McNulty, Edward

Introduction: The relationship between aortic stenosis (AS) severity, AS-related symptoms, and clinical outcomes is poorly understood. Research Question: Does a history of AS-related symptoms at the time of diagnosis affect clinical outcomes including death and AS-related hospitalization? Methods: Using a combination of natural language processing algorithms and administrative codes, we ascertained physician-assessed AS, AS severity, and AS-related symptoms (chest pain, acute coronary syndrome, syncope, presyncope, orthopnea, dyspnea, PND, and worsening heart failure) in the year prior or up to 60 days after an initial AS diagnosis among 602,821 adults with echocardiograms in a large, integrated health system from 2010-2019. We examined multivariable associations between AS severity and recent AS-related symptoms for the outcomes of death and AS-related hospitalizations using Cox models. Results: Among 40,333 patients identified with incident AS, the majority had recent AS-related symptoms (mild: 80%, mild-moderate: 77%, moderate: 77%, moderate-severe: 85%, and severe AS: 87%). Patients with recent symptoms were older (mean [SD] age 78 [10] vs 75 [11] years; p<0.01), more likely female (51% vs 47%; p<0.01), and had a higher comorbidity burden. In unadjusted analyses, symptom status was a strong discriminator of risk over a median (IQR) of 2.2 (0.8-4.3) years of follow-up ( Figure ). After multivariable adjustment, AS-related symptoms remained strongly associated with death and AS-related hospitalization across the spectrum of AS severity, with moderate symptomatic patients having risk similar to severe asymptomatic patients. Conclusions: The majority of patients diagnosed with AS have recent and/or active AS-related symptoms, which is associated with a significantly increased risk of adverse outcomes. Incorporating symptom status across the individual grades of AS may improve risk stratification beyond AS severity alone.

Background: In light of well-known deficiencies in the process of informed consent for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), we developed and tested a personalized consent form, PRISM; this was shown to improve patients' participation in the consent process, understanding of procedural risks, and engagement in shared decision-making when compared to original PCI consent forms. It is unknown whether patient factors traditionally known to impair the consent process, including socioeconomic status, literacy and numeracy, were associated with greater benefit from the PRISM consents. Methods: We interviewed 590 patients receiving original consent documents and 527 receiving PRISM consents and compared the rates of reviewing the consent form, recalling a risk of bleeding and engaging in discussions about stent type using hierarchical modified Poisson regression analysis. The interaction of patient factors (age, gender, education level, insurance status, literacy and numeracy) with PRISM on outcomes was assessed. Results: Overall, few patient characteristics were associated with outcomes, including review of consent forms, knowledge transfer, or engagement in shared decision-making (see Table), although older patients were less likely to discuss stent types with their doctors (RR=0.84/decade for original and 0.93/decade for PRISM). Those with more than a high school education were less likely to review original consents (RR=0.77; 95% CI=0.66, 0.89) compared to those with less education; this difference was eliminated with the PRISM consents (RR=1.0; 95%CI=0.82, 1.23; p-value for interaction = 0.01). Conclusions: PRISM consent forms led to improved participation in the consent process and knowledge transfer in a 9-center study; there was little variance by sociodemographic, economic, literacy or numeracy factors, both with original consents and with PRISM.