF with EF ≤40% vs >40% and estimate the cost offset with implementation of SGLT2i therapy., Methods: This study examined Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for HF in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry from 2016 to 2020. Mean per-patient total (excluding drug costs) and cause-specific costs from discharge through 1-year follow-up were calculated and compared between EF ≤40% vs >40%. Next, risk reductions on total all-cause and HF hospitalizations were estimated in a trial-level meta-analysis of 5 pivotal trials of SGLT2is in HF. Finally, these relative treatment effects were applied to Medicare beneficiaries eligible for SGLT2i therapy to estimate the projected cost offset with implementation of SGLT2i, excluding drug costs., Results: Among 146,003 patients, 50,598 (34.7%) had EF ≤40% and 95,405 (65.3%) had EF >40%. Mean total cost through 1 year was $40,557. Total costs were similar between EF groups overall but were higher for EF ≤40% among patients surviving the 1-year follow-up period. Patients with EF >40% had higher costs caused by non-HF and noncardiovascular hospitalizations, and skilled nursing facilities (all P < 0.001). Trial-level meta-analysis of the 5 SGLT2i clinical trials estimated 11% (rate ratio: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.84-0.93; P < 0.001) and 29% (rate ratio: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.66-0.76; P < 0.001) relative reductions in rates of total all-cause and HF hospitalizations, respectively, regardless of EF. Reductions in all-cause and HF hospitalizations were projected to reduce annual costs of readmission by $2,451 to $2,668 per patient with EF ≤40% and $1,439 to $2,410 per patient with EF >40%., Conclusions: In this large cohort of older U.S. adults hospitalized for HF, cause-specific costs of care differed among patients with EF ≤40% vs >40%. SGLT2i significantly reduced the rate of HF and all-cause hospitalizations irrespective of EF in clinical trials, and implementation of SGLT2i therapy in clinical practice is projected to reduce costs by $1,439 to $2,668 per patient over the 1 year post-discharge, excluding drug costs., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This analysis, as a part of the TRANSLATE-HF research series, was supported by AstraZeneca. The Get With The Guidelines–Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) program is provided by the American Heart Association. GWTG-HF is sponsored, in part, by Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, Bayer, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Vaduganathan has received research grant support, served on advisory boards, or had speaker engagements with American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Baxter Healthcare, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cytokinetics, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Relypsa, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, and Tricog Health; and participated on clinical trial committees for studies sponsored by AstraZeneca, Galmed, Novartis, Bayer AG, Occlutech, and Impulse Dynamics. Dr Butler has served as a consultant for Abbott, Adrenomed, Amgen, Array, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, G3 Pharmaceutical, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Luitpold, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Relypsa, Roche, V-Wave Limited, and Vifor. Drs Huang, Linganathan, and McDermott are employees of AstraZeneca and may own stock options with the company. Dr Vardeny has served as a consultant for Bayer, AstraZeneca, Moderna, and Cardior; and has received institutional research support from Bayer and Cardurion. Dr Fonarow has served as a consultant for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Greene has received research support from the Duke University Department of Medicine Chair’s Research Award, American Heart Association, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehinger Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; served on advisory boards or as a consultant for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Corteria Pharmaceuticals, CSL Vifor, Cytokinetics, Eli Lilly, Lexicon, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, scPharmaceuticals, Tricog Health, and Urovant Pharmaceuticals; and has received speaker fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Lexicon, and Roche Diagnostics. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Quantifying the economic burden of cardiovascular disease and stroke over the coming decades may inform policy, health system, and community-level interventions for prevention and treatment., Methods: We used nationally representative health, economic, and demographic data to project health care costs attributable to key cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia) and conditions (coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure, atrial fibrillation) through 2050. The human capital approach was used to estimate productivity losses from morbidity and premature mortality due to cardiovascular conditions., Results: One in 3 US adults received care for a cardiovascular risk factor or condition in 2020. Annual inflation-adjusted (2022 US dollars) health care costs of cardiovascular risk factors are projected to triple between 2020 and 2050, from $400 billion to $1344 billion. For cardiovascular conditions, annual health care costs are projected to almost quadruple, from $393 billion to $1490 billion, and productivity losses are projected to increase by 54%, from $234 billion to $361 billion. Stroke is projected to account for the largest absolute increase in costs. Large relative increases among the Asian American population (497%) and Hispanic American population (489%) reflect the projected increases in the size of these populations., Conclusions: The economic burden of cardiovascular risk factors and overt cardiovascular disease in the United States is projected to increase substantially in the coming decades. Development and deployment of cost-effective programs and policies to promote cardiovascular health are urgently needed to rein in costs and to equitably enhance population health.

Background: Cardiovascular disease and stroke are common and costly, and their prevalence is rising. Forecasts on the prevalence of risk factors and clinical events are crucial., Methods: Using the 2015 to March 2020 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and 2015 to 2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we estimated trends in prevalence for cardiovascular risk factors based on adverse levels of Life's Essential 8 and clinical cardiovascular disease and stroke. We projected through 2050, overall and by age and race and ethnicity, accounting for changes in disease prevalence and demographics., Results: We estimate that among adults, prevalence of hypertension will increase from 51.2% in 2020 to 61.0% in 2050. Diabetes (16.3% to 26.8%) and obesity (43.1% to 60.6%) will increase, whereas hypercholesterolemia will decline (45.8% to 24.0%). The prevalences of poor diet, inadequate physical activity, and smoking are estimated to improve over time, whereas inadequate sleep will worsen. Prevalences of coronary disease (7.8% to 9.2%), heart failure (2.7% to 3.8%), stroke (3.9% to 6.4%), atrial fibrillation (1.7% to 2.4%), and total cardiovascular disease (11.3% to 15.0%) will rise. Clinical CVD will affect 45 million adults, and CVD including hypertension will affect more than 184 million adults by 2050 (>61%). Similar trends are projected in children. Most adverse trends are projected to be worse among people identifying as American Indian/Alaska Native or multiracial, Black, or Hispanic., Conclusions: The prevalence of many cardiovascular risk factors and most established diseases will increase over the next 30 years. Clinical and public health interventions are needed to effectively manage, stem, and even reverse these adverse trends.

Background: The objective of this study was to examine insurance-based disparities in mortality, nonhome discharges, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation utilization in patients hospitalized with COVID-19., Methods: Using a national database of U.S. academic medical centers and their affiliated hospitals, the risk-adjusted association between mortality, nonhome discharge, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation utilization and (1) the type of insurance coverage (private insurance, Medicare, dual enrollment in Medicare and Medicaid, and no insurance) and (2) the weekly hospital COVID-19 burden (0 to 5.0%; 5.1 to 10%, 10.1 to 20%, 20.1 to 30%, and 30.1% and greater) was evaluated. Modeling was expanded to include an interaction between payer status and the weekly hospital COVID-19 burden to examine whether the lack of private insurance was associated with increases in disparities as the COVID-19 burden increased., Results: Among 760,846 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 214,992 had private insurance, 318,624 had Medicare, 96,192 were dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid, 107,548 had Medicaid, and 23,560 had no insurance. Overall, 76,250 died, 211,702 had nonhome discharges, 75,703 were mechanically ventilated, and 2,642 underwent extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The adjusted odds of death were higher in patients with Medicare (adjusted odds ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.21 to 1.35]; P < 0.0005), dually enrolled (adjusted odds ratio, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.30 to 1.50]; P < 0.0005), Medicaid (adjusted odds ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.20 to 1.36]; P < 0.0005), and no insurance (adjusted odds ratio, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.26 to 1.62]; P < 0.0005) compared to patients with private insurance. Patients with Medicare (adjusted odds ratio, 0.47; [95% CI, 0.39 to 0.58]; P < 0.0005), dually enrolled (adjusted odds ratio, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.24 to 0.43]; P < 0.0005), Medicaid (adjusted odds ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.79]; P < 0.0005), and no insurance (adjusted odds ratio, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.56]; P < 0.001) were less likely to be placed on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation than patients with private insurance. Mortality, nonhome discharges, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation utilization did not change significantly more in patients with private insurance compared to patients without private insurance as the COVID-19 burden increased., Conclusions: Among patients with COVID-19, insurance-based disparities in mortality, nonhome discharges, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation utilization were substantial, but these disparities did not increase as the hospital COVID-19 burden increased., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Anesthesiologists. All Rights Reserved.)

Importance: Kidney health has received increasing focus as part of comprehensive heart failure (HF) treatment efforts. However, the occurrence of clinically relevant kidney outcomes in contemporary populations with HF has not been well studied., Objective: To examine rates of incident dialysis and acute kidney injury (AKI) among Medicare beneficiaries after HF hospitalization., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study evaluated adults aged 65 years or older who were hospitalized for HF across 372 sites in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry in the US between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018. Patients younger than 65 years or requiring dialysis either during or prior to hospitalization were excluded. Data were analyzed from May 4, 2021, to March 8, 2024., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was inpatient dialysis initiation in the year after HF hospitalization and was ascertained via linkage with Medicare claims data. Other all-cause and cause-specific hospitalizations were also evaluated. The covariate-adjusted association between discharge estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and 1-year postdischarge outcomes was examined using Cox proportional hazards regression models., Results: Overall, among 85 298 patients included in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 80 [9] years; 53% women) mean (SD) left ventricular ejection fraction was 47% (16%) and mean (SD) eGFR was 53 (29) mL/min per 1.73 m2; 54 010 (63%) had an eGFR less than 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2. By 1 year after HF hospitalization, 6% had progressed to dialysis, 7% had progressed to dialysis or end-stage kidney disease, and 7% had been readmitted for AKI. Incident dialysis increased steeply with lower discharge eGFR category: compared with patients with an eGFR of 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2 or more, individuals with an eGFR of 45 to less than 60 and of less than 30 mL/min per 1.73 m2 had higher rates of dialysis readmission (45 to <60: adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 2.16 [95% CI, 1.86-2.51]; <30: AHR, 28.46 [95% CI, 25.25-32.08]). Lower discharge eGFR (per 10 mL/min per 1.73 m2 decrease) was independently associated with a higher rate of readmission for dialysis (AHR, 2.23; 95% CI, 2.14-2.32), dialysis or end-stage kidney disease (AHR, 2.34; 95% CI, 2.24-2.44), and AKI (AHR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.23-1.27), with similar findings for all-cause mortality, all-cause readmission, and HF readmission. Baseline left ventricular ejection fraction did not modify the covariate-adjusted association between lower discharge eGFR and kidney outcomes., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, older adults with HF had substantial risk of kidney complications, with an estimated 6% progressing to dialysis in the year after HF hospitalization. These findings emphasize the need for health care approaches prioritizing kidney health in this high-risk population.

Objectives: To assess whether hospitals participating in Medicare's Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) program for joint replacement changed their referral patterns to favor higher-quality skilled nursing facilities (SNFs)., Study Design: Retrospective observational study using 2009-2015 inpatient and outpatient claims from a 20% sample of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing joint replacement in US hospitals (N = 146,074) linked with data from Medicare's BPCI program and Nursing Home Compare., Methods: We ran fixed effect regression models regressing BPCI participation on hospital-SNF referral patterns (number of SNF discharges, number of SNF partners, and SNF referral concentration) and SNF quality (facility inspection survey rating, patient outcome rating, staffing rating, and registered nurse staffing rating)., Results: We found that BPCI participation was associated with a decrease in the number of SNF referrals and no significant change in the number of SNF partners or concentration of SNF partners. BPCI participation was associated with discharge to SNFs with a higher patient outcome rating by 0.04 stars (95% CI, 0.04-0.26). BPCI participation was not associated with improvements in discharge to SNFs with a higher facility survey rating (95% CI, -0.03 to 0.11), staffing rating (95% CI, -0.07 to 0.04), or registered nurse staffing rating (95% CI, -0.09 to 0.02)., Conclusions: BPCI participation was associated with lower volume of SNF referrals and small increases in the quality of SNFs to which patients were discharged, without narrowing hospital-SNF referral networks.

Background: Despite its approval for acute ischemic stroke >25 years ago, intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) remains underused, with inequities by age, sex, race, ethnicity, and geography. Little is known about IVT rates by insurance status., Methods and Results: We assessed temporal trends from 2002 to 2015 in IVT for acute ischemic stroke in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample using adjusted, survey - weighted logistic regression. We calculated odds ratios for IVT for each category in 2002 to 2008 (period 1) and 2009 to 2015 (period 2). IVT use for acute ischemic stroke increased from 1.0% in 2002 to 6.8% in 2015 (adjusted annual relative ratio, 1.15). Individuals aged ≥85 years had the most pronounced increase during 2002 to 2015 (adjusted annual relative ratio, 1.18) but were less likely to receive IVT compared with 18- to 44-year-olds in period 1 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.23) and period 2 (aOR, 0.36). Women were less likely than men to receive IVT, but the disparity narrowed over time (period 1: aOR, 0.81; period 2: aOR, 0.94). Inequities in IVT resolved for Hispanic individuals in period 2 (aOR, 0.96) but not for Black individuals (period 2: aOR, 0.81). The disparity in IVT for Medicare patients, compared with privately insured patients, lessened over time (period 1: aOR, 0.59; period 2: aOR, 0.75). Patients treated in rural hospitals remained less likely to receive IVT than in urban hospitals; a more dramatic increase in urbanity widened the inequity (period 2, urban nonteaching versus rural: aOR, 2.58, period 2, urban teaching versus rural: aOR, 3.90)., Conclusions: IVT for acute ischemic stroke increased among adults. Despite some encouraging trends, the remaining disparities highlight the need for intensified efforts at addressing inequities.

The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced Model (BPCI-A), a voluntary Alternative Payment Model for Medicare, incentivizes hospitals and physician group practices to reduce spending for patient care episodes below preset target prices. The experience of physician groups in BPCI-A is not well understood. We found that physician groups earned $421 million in incentive payments during BPCI-A's first four performance periods (2018-20). Target prices were positively associated with bonuses, with a mean reconciliation payment of $139 per episode in the lowest decile of target prices and $2,775 in the highest decile. In the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, mean bonuses increased from $815 per episode to $2,736 per episode. These findings suggest that further policy changes, such as improving target price accuracy and refining participation rules, will be important as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services continues to expand BPCI-A and develop other bundled payment models.

Objectives: In 2018, CMS established reimbursement for the first Medicare-covered artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled clinical software: CT fractional flow reserve (FFRCT) to assist in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. This study quantified Medicare utilization of and spending on FFRCT from 2018 through 2022 and characterized adopting hospitals, clinicians, and patients., Study Design: Analysis, using 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims data, of the hospitals, clinicians, and patients who performed or received coronary CT angiography with or without FFRCT., Methods: We measured annual trends in utilization of and spending on FFRCT among hospitals and clinicians from 2018 through 2022. Characteristics of FFRCT-adopting and nonadopting hospitals and clinicians were compared, as well as the characteristics of patients who received FFRCT vs those who did not., Results: From 2018 to 2022, FFRCT billing volume in Medicare increased more than 11-fold (from 1083 to 12,363 claims). Compared with nonbilling hospitals, FFRCT-billing hospitals were more likely to be larger, part of a health system, nonprofit, and financially profitable. FFRCT-billing clinicians worked in larger group practices and were more likely to be cardiac specialists. FFRCT-receiving patients were more likely to be male and White and less likely to be dually enrolled in Medicaid or receiving disability benefits., Conclusions: In the initial 5 years of Medicare reimbursement for FFRCT, growth was concentrated among well-resourced hospitals and clinicians. As Medicare begins to reimburse clinicians for the use of AI-enabled clinical software such as FFRCT, it is crucial to monitor the diffusion of these services to ensure equal access.

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.

Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Wadhera receives research support from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and serves as a consultant for Abbott, CVS Health, and Chamber Cardio, outside the submitted work. Dr Joynt Maddox reported receiving research support from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the National Institute of Nursing Research, and the National Institute on Aging and receiving personal fees from Humana and Centene, outside the submitted work.

Background: Improving quality of care provided to short-stay patients with dementia in nursing homes is a policy priority. However, it is unknown whether dementia-focused care strategies are associated with improved clinical outcomes or lower utilization and costs for short-stay dementia patients., Methods: We performed a national survey of nursing home administrators in 2020-2021, asking about the presence of three dementia-focused care services used for their short-stay patients: (1) a dementia care unit, (2) cognitive deficiency training for staff, and (3) dementia-specific occupational therapy. Using Medicare claims, we identified short-stay episodes for beneficiaries residing in surveyed skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) with and without dementia. We compared clinical, cost, and utilization outcomes for dementia patients in SNFs, which did and did not offer dementia-focused care services. As a counterfactual control, we compared these differences to those for non-dementia patients in the same facilities. Our primary quantity of interest was an interaction term between a patients' dementia status and the presence of a dementia-focused care tool., Results: The study population included 102,860 Medicare episodes of care from 377 SNF survey respondents in 2018-2019. In adjusted comparisons of the interaction between dementia status and the presence of each dementia-focused care tool, dementia care units were associated with a 1.5-day increase in healthy days at home in the 90 days following discharge (p = 0.01) and a 3.1% decrease in the likelihood of a subsequent SNF admission (p = 0.001). Cognitive deficiency training was also associated with a 2.0% increase in antipsychotics (p = 0.03), whereas dementia-specific occupational therapy was associated with a 1.2% increase in falls (p = 0.01) per patient episode., Conclusions: Self-reported use of dementia care units for short-stay patients was associated with modestly better performance in some, but not all, outcome measures. This provides hypothesis-generating evidence that dementia care units could be a promising mechanism to improve care delivery in nursing homes., (© 2023 The American Geriatrics Society.)

Background: Traditional cardiac rehabilitation (CR) improves cardiovascular outcomes and reduces mortality, but less is known about the relative benefit of intensive CR (ICR) which incorporates greater lifestyle education through 72 sessions (versus 36 in CR). Our objective was to determine whether ICR is associated with a mortality and cardiovascular benefit compared with CR., Methods: Retrospective cohort study of Medicare Fee-For-Service beneficiaries in a 100% sample, claims data set. Qualifying events were captured from May 1, 2016 to December 31, 2019 and ICR/CR utilization captured from May 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020. Among patients attending at least 1 day of either CR or ICR, Cox proportional hazards models using a 1 to 5 propensity score match were used to compare utilization and the association of ICR versus CR participation with (1) all-cause mortality and (2) cardiovascular-related hospitalizations or nonfatal cardiac events. Dose-response was assessed by the number of days attended., Results: From 2016 to 2019, 1 277 358 unique patients met at least one qualifying indication for ICR/CR from 2016 to 2019. Of these, 262 579 (20.6%) and 4452 (0.4%) attended at least one session of CR or ICR, respectively (mean [SD] age, 73.2 [7.8] years; 32.3% female). In the matched sample, including 26 659 total patients (median, 2.4-year follow-up), ICR was associated with 12% lower all-cause mortality (multivariable adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.78-0.99]; P =0.036) compared with CR but no significant difference for cardiovascular-related hospitalization or nonfatal cardiac events. The mortality benefit was seen for both ICR and CR per day strata, with each modality demonstrating a clear dose-response benefit., Conclusions: ICR is associated with lower mortality than traditional CR among Medicare beneficiaries but no difference in cardiovascular-related hospitalization or nonfatal cardiac events. Moreover, ICR and CR demonstrate a dose-response relationship for mortality. Additional studies are needed to confirm these observations and to better understand the mechanisms by which ICR may lead to a reduction in mortality., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Husaini received research support from Pritikin intensive cardiac rehabilitation (ICR), LLC through the Foundation for Barnes-Jewish Hospital and has received honoraria from Bristol Meyers Squibb. Dr Racette receives research support from the National Institutes of Health (NIH; R01 AG070717, R01 AG060499, R61 HL155858, R34 HL158947, R33 AG070455, R25 HL105400), and the Foundation for Barnes-Jewish Hospital. Dr Rich receives support from the NIH (R01 AG060499, R01 AG078153, R01 HL147862, R01 HL151431). Dr Joynt Maddox receives research support from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL143421 and R01HL164561), National Institute of Nursing research (U01NR020555), and National Institute on Aging (R01AG060935, R01AG063759, and R21AG065526), and from Humana. She also serves on the Health Policy Advisory Council for the Centene Corporation (St Louis, MO). Dr Peterson has stock holdings in Medtronic, Johnson and Johnson and receives research support from the NIH (R61/R33 HL155858, R01 AG060499-01, R01 HL 165238), the American Heart Association (No. 23SCISA1145192), the Children’s Discovery Institute, the Clinical and Translational Research Funding Program (CTRFP), and the Foundation for Barnes-Jewish Hospital in Saint Louis, MO. The other authors report no conflicts.

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., Competing Interests: Disclosures: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M23-2109.

Importance: The interhospital transfer (IHT) of patients with sepsis to higher-capability hospitals may improve outcomes. Little is known about patient and hospital factors associated with sepsis IHT., Objectives: We evaluated patterns of hospitalization and IHT and determined patient and hospital factors associated with the IHT of adult patients with sepsis., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting and Participants: A total of 349,938 adult patients with sepsis at 329 nonfederal hospitals in California, 2018-2019., Main Outcomes and Measures: We evaluated patterns of admission and outward IHT between low sepsis-, intermediate sepsis-, and high sepsis-capability hospitals. We estimated odds of IHT using generalized estimating equations logistic regression with bootstrap stepwise variable selection., Results: Among the cohort, 223,202 (66.4%) were initially hospitalized at high-capability hospitals and 10,870 (3.1%) underwent IHT. Nearly all transfers (98.2%) from low-capability hospitals were received at higher-capability hospitals. Younger age (< 65 yr) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.54; 95% CI, 1.40-1.69) and increasing organ dysfunction (aOR 1.22; 95% CI, 1.19-1.25) were associated with higher IHT odds, as were admission to low-capability (aOR 2.79; 95% CI, 2.33-3.35) or public hospitals (aOR 1.35; 95% CI, 1.09-1.66). Female sex (aOR 0.88; 95% CI, 0.84-0.91), Medicaid insurance (aOR 0.59; 95% CI, 0.53-0.66), home to admitting hospital distance less than or equal to 10 miles (aOR 0.92; 95% CI, 0.87-0.97) and do-not-resuscitate orders (aOR 0.48; 95% CI, 0.45-0.52) were associated with lower IHT odds, as was admission to a teaching hospital (aOR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.96)., Conclusions and Relevance: Most patients with sepsis are initially hospitalized at high-capability hospitals. The IHT rate for sepsis is low and more likely to originate from low-capability and public hospitals than from high-capability and for-profit hospitals. Transferred patients with sepsis are more likely to be younger, male, sicker, with private medical insurance, and less likely to have care limitation orders. Future studies should evaluate the comparative benefits of IHT from low-capability hospitals., Competing Interests: Dr. Joynt Maddox receives research support from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL143421 and R01HL164561), the National Institute of Nursing Research (U01NR020555), and the National Institute on Aging (R01AG060935, R01AG063759, and R21AG065526), and from Humana. She also serves on the Health Policy Advisory Council for the Centene Corporation (St. Louis, MO). Dr. Kollef is supported by the Barnes-Jewish Hospital Foundation. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.)

Importance: Residential segregation has been shown to be a root cause of racial inequities in health outcomes, yet little is known about current patterns of racial segregation in where patients receive hospital care or whether hospital segregation is associated with health outcomes. Filling this knowledge gap is critical to implementing policies that improve racial equity in health care., Objective: To characterize contemporary patterns of racial segregation in hospital care delivery, identify market-level correlates, and determine the association between hospital segregation and health outcomes., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study of US hospital referral regions (HRRs) used 2018 Medicare claims, American Community Survey, and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Social Determinants of Health data. Hospitalization patterns for all non-Hispanic Black or non-Hispanic White Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with at least 1 inpatient hospitalization in an eligible hospital were evaluated for hospital segregation and associated health outcomes at the HRR level. The data analysis was performed between August 10, 2022, and September 6, 2023., Exposures: Dissimilarity index and isolation index for HRRs., Main Outcomes and Measures: Health outcomes were measured using Prevention Quality Indicator (PQI) acute and chronic composites per 100 000 Medicare beneficiaries, and total deaths related to heart disease and stroke per 100 000 residents were calculated for individuals aged 74 years or younger. Correlation coefficients were used to compare residential and hospital dissimilarity and residential and hospital isolation. Linear regression was used to examine the association between hospital segregation and health outcomes., Results: This study included 280 HRRs containing data for 4386 short-term acute care and critical access hospitals. Black and White patients tended to receive care at different hospitals, with a mean (SD) dissimilarity index of 23 (11) and mean (SD) isolation index of 13 (13), indicating substantial variation in segregation across HRRs. Hospital segregation was correlated with residential segregation (correlation coefficients, 0.58 and 0.90 for dissimilarity and isolation, respectively). For Black patients, a 1-SD increase in the hospital isolation index was associated with 204 (95% CI, 154-254) more acute PQI hospitalizations per 100 000 Medicare beneficiaries (28% increase from the median), 684 (95% CI, 488-880) more chronic PQI hospitalizations per 100 000 Medicare beneficiaries (15% increase), and 6 (95% CI, 2-9) additional deaths per 100 000 residents (6% increase) compared with 68 (95% CI, 24-113; 6% increase), 202 (95% CI, 131-274; 8% increase), and 2 (95% CI, 0 to 4; 3% increase), respectively, for White patients., Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that higher segregation of hospital care was associated with poorer health outcomes for both Black and White Medicare beneficiaries, with significantly greater negative health outcomes for Black populations, supporting racial segregation as a root cause of health disparities. Policymakers and clinical leaders could address this important public health issue through payment reform efforts and expansion of health insurance coverage, in addition to supporting upstream efforts to reduce racial segregation in hospital care and residential settings.

