Abe, Temidayo

Background Safety-net hospitals (SNH) provide care to a significant proportion of low-income, uninsured, and underserved populations disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the impact of safety-net burden on outcomes of COVID-19 hospitalizations. Methods We identified patients aged ≥ 18 years hospitalized with COVID-19 from the nationwide inpatient database using the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Edition (ICD-10-CM) code U07.1. The primary study outcomes were inpatient mortality, respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation, and tracheostomy use. Secondary outcomes were total hospitalization costs (THC) and length of hospital stay (LOS). Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare the primary and secondary outcomes in HBH and medium safety-net burden (MBH) with lower-burden hospitals (LBH) (reference). Results An estimated 2,608,232 COVID-19 hospitalizations met the inclusion criteria, with 68.7% occurring in HBH, 22.8% in MBH, and 8.5% in LBH. On adjusted multivariable analysis, HBH was associated with increased odds of inpatient mortality (aOR 1.19, 95% CI 1.09-1.28) compared with LBH. Both HBH (aOR 1.30, 95% CI 1.21-1.40) and MBH (aOR 1.14, 95% CI 1.06-1.24) demonstrated increased odds of mechanical ventilation compared with LBH. THC was lower in HBH and MBH compared with LBH. The LOS was similar across safety net burden categories. Conclusion After adjusting for patient- and hospital-level factors, COVID-19 hospitalizations at HBH had inferior inpatient outcomes compared with LBH. Targeted policy reforms are needed to address the underlying causes of these disparities and increase our health systems’ readiness for future crises, particularly in underserved communities.

Background: Safety net hospitals treat a large burden of uninsured, or Medicaid insured patients, and have been linked to worse outcomes across several medical and surgical conditions. Currently, there is limited data on the effect of safety net burden on outcomes of inpatient cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for patients that suffered in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) in the US. Hypothesis: Patients that experience IHCA in high burden safety net hospitals (HBH) will have worse outcomes compared to low burden safety net hospitals (LBH). Methods: Using the National Inpatient Sample database, from 2008 – 2018, we identified patients aged ≥ 18 years who experienced IHCA, using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Hospitals’ safety net burden was calculated from the proportions of Medicaid and uninsured patients using previously published methodology and categorized into LBH and HBH. Multivariate regression models were used to estimate the odds of key clinical outcomes Result: From 2008 to 2018, an estimated 555,016 unweighted adult hospitalizations underwent CPR for IHCA, out of which 19.2 % occurred at LBH and 55.2 % occurred at HBH. Compared with LBH, patients at HBH on average were younger 62 years ± 20 vs 67 years ± 17), less likely to be of White race, and more likely to be in the lowest median household income. On multivariate regression analysis, HBH was associated with lower chances of survival to hospital discharge (aOR 0.88; 95% CI 0.85 – 0.96) and lower odds of routine discharge (aOR 0.6; 95% CI 0.47 – 0.75)), compared to LBH. Patients who suffered IHCA in safety net hospitals with medium and large hospital bed size (aOR 0.96; 95% CI 0.94 – 0.98) and those publicly owned (aOR 0.95; 95% CI 0.92 – 0.98) were less likely to survive to hospital discharge. Median household income of patients in the 26 th – 100 th quartile and hospital location in the Midwest and Southern region were associated with better odds of hospital survival. Conclusion: Our study suggests that patients who experience IHCA at HBH had lower rates and odds of in-hospital survival and also less likely to be routinely discharged home. Patients’ income level and hospital-level characteristics appear to contribute to survival.

Background: Overall inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) utilization has decreased in the United States since the 2010 US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) safety communication. The FDA renewed this safety warning in 2014 with additional mandates on reporting IVCF-related adverse events. We evaluated the impact of the FDA recommendations on IVCF placements for different indications from 2010 to 2019 and further assessed utilization trends by region and hospital teaching status. Methods: Inferior vena cava filter placements between 2010 and 2019 were identified in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database using the associated International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification, and Tenth Revision codes. Inferior vena cava filter placements were categorized by indication for venous thromboembolism (VTE) “treatment” in patients with VTE diagnosis and contraindication to anticoagulation and “prophylaxis” in patients without VTE. Generalized linear regression was used to analyze utilization trends. Results: A total of 823 717 IVCFs were placed over the study period, of which 644 663 (78.3%) were for VTE treatment and 179 054 (21.7%) were for prophylaxis indications. The median age for both categories of patients was 68 years. The total number of IVCFs placed for all indications decreased from 129 616 in 2010 to 58 465 in 2019, with an aggregate decline rate of −8.4%. The decline rate was higher between 2014 and 2019 than between 2010 and 2014 (−11.6% vs −7.2%). From 2010 to 2019, IVCF placement for VTE treatment and prophylaxis trended downward at rates of −7.9% and −10.2%, respectively. Urban nonteaching hospitals saw the highest decline for both VTE treatment (−17.2%) and prophylactic indications (−18.0%). Hospitals located in the Northeast region had the highest decline rates for VTE treatment (−10.3%) and prophylactic indications (−12.5%). Conclusion: The higher decline rate in IVCF placements between 2014 and 2019 compared with 2010 and 2014 suggests an additional impact of the renewed 2014 FDA safety indications on national IVCF utilization. Variations in IVCF use for VTE treatment and prophylactic indications existed across hospital teaching types, locations, and regions. Clinical Impact Inferior vena cava filters (IVCF) are associated with medical complications. The 2010 and 2014 FDA safety warnings appeared to have synergistically contributed to a significant decline in IVCF utilization rates from 2010 – 2019 in the US. IVC filter placements in patients without venous thromboembolism (VTE) declined at a higher rate than VTE. However, IVCF utilization varied across hospitals and geographical locations, likely due to the absence of universally accepted clinical guidelines on IVCF indications and use. Harmonization of IVCF placement guidelines is needed to standardize clinical practice, thereby reducing the observed regional and hospital variations and potential IVC filter overutilization.

Background Although there has been a decrease in the incidence of ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in the United States, this trend might be stagnant or increasing in young women. We assessed the trends, characteristics, and outcomes of STEMI in women aged 18 to 55 years. Methods and Results We identified 177 602 women aged 18 to 55 with the primary diagnosis of STEMI from the National Inpatient Sample during years 2008 to 2019. We performed trend analyses to assess hospitalization rates, cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor profile, and in‐hospital outcomes stratified by three age subgroups (18–34, 35–44, and 45–55 years). We found STEMI hospitalization rates were decreased in the overall study cohort from 52 per 100 000 hospitalizations in 2008 to 36 per 100 000 in 2019. This was driven by decreased proportion of hospitalizations in women aged 45 to 55 years (74.2% to–71.7%; P <0.001). Proportion of STEMI hospitalizationincreased in women aged 18–34 (4.7%–5.5%; P <0.001) and 35–44 years (21.2%–22.7%; P <0.001). The prevalence of traditional and non‐traditional female‐specific or female‐predominant CVD risk factors increased in all age subgroups. The adjusted odds of in‐hospital mortality in the overall study cohort and age subgroups were unchanged throughout the study period. Additionally, we observed an increase in the adjusted odds of cardiogenic shock, acute stroke, and acute kidney injury in the overall cohort over the study period. Conclusions STEMI hospitalizations are increasing among women aged <45 years, and in‐hospital mortality has not changed over the past 12 years in women aged <55 years. Future studies on the optimization of risk assessment and management of STEMI in young women are urgently needed.

IMPORTANCE: High safety-net burden hospitