Kumar Dharmarajan

National Trends in Heart Failure Hospital Stay Rates, 2001 to 2009

OBJECTIVES This study sought to analyze recent trends over time in heart failure (HF) hospital stay rates, length of stay (LOS), and in-hospital mortality by age groups with a large national dataset of U.S. hospital discharges. BACKGROUND Heart failure hospital stay rates, LOS, and mortality have fallen over the past decade for older Medicare beneficiaries, but whether this holds true for younger adults is unknown. METHODS From the National Inpatient Sample, we calculated HF hospital stay rates, LOS, and in-hospital mortality from 2001 to 2009 with survey data analysis techniques. RESULTS Hospital stays (n = 1,686,089) with a primary discharge diagnosis of HF were identified from National Inpatient Sample data between 2001 and 2009. The overall national hospital stay rate decreased from 633 to 463 hospital stays/100,000 persons, (-26.9%, p-for-trend <0.001). However, statistically significant declines (p < 0.001) were only observed for patients 55 to 64 years of age (-36.5%) 65 to 74 years (-37.4%), and ≥ 75 years (-28.3%) but not for patients 18 to 44 years of age (-12.8%, p = 0.57) or 45 to 55 years (-16.2%, p = 0.04). Statistically significant declines in LOS were only observed for patients 65 years of age and older. Overall in-hospital mortality fell from 4.5% to 3.3%, a relative decline of -27.4%, (p-for-trend <0.001), but patients 18 to 44 years of age did not exhibit a significant decline (-8.1%, p-for-trend = 0.18). In secondary analyses significant declines in HF hospital stay rate over time were observed for white men, white women, and black women but not for black men (-9.5%, p-for-trend = 0.43). CONCLUSIONS Younger patients have not experienced comparable declines in HF hospital stay, LOS, and in-hospital mortality as older patients. Black men remain a vulnerable population for HF hospital stay.

National Trends in Heart Failure Hospitalization After Acute Myocardial Infarction for Medicare Beneficiaries 1998–2010

Background— Previous studies have reported conflicting findings regarding how the incidence of heart failure (HF) after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has changed over time, and data on contemporary national trends are sparse. Methods and Results— Using a complete national sample of 2 789 943 AMI hospitalizations of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries from 1998 through 2010, we evaluated annual changes in the incidence of subsequent HF hospitalization and mortality using Poisson and survival analysis models. The number of patients hospitalized for HF within 1 year after AMI declined modestly from 16.1 per 100 person-years in 1998 to 14.2 per 100 person years in 2010 (P<0.001). After adjusting for demographic factors, a relative 14.6% decline for HF hospitalizations after AMI was observed over the study period (incidence risk ratio, 0.854; 95% confidence interval, 0.809–0.901). Unadjusted 1-year mortality following HF hospitalization after AMI was 44.4% in 1998, which decreased to 43.2% in 2004 to 2005, but then increased to 45.5% by 2010. After adjusting for demographic factors and clinical comorbidities, this represented a 2.4% relative annual decline (hazard ratio, 0.976; 95% confidence interval, 0.974–0.978) from 1998 to 2007, but a 5.1% relative annual increase from 2007 to 2010 (hazard ratio, 1.051; 95% confidence interval, 1.039–1.064). Conclusions— In a national sample of Medicare beneficiaries, HF hospitalization after AMI decreased from 1998 to 2010, which may indicate improvements in the management of AMI. In contrast, survival after HF following AMI remains poor, and has worsened from 2007 to 2010, demonstrating that challenges still remain for the treatment of this high-risk condition after AMI.

Trajectories of risk after hospitalization for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or pneumonia: retrospective cohort study.

Objective To characterize the absolute risks for older patients of readmission to hospital and death in the year after hospitalization for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or pneumonia. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting 4767 hospitals caring for Medicare fee for service beneficiaries in the United States, 2008-10. Participants More than 3 million Medicare fee for service beneficiaries, aged 65 years or more, surviving hospitalization for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or pneumonia. Main outcome measures Daily absolute risks of first readmission to hospital and death for one year after discharge. To illustrate risk trajectories, we identified the time required for risks of readmission to hospital and death to decline 50% from maximum values after discharge; the time required for risks to approach plateau periods of minimal day to day change, defined as 95% reductions in daily changes in risk from maximum daily declines after discharge; and the extent to which risks are higher among patients recently discharged from hospital compared with the general elderly population. Results Within one year of hospital discharge, readmission to hospital and death, respectively, occurred following 67.4% and 35.8% of hospitalizations for heart failure, 49.9% and 25.1% for acute myocardial infarction, and 55.6% and 31.1% for pneumonia. Risk of first readmission had declined 50% by day 38 after hospitalization for heart failure, day 13 after hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction, and day 25 after hospitalization for pneumonia; risk of death declined 50% by day 11, 6, and 10, respectively. Daily change in risk of first readmission to hospital declined 95% by day 45, 38, and 45; daily change in risk of death declined 95% by day 21, 19, and 21. After hospitalization for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or pneumonia, the magnitude of the relative risk for hospital admission over the first 90 days was 8, 6, and 6 times greater than that of the general older population; the relative risk of death was 11, 8, and 10 times greater. Conclusions Risk declines slowly for older patients after hospitalization for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or pneumonia and is increased for months. Specific risk trajectories vary by discharge diagnosis and outcome. Patients should remain vigilant for deterioration in health for an extended time after discharge. Health providers can use knowledge of absolute risks and their changes over time to better align interventions designed to reduce adverse outcomes after discharge with the highest risk periods for patients.

Association Between Hospital Penalty Status Under the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program and Readmission Rates for Target and Nontarget Conditions

Importance Readmission rates declined after announcement of the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP), which penalizes hospitals for excess readmissions for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), and pneumonia. Objective To compare trends in readmission rates for target and nontarget conditions, stratified by hospital penalty status. Design, Setting, and Participants Retrospective cohort study of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries older than 64 years discharged between January 1, 2008, and June 30, 2015, from 2214 penalty hospitals and 1283 nonpenalty hospitals. Difference-interrupted time-series models were used to compare trends in readmission rates by condition and penalty status. Exposure Hospital penalty status or target condition under the HRRP. Main Outcomes and Measures Thirty-day risk adjusted, all-cause unplanned readmission rates for target and nontarget conditions. Results The study included 48 137 102 hospitalizations of 20 351 161 Medicare beneficiaries. In January 2008, the mean readmission rates for AMI, HF, pneumonia, and nontarget conditions were 21.9%, 27.5%, 20.1%, and 18.4%, respectively, at hospitals later subject to financial penalties and 18.7%, 24.2%, 17.4%, and 15.7% at hospitals not subject to penalties. Between January 2008 and March 2010, prior to HRRP announcement, readmission rates were stable across hospitals (except AMI at nonpenalty hospitals). Following announcement of HRRP (March 2010), readmission rates for both target and nontarget conditions declined significantly faster for patients at hospitals later subject to financial penalties compared with those at nonpenalized hospitals (for AMI, additional decrease of -1.24 [95% CI, -1.84 to -0.65] percentage points per year relative to nonpenalty discharges; for HF, -1.25 [95% CI, -1.64 to -0.86]; for pneumonia, -1.37 [95% CI, -1.80 to -0.95]; and for nontarget conditions, -0.27 [95% CI, -0.38 to -0.17]; P < .001 for all). For penalty hospitals, readmission rates for target conditions declined significantly faster compared with nontarget conditions (for AMI, additional decline of -0.49 [95% CI, -0.81 to -0.16] percentage points per year relative to nontarget conditions [P = .004]; for HF, -0.90 [95% CI, -1.18 to -0.62; P < .001]; and for pneumonia, -0.57 [95% CI, -0.92 to -0.23; P < .001]). In contrast, among nonpenalty hospitals, readmissions for target conditions declined similarly or more slowly compared with nontarget conditions (for AMI, additional increase of 0.48 [95% CI, 0.01-0.95] percentage points per year [P = .05]; for HF, 0.08 [95% CI, -0.30 to 0.46; P = .67]; for pneumonia, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.13-0.93; P = .01]). After HRRP implementation in October 2012, the rate of change for readmission rates plateaued (P < .05 for all except pneumonia at nonpenalty hospitals), with the greatest relative change observed among hospitals subject to financial penalty. Conclusions and Relevance Medicare fee-for-service patients at hospitals subject to penalties under the HRRP had greater reductions in readmission rates compared with those at nonpenalized hospitals. Changes were greater for target vs nontarget conditions for patients at the penalized hospitals but not at the other hospitals.

Hospital Variation in the Use of Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging and Its Association With Downstream Testing, Interventions, and Outcomes

IMPORTANCE Current guidelines allow substantial discretion in use of noninvasive cardiac imaging for patients without acute myocardial infarction (AMI) who are being evaluated for ischemia. Imaging use may affect downstream testing and outcomes. OBJECTIVE To characterize hospital variation in use of noninvasive cardiac imaging and the association of imaging use with downstream testing, interventions, and outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Cross-sectional study of hospitals using 2010 administrative data from Premier, Inc, including patients with suspected ischemia on initial evaluation who were seen in the emergency department, observation unit, or inpatient ward; received at least 1 cardiac biomarker test on day 0 or 1; and had a principal discharge diagnosis for a common cause of chest discomfort, a sign or symptom of cardiac ischemia, and/or a comorbidity associated with coronary disease. We excluded patients with AMI. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES At each hospital, the proportion of patients who received noninvasive imaging to identify cardiac ischemia and the subsequent rates of admission, coronary angiography, and revascularization procedures. RESULTS We identified 549,078 patients at 224 hospitals. The median (interquartile range) hospital noninvasive imaging rate was 19.8% (10.9%-27.7%); range, 0.2% to 55.7%. Median hospital imaging rates by quartile were Q1, 6.0%; Q2, 15.9%; Q3, 23.5%; Q4, 34.8%. Compared with Q1, Q4 hospitals had higher rates of admission (Q1, 32.1% vs Q4, 40.0%), downstream coronary angiogram (Q1, 1.2% vs Q4, 4.9%), and revascularization procedures (Q1, 0.5% vs Q4, 1.9%). Hospitals in Q4 had a lower yield of revascularization for noninvasive imaging (Q1, 7.6% vs Q4, 5.4%) and for angiograms (Q1, 41.2% vs Q4, 38.8%). P <.001 for all comparisons. Readmission rates to the same hospital for AMI within 2 months were not different by quartiles (P = .51). Approximately 23% of variation in imaging use was attributable to the behavior of individual hospitals. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Hospitals vary in their use of noninvasive cardiac imaging in patients with suspected ischemia who do not have AMI. Hospitals with higher imaging rates did not have substantially different rates of therapeutic interventions or lower readmission rates for AMI but were more likely to admit patients and perform angiography.

Hospital readmission performance and patterns of readmission: retrospective cohort study of Medicare admissions

Objectives To determine whether high performing hospitals with low 30 day risk standardized readmission rates have a lower proportion of readmissions from specific diagnoses and time periods after admission or instead have a similar distribution of readmission diagnoses and timing to lower performing institutions. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting Medicare beneficiaries in the United States. Participants Patients aged 65 and older who were readmitted within 30 days after hospital admission for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or pneumonia in 2007-09. Main outcome measures Readmission diagnoses were classified with a modified version of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ condition categories, and readmission timing was classified by day (0-30) after hospital discharge. Hospital 30 day risk standardized readmission rates over the three years of study were calculated with public reporting methods of the US federal government, and hospitals were categorized with bootstrap analysis as having high, average, or low readmission performance for each index condition. High and low performing hospitals had ≥95% probability of having an interval estimate respectively less than or greater than the national 30 day readmission rate over the three year period of study. All remaining hospitals were considered average performers. Results For readmissions in the 30 days after the index admission, there were 320 003 after 1 291 211 admissions for heart failure (4041 hospitals), 102 536 after 517 827 admissions for acute myocardial infarction (2378 hospitals), and 208 438 after 1 135 932 admissions for pneumonia (4283 hospitals). The distribution of readmissions by diagnosis was similar across categories of hospital performance for all three conditions. High performing hospitals had fewer readmissions for all common diagnoses. Median time to readmission was similar by hospital performance for heart failure and acute myocardial infarction, though was 1.4 days longer among high versus low performing hospitals for pneumonia (P<0.001). Findings were unchanged after adjustment for other hospital characteristics potentially associated with readmission patterns. Conclusions High performing hospitals have proportionately fewer 30 day readmissions without differences in readmission diagnoses and timing, suggesting the possible benefit of strategies that lower risk of readmission globally rather than for specific diagnoses or time periods after hospital stay.

Variation Exists in Rates of Admission to Intensive Care Units for Heart Failure Patients Across Hospitals in the United States

Background— Despite increasing attention on reducing relatively costly hospital practices while maintaining the quality of care, few studies have examined how hospitals use the intensive care unit (ICU), a high-cost setting, for patients admitted with heart failure (HF). We characterized hospital patterns of ICU admission for patients with HF and determined their association with the use of ICU-level therapies and patient outcomes. Methods and Results— We identified 166 224 HF discharges from 341 hospitals in the 2009–2010 Premier Perspective database. We excluded hospitals with <25 HF admissions, patients <18 years old, and transfers. We defined ICU as including medical ICU, coronary ICU, and surgical ICU. We calculated the percent of patients admitted directly to an ICU. We compared hospitals in the top quartile (high ICU admission) with the remaining quartiles. The median percentage of ICU admission was 10% (interquartile range, 6%–16%; range, 0%–88%). In top-quartile hospitals, treatments requiring an ICU were used less often; the percentage of ICU days receiving mechanical ventilation was 6% for the top quartile versus 15% for the others; noninvasive positive pressure ventilation, 8% versus 19%; vasopressors and/or inotropes, 9% versus 16%; vasodilators, 6% versus 12%; and any of these interventions, 26% versus 51%. Overall HF in-hospital risk-standardized mortality was similar (3.4% versus 3.5%; P=0.2). Conclusions— ICU admission rates for HF varied markedly across hospitals and lacked association with in-hospital risk-standardized mortality. Greater ICU use correlated with fewer patients receiving ICU interventions. Judicious ICU use could reduce resource consumption without diminishing patient outcomes.