Objective: To determine the extent to which counting observation stays changes hospital performance on 30-day readmission measures., Methods: This was a retrospective study of inpatient admissions and observation stays among fee-for-service Medicare enrollees in 2017. We generated 3 specifications of 30-day risk-standardized readmissions measures: the hospital-wide readmission (HWR) measure utilized by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which captures inpatient readmissions within 30 days of inpatient discharge; an expanded HWR measure, which captures any unplanned hospitalization (inpatient admission or observation stay) within 30 days of inpatient discharge; an all-hospitalization readmission (AHR) measure, which captures any unplanned hospitalization following any hospital discharge (observation stays are included in both the numerator and denominator of the measure). Estimated excess readmissions for hospitals were compared across the 3 measures. High performers were defined as those with a lower-than-expected number of readmissions whereas low performers had higher-than-expected or excess readmissions. Multivariable logistic regression identified hospital characteristics associated with worse performance under the measures that included observation stays., Results: Our sample had 2586 hospitals with 5,749,779 hospitalizations. Observation stays ranged from 0% to 41.7% of total hospitalizations. Mean (SD) readmission rates were 16.6% (5.4) for the HWR, 18.5% (5.7) for the expanded HWR, and 17.9% (5.7) in the all-hospitalization readmission measure. Approximately 1 in 7 hospitals (14.9%) would switch from being classified as a high performer to a low performer or vice-versa if observation stays were fully included in the calculation of readmission rates. Safety-net hospitals and those with a higher propensity to use observation would perform significantly worse., Conclusions: Fully incorporating observation stays in readmission measures would substantially change performance in value-based programs for safety-net hospitals and hospitals with high rates of observation stays., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Regionalized sepsis care could improve sepsis outcomes by facilitating the interhospital transfer of patients to higher-capability hospitals. There are no measures of sepsis capability to guide the identification of such hospitals, although hospital case volume of sepsis has been used as a proxy. We evaluated the performance of a novel hospital sepsis-related capability (SRC) index as compared with sepsis case volume., Design: Principal component analysis (PCA) and retrospective cohort study., Setting: A total of 182 New York (derivation) and 274 Florida and Massachusetts (validation) nonfederal hospitals, 2018., Patients: A total of 89,069 and 139,977 adult patients (≥ 18 yr) with sepsis were directly admitted into the derivation and validation cohort hospitals, respectively., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: We derived SRC scores by PCA of six hospital resource use characteristics (bed capacity, annual volumes of sepsis, major diagnostic procedures, renal replacement therapy, mechanical ventilation, and major therapeutic procedures) and classified hospitals into capability score tertiles: high, intermediate, and low. High-capability hospitals were mostly urban teaching hospitals. Compared with sepsis volume, the SRC score explained more variation in hospital-level sepsis mortality in the derivation (unadjusted coefficient of determination [ R2 ]: 0.25 vs 0.12, p < 0.001 for both) and validation (0.18 vs 0.05, p < 0.001 for both) cohorts; and demonstrated stronger correlation with outward transfer rates for sepsis in the derivation (Spearman coefficient [ r ]: 0.60 vs 0.50) and validation (0.51 vs 0.45) cohorts. Compared with low-capability hospitals, patients with sepsis directly admitted into high-capability hospitals had a greater number of acute organ dysfunctions, a higher proportion of surgical hospitalizations, and higher adjusted mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.55; 95% CI, 1.25-1.92). In stratified analysis, worse mortality associated with higher hospital capability was only evident among patients with three or more organ dysfunctions (OR, 1.88 [1.50-2.34])., Conclusions: The SRC score has face validity for capability-based groupings of hospitals. Sepsis care may already be de facto regionalized at high-capability hospitals. Low-capability hospitals may have become more adept at treating less complicated sepsis., Competing Interests: Dr. Ofoma’s institution received funding from the National Institute on Aging. Drs. Ofoma and Maddox received support for article research from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Dr. Mohr’s institution received funding from Endpoint Health. Dr. Maddox’s institution received funding from the NIH; she received funding from Humana and Centene. Dr. Kollef is supported by the Barnes-Jewish Hospital Foundation. Dr. Joynt Maddox receives research support from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL143421 and R01HL164561), the National Institute of Nursing Research (U01NR020555), the National Institute on Aging (R01AG060935, R01AG063759, and R21AG065526), and from Humana. She also serves on the Health Policy Advisory Council for the Centene Corporation (St. Louis, MO). The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Background COVID-19 stressed hospitals and may have disproportionately affected the stroke outcomes and treatment of Black and Hispanic individuals. Methods and Results This retrospective study used 100% Medicare Provider Analysis and Review file data from between 2016 and 2020. We used interrupted time series analyses to examine whether the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated disparities in stroke outcomes and reperfusion therapy. Among 1 142 560 hospitalizations for acute ischemic strokes, 90 912 (8.0%) were Hispanic individuals; 162 752 (14.2%) were non-Hispanic Black individuals; and 888 896 (77.8%) were non-Hispanic White individuals. The adjusted odds of mortality increased by 51% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.51 [95% CI, 1.34-1.69]; P <0.001), whereas the rates of nonhome discharges decreased by 11% (aOR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.82-0.96]; P =0.003) for patients hospitalized during weeks when the hospital's proportion of patients with COVID-19 was >30%. The overall rates of motor deficits ( P =0.25) did not increase, and the rates of reperfusion therapy did not decrease as the weekly COVID-19 burden increased. Black patients had lower 30-day mortality (aOR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.69-0.72]; P <0.001) but higher rates of motor deficits (aOR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.12-1.16]; P <0.001) than White individuals. Hispanic patients had lower 30-day mortality and similar rates of motor deficits compared with White individuals. There was no differential increase in adverse outcomes or reduction in reperfusion therapy among Black and Hispanic individuals compared with White individuals as the weekly COVID-19 burden increased. Conclusions This national study of Medicare patients found no evidence that the hospital COVID-19 burden exacerbated disparities in treatment and outcomes for Black and Hispanic individuals admitted with an acute ischemic stroke.

Background: Bundled Payments for Care Improvement - Advanced (BPCI-A) is a Medicare initiative that aims to incentivize reductions in spending for episodes of care that start with a hospitalization and end 90 days after discharge. Cardiovascular disease, an important driver of Medicare spending, is one of the areas of focus BPCI-A. It is unknown whether BPCI-A is associated with spending reductions or quality improvements for the 3 cardiovascular medical events or 5 cardiovascular procedures in the model., Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we conducted difference-in-differences analyses using Medicare claims for patients discharged between January 1, 2017, and September 30, 2019, to assess differences between BPCI-A hospitals and matched nonparticipating control hospitals. Our primary outcomes were the differential changes in spending, before versus after implementation of BPCI-A, for cardiac medical and procedural conditions at BPCI-A hospitals compared with controls. Secondary outcomes included changes in patient complexity, care utilization, healthy days at home, readmissions, and mortality., Results: Baseline spending for cardiac medical episodes at BPCI-A hospitals was $25 606. The differential change in spending for cardiac medical episodes at BPCI-A versus control hospitals was $16 (95% CI, -$228 to $261; P =0.90). Baseline spending for cardiac procedural episodes at BPCI-A hospitals was $37 961. The differential change in spending for cardiac procedural episodes was $171 (95% CI, -$429 to $772; P =0.58). There were minimal differential changes in physicians' care patterns such as the complexity of treated patients or in their care utilization. At BPCI-A versus control hospitals, there were no significant differential changes in rates of 90-day readmissions (differential change, 0.27% [95% CI, -0.25% to 0.80%] for medical episodes; differential change, 0.31% [95% CI, -0.98% to 1.60%] for procedural episodes) or mortality (differential change, -0.14% [95% CI, -0.50% to 0.23%] for medical episodes; differential change, -0.36% [95% CI, -1.25% to 0.54%] for procedural episodes)., Conclusions: Participation in BPCI-A was not associated with spending reductions, changes in care utilization, or quality improvements for the cardiovascular medical events or procedures offered in the model., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Shashikumar has received grants from the Sarnoff Cardiovascular Research Foundation outside the submitted work. Dr Orav receives grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the National Institute on Aging. Dr Epstein receives grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the National Institute on Aging, and the Commonwealth Fund. Dr Joynt Maddox receives grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the National Institute on Aging, and the National Institute of Nursing Research; participates in research projects with Humana; and receives personal fees from the Centene Corporation (St. Louis, MO) for service on the health policy advisory committee. Dr Zheng reports no conflicts.

In October 2018, the allocation policy for adult orthotopic heart transplant (OHTx) in the United States was changed, with the goal of reducing waitlist mortality and providing broader sharing of donor organs within the United States. This study aimed to assess the association of this policy change with changes in access to OHTx versus left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), overall and in key sociodemographic subgroups, in the United States from 2016 to 2019. We identified all patients receiving OHTx or LVAD between 2016 and 2019 using the National Inpatient Sample. Controlling for medical co-morbidities, prepolicy trends, and within-hospital-year effects, we fit a dynamic logistic regression model to evaluate patient and hospital factors associated with receiving OHTx versus LVAD before versus after policy change. We also examined the frequency of temporary mechanical circulatory support in the same fashion. We identified 2,264 patients who received OHTx and 3,157 who received LVADs during the study period. In its first year of implementation, the United Network for Organ Sharing policy change of 2018 was associated with no overall change utilization of OHTx versus LVAD. In OHTx recipients, the frequency of use of temporary mechanical circulatory support changed from 15.6% in the before period to 42.6% in the after period (p <0.001). Although the policy change was associated with differences in the odds of receiving an OHTx versus LVAD between different regions of the country, there were no significant changes based on age, gender, race/ethnicity, insurance status, or rurality. In conclusion, the United Network for Organ Sharing policy change on access to OHTx was associated with no overall change in OHTx versus LVAD use in its first year of implementation although we observed small changes in relative odds of transplant based on rurality. Shifts in regional allocation were not significant overall, although certain regions appeared to have a relative increase in their use of OHTx., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted usual care for emergent conditions, such as acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Understanding whether Black and Hispanic individuals experiencing AMI had greater increases in poor outcomes compared with White individuals during the pandemic has important equity implications., Objective: To investigate whether the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased disparities in treatment and outcomes among Medicare patients hospitalized with AMI., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used Medicare data for patients hospitalized with AMI between January 2016 and November 2020. Patients were categorized as Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, and non-Hispanic White. The association between race and ethnicity and outcomes as a function of the proportion of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was evaluated using interrupted time series. Data were analyzed from October 2022 to June 2023., Exposure: The main exposure was a hospital's proportion of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 on a weekly basis as a proxy for care disruption during the pandemic., Main Outcomes and Measures: Revascularization, 30-day mortality, 30-day readmission, and nonhome discharges., Results: A total of 1 319 273 admissions for AMI (579 817 females [44.0%]; 122 972 Black [9.3%], 117 668 Hispanic [8.9%], and 1 078 633 White [81.8%]; mean [SD] age, 77 [8.4] years) were included. For patients with non-ST segment elevation MI (NSTEMI) overall, the adjusted odds of mortality and nonhome discharges increased by 51% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.51; 95% CI, 1.29-1.76; P < .001) and 32% (aOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.15-1.52; P < .001), respectively, and the odds of revascularization decreased by 27% (aOR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.64-0.83; P < .001) among patients hospitalized during weeks with a high hospital COVID-19 burden (>30%) vs patients hospitalized prior to the pandemic. Black individuals with NSTEMI experienced a clinically insignificant 7% greater increase in the odds of mortality (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.00-1.15; P = .04) for each 10% increase in the COVID-19 hospital burden but no increases in readmissions or nonhome discharges or reductions in revascularization rates compared with White individuals. There were no differential increases in adverse outcomes among Hispanic compared with White patients with NSTEMI based on hospital COVID-19 burden. Increases in hospital COVID-19 burden were not associated with changes in outcomes or the use of revascularization in STEMI overall or by racial or ethnic group., Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that while hospital COVID-19 burden was associated with worse treatment and outcomes for NSTEMI, race and ethnicity-associated inequities did not increase significantly during the pandemic. These findings suggest the need for additional efforts to mitigate outcomes associated with the COVID-19 pandemic for patients admitted with AMI when the hospital COVID-19 burden is substantially increased.