Transthyretin Cardiac Amyloidoses in Older North Americans

The amyloidoses are a group of hereditary or acquired disorders caused by the extracellular deposition of insoluble protein fibrils that impair tissue structure and function. All amyloidoses result from protein misfolding, a common mechanism for disorders in older persons, including Alzheimers disease and Parkinsons disease. Abnormalities in the protein transthyretin (TTR), a serum transporter of thyroxine and retinol, is the most common cause of cardiac amyloidoses in elderly adults. Mutations in TTR can result in familial amyloidotic cardiomyopathy, and wild‐type TTR can result in senile cardiac amyloidosis. These underdiagnosed disorders are much more common than previously thought. The resulting restrictive cardiomyopathy can cause congestive heart failure, arrhythmias, and advanced conduction system disease. Although historically difficult to make, the diagnosis of TTR cardiac amyloidosis has become easier in recent years with advances in cardiac imaging and more widespread use of genetic analysis. Although therapy has largely involved supportive medical care, avoidance of potentially toxic agents, and rarely organ transplantation, the near future brings the possibility of targeted pharmacotherapies designed to prevent TTR misfolding and amyloid deposition. Because these disease‐modifying agents are designed to prevent disease progression, it has become increasingly important that older persons with TTR amyloidosis be expeditiously identified and considered for enrollment in clinical registries and trials.

Sex Differences in the Rate, Timing, and Principal Diagnoses of 30-Day Readmissions in Younger Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction

Background— Young women (<65 years) experience a 2- to 3-fold greater mortality risk than younger men after an acute myocardial infarction. However, it is unknown whether they are at higher risk for 30-day readmission, and if this association varies by age. We examined sex differences in the rate, timing, and principal diagnoses of 30-day readmissions, including the independent effect of sex following adjustment for confounders. Methods and Results— We included patients aged 18 to 64 years with a principal diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction. Data were used from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-State Inpatient Database for California (07–09). Readmission diagnoses were categorized by using an aggregated version of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ Condition Categories, and readmission timing was determined from the day after discharge. Of 42 518 younger patients with acute myocardial infarction (26.4% female), 4775 (11.2%) had at least 1 readmission. The 30-day all-cause readmission rate was higher for women (15.5% versus 9.7%, P<0.0001). For both sexes, readmission risk was highest on days 2 to 4 after discharge and declined thereafter, and women were more likely to present with noncardiac diagnoses (44.4% versus 40.6%, P=0.01). Female sex was associated with a higher rate of 30-day readmission, which persisted after adjustment (hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.15–1.30). There was no significant interaction between age and sex on readmission. Conclusions— In comparison with men, younger women have a higher risk for readmission, even after the adjustment for confounders. The timing of 30-day readmission was similar in women and men, and both sexes were susceptible to a wide range of causes for readmission.

The China Patient-Centered Evaluative Assessment of Cardiac Events (China PEACE) Retrospective Study of Acute Myocardial Infarction: Study Design

Background— Cardiovascular diseases are rising as a cause of death and disability in China. To improve outcomes for patients with these conditions, the Chinese government, academic researchers, clinicians, and >200 hospitals have created China Patient-Centered Evaluative Assessment of Cardiac Events (China PEACE), a national network for research and performance improvement. The first study from China PEACE, the Retrospective Study of Acute Myocardial Infarction (China PEACE-Retrospective AMI Study), is designed to promote improvements in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) quality of care by generating knowledge about the characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of patients hospitalized with AMI across a representative sample of Chinese hospitals during the past decade. Methods and Results— The China PEACE-Retrospective AMI Study will examine >18 000 patient records from 162 hospitals identified using a 2-stage cluster sampling design within economic–geographic regions. Records were chosen from 2001, 2006, and 2011 to identify temporal trends. Data quality will be monitored by a central coordinating center and will, in particular, address case ascertainment, data abstraction, and data management. Analyses will examine patient characteristics, diagnostic testing patterns, in-hospital treatments, in-hospital outcomes, and variation in results by time and site of care. In addition to publications, data will be shared with participating hospitals and the Chinese government to develop strategies to promote quality improvement. Conclusions— The China PEACE-Retrospective AMI Study is the first to leverage the China PEACE platform to better understand AMI across representative sites of care and during the past decade in China. The China PEACE collaboration among government, academicians, clinicians, and hospitals is poised to translate research about trends and patterns of AMI practices and outcomes into improved care for patients. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01624883.