Background: Patients with dementia are a growing and vulnerable population within Medicare. Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are becoming Medicare's dominant care model, but ACO enrollment and care patterns for patients with dementia are unknown., Objective: The aim of this study was to compare differences in ACO enrollment for patients with versus without dementia, and in risk profiles and ambulatory care among patients with dementia by ACO enrollment status., Research Design: Cohort study assessing the relationships between patient dementia, following-year ACO enrollment, and ambulatory care patterns., Subjects: A total of 13,362 (weighted: 45, 499,049) person-years for patients [2761 (weighted: 6,312,304) for dementia patients] ages 65 years and above in the 2015-2019 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey., Measures: We assessed differences in ACO enrollment rates for patients with versus without dementia, and in dementia-relevant ambulatory care visit rates and validated care fragmentation indices among patients with dementia by ACO enrollment status., Results: Patients with versus without dementia were less likely to be enrolled in (38.3% vs. 44.6%, P<0.001), and more likely to exit (21.1% vs. 13.7%, P<0.01) ACOs. Among patients with dementia, those enrolled versus not enrolled in ACOs had a more favorable social and health risk profile on 6 of 16 measures (P<0.05). There were no differences in rates of dementia-relevant, primary, or specialty care visits. ACO enrollment was associated with 45.7% higher wellness visit rates (P<0.001), and 13.4% more fragmented primary care (P<0.01) spread across 8.7% more distinct physicians (P<0.05)., Conclusion: Medicare ACOs are less likely to enroll and retain patients with dementia than other patients and provide more fragmented primary care without providing additional dementia-relevant ambulatory care visits., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To investigate the real-world safety of paclitaxel (PTX)-coated devices for treating lower extremity peripheral artery disease using a commercial claims database., Materials and Methods: Data from FAIR Health, the largest commercial claims data warehouse in the United States, were used for this study. The study consisted of patients who underwent femoropopliteal revascularization procedures between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019, with PTX and non-PTX devices. The primary outcome was 4-year survival following treatment. The secondary outcomes included 2-year survival, 2- and 4-year freedom from amputation, and repeat revascularization. Propensity score matching was used to minimize confounding, and the Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate survival., Results: A total of 10,832 procedures were included in the analysis, including 4,962 involving PTX devices and 5,870 involving non-PTX devices. PTX devices were associated with a reduced hazard of death following treatment at 2 and 4 years (hazard ratio [HR], 0.74 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.69-0.79]; P <.05, and HR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.77-1.02]; log-rank P =.018, respectively). The risk of amputation was also lower following treatment with PTX devices than with non-PTX devices at 2 and 4 years (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.76-0.87]; P =.02, and HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.67-0.89]; log-rank P =.01, respectively). In addition, the odds of repeat revascularization were similar with PTX and non-PTX devices at 2 and 4 years., Conclusions: In the real-world commercial claims database, no short- or long-term signal for increased mortality or amputations was observed following treatment with PTX devices., (Copyright © 2023 SIR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Nursing home quality of care is a persistent challenge, with recent reports calling for increased reforms to improve quality and safety. Less is known about the clinical approaches currently used and the barriers perceived by skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) to provide care for their short-stay residents., Methods: We conducted a nationally representative survey of SNFs from October 2020 to May 2021 to understand their care delivery approaches and perceived barriers. Our primary outcomes were the reported number of 23 separate care delivery approaches and the reported number of 12 separate barriers to reduce spending or improve care for SNF short-stay residents. We also performed stratified analyses by facility participation in bundled payments and other SNF characteristics., Results: We received 377 responses from 693 SNFs contacted (response rate = 54%). SNFs reported an average of 16.8 care delivery approaches and an average of 5.0 barriers. While there were some differences observed in SNF characteristics, such as by bundled payments participation or ownership type, there were common care delivery approaches and barriers shared by most facilities. Care management practices, including reviewing the patient census and medication reconciliation on discharge, were the most common delivery approaches reported. SNFs were less likely to ensure the completion of a follow-up appointment with a primary care provider or track repeat emergency room visits. Issues concerning staffing, such as staff turnover and/or burnout, and lack of resources to provide patients social support, mental health, and substance use services, were the most cited barriers to care delivery., Conclusions: Nationally, SNFs implemented a wide array of care delivery approaches, but challenges with staffing and limited resources to address patients' social and mental health needs were dominant. Individual SNFs may have limited ability to address these key barriers, so the involvement of many stakeholders across the entire healthcare system may be necessary., (© 2023 The American Geriatrics Society.)

Importance: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Medicare introduced a public health emergency (PHE) waiver in March 2020, removing a 3-day hospitalization requirement before fee-for-service beneficiaries could receive skilled nursing facility (SNF) care benefits., Objective: To assess whether there were changes in SNF episode volume and Medicare spending on SNF care before and during the PHE among long-term care (LTC) residents and other Medicare beneficiaries., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used Medicare fee-for-service claims and the Minimum Data Set for Medicare beneficiaries who were reimbursed for SNF care episodes from January 2018 to September 2021 in US SNFs., Exposures: The prepandemic period (January 2018-February 2020) vs the PHE period (March 2020-September 2021)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were SNF episode volume, characteristics, and costs. Episodes were defined as standard (with a preceding 3-day hospitalization) or waiver (with other or no acute care use)., Results: Skilled nursing facility care was provided to 4 299 863 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. Medicare beneficiaries had on average 130 400 monthly SNF episodes in the prepandemic period (mean [SD] age of beneficiaries, 78.9 [11.0] years; 59% female) and 108 575 monthly episodes in the PHE period (mean [SD] age of beneficiaries, 79.0 [11.1] years; 59% female). All waiver episodes increased from 6% to 32%, and waiver episodes without preceding acute care increased from 3% to 18% (from 4% to 49% among LTC residents). Skilled nursing facility episodes provided for LTC residents increased by 77% (from 15 538 to 27 537 monthly episodes), primarily due to waiver episodes provided for residents with COVID-19 in 2020 and early 2021 (62% of waiver episodes without preceding acute care). Skilled nursing facilities in the top quartile of waiver episodes were more often for-profit (80% vs 68%) and had lower quality ratings (mean [SD] overall star rating, 2.7 [1.4] vs 3.2 [1.4]; mean [SD] staffing star rating, 2.5 [1.1] vs 3.0 [1.2]) compared with SNFs in the other quartiles. Monthly Medicare spending on SNF care was $2.1 billion before the pandemic and $2.0 billion during the PHE. For LTC residents, monthly SNF spending increased from $301 million to $585 million while spending on hospitalizations remained relatively stable., Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that the PHE waiver for SNF care was associated with a marked increase in the prevalence of SNF episodes without a preceding hospitalization, especially in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. The waiver was used primarily among certain types of facilities and for LTC residents with COVID-19. Although the effect of the waiver cannot be differentiated from that of the pandemic, overall SNF care costs did not increase substantially; for LTC residents, the waiver was applied primarily for COVID-19 care, suggesting the waiver's successful implementation.

Importance: Clinical guidelines for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) strongly recommend treatment with a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) to reduce cardiovascular mortality or HF hospitalization. Nationwide adoption of SGLT2i for HFrEF in the US is unknown., Objective: To characterize patterns of SGLT2i use among eligible US patients hospitalized for HFrEF., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study analyzed 49 399 patients hospitalized for HFrEF across 489 sites in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) registry between July 1, 2021, and June 30, 2022. Patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 20 mL/min/1.73 m2, type 1 diabetes, and previous intolerance to SGLT2i were excluded., Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient-level and hospital-level prescription of SGLT2i at hospital discharge., Results: Of 49 399 included patients, 16 548 (33.5%) were female, and the median (IQR) age was 67 (56-78) years. Overall, 9988 patients (20.2%) were prescribed an SGLT2i. SGLT2i prescription was less likely among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD; 4550 of 24 437 [18.6%] vs 5438 of 24 962 [21.8%]; P < .001) but more likely among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D; 5721 of 21 830 [26.2%] vs 4262 of 27 545 [15.5%]; P < .001) and those with both T2D and CKD (2905 of 12 236 [23.7%] vs 7078 vs 37 139 [19.1%]; P < .001). Patients prescribed SGLT2i therapy were more likely to be prescribed background triple therapy with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, β-blocker, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (4624 of 9988 [46.3%] vs 10 880 of 39 411 [27.6%]; P < .001), and 4624 of 49 399 total study patients (9.4%) were discharged with prescriptions for quadruple medical therapy including SGLT2i. Among 461 hospitals with 10 or more eligible discharges, 19 hospitals (4.1%) discharged 50% or more of patients with prescriptions for SGLT2i, whereas 344 hospitals (74.6%) discharged less than 25% of patients with prescriptions for SGLT2i (including 29 [6.3%] that discharged zero patients with SGLT2i prescriptions). There was high between-hospital variance in the rate of SGLT2i prescription in unadjusted models (median odds ratio, 2.53; 95% CI, 2.36-2.74) and after adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics (median odds ratio, 2.51; 95% CI, 2.34-2.71)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, prescription of SGLT2i at hospital discharge among eligible patients with HFrEF was low, including among patients with comorbid CKD and T2D who have multiple indications for therapy, with substantial variation among US hospitals. Further efforts are needed to overcome implementation barriers and improve use of SGLT2i among patients with HFrEF.

Background Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is the most common heritable cardiac disease. In small studies, sociodemographic factors have been associated with disparities in septal reduction therapy, but little is known about the association of sociodemographic factors with HCM treatments and outcomes more broadly. Methods and Results Using the National Inpatient Survey from 2012 to 2018, HCM diagnoses and procedures were identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth/Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification ( ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM ) codes. Logistic regression was used to determine the association of sociodemographic risk factors with HCM procedures and in-hospital death, adjusting for clinical comorbidities and hospital characteristics. Of 53 117 patients hospitalized with HCM, 57.7% were women, 20.5% were Black individuals, 27.7% lived in the lowest zip income quartile, and 14.7% lived in rural areas. Among those with obstruction (45.2%), compared with White patients, Black patients were less likely to undergo septal myectomy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.40-0.68]), or alcohol septal ablation (aOR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.42-0.86]). Patients with Medicaid were less likely to undergo each procedure (aOR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.61-0.99] for myectomy; aOR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.36-0.83] for ablation). Women (aOR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.58-0.74]), patients with Medicaid (aOR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.65-0.93]), and patients from low-income areas (aOR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.65-0.93]) were less likely to receive implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Women (aOR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.10-1.37]) and patients from towns (aOR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.03-1.31]) or rural areas (aOR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.30-1.89]) had higher odds of in-hospital death. Conclusions Among 53 117 patients hospitalized with HCM, race, sex, social, and geographic risk factors were associated with disparities in HCM outcomes and treatment. Further research is required to identify and address the sources of these inequities.

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.

Objective: To evaluate whether Medicare's Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) is associated with increased observation stay use., Data Sources and Study Setting: A nationally representative sample of fee-for-service Medicare claims, January 2009-September 2016., Study Design: Using a difference-in-difference (DID) design, we modeled changes in observation stays as a proportion of total hospitalizations, separately comparing the initial (acute myocardial infarction, pneumonia, heart failure) and subsequent (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) target conditions with a control group of nontarget conditions. Each model used 3 time periods: baseline (15 months before program announcement), an intervening period between announcement and implementation, and a 2-year post-implementation period, with specific dates defined by HRRP policies., Data Collection/extraction Methods: We derived a 20% random sample of all hospitalizations for beneficiaries continuously enrolled for 12 months before hospitalization (N = 7,162,189)., Principal Findings: Observation stays increased similarly for the initial HRRP target and nontarget conditions in the intervening period (0.01% points per month [95% CI -0.01, 0.3]). Post-implementation, observation stays increased significantly more for target versus nontarget conditions, but the difference is quite small (0.02% points per month [95% CI 0.002, 0.04]). Results for the COPD analysis were statistically insignificant in both policy periods., Conclusions: The increase in observation stays is likely due to other factors, including audit activity and clinical advances., (© 2023 The Authors. Health Services Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Health Research and Educational Trust.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic caused massive disruption in usual care delivery patterns in hospitals across the USA, and highlighted long-standing inequities in health care delivery and outcomes. Its effect on hospital operations, and whether the magnitude of the effect differed for hospitals serving historically marginalized populations, is unknown., Objective: To investigate the perspectives of hospital leaders on the effects of COVID-19 on their facilities' operations and patient outcomes., Methods: A survey was administered via print and electronic means to hospital leaders at 588 randomly sampled acute-care hospitals participating in Medicare's Inpatient Prospective Payment System, fielded from November 2020 to June 2021. Summary statistics were tabulated, and responses were adjusted for sampling strategy and non-response., Results: There were 203 responses to the survey (41.6%), with 20.7% of respondents representing safety-net hospitals and 19.7% representing high-minority hospitals. Over three-quarters of hospitals reported COVID testing shortages, about two-thirds reported staffing shortages, and 78.8% repurposed hospital spaces to intensive care units, with a slightly higher proportion of high-minority hospitals reporting these effects. About half of respondents felt that non-COVID inpatients received worsened quality or outcomes during peak COVID surges, and almost two-thirds reported worsened quality or outcomes for outpatient non-COVID patients as well, with few differences by hospital safety-net or minority status. Over 80% of hospitals participated in alternative payment models prior to COVID, and a third of these reported decreasing these efforts due to the pandemic, with no differences between safety-net and high-minority hospitals., Conclusions: COVID-19 significantly disrupted the operations of hospitals across the USA, with hospitals serving patients in poverty and racial and ethnic minorities reporting relatively similar care disruption as non-safety-net and lower-minority hospitals., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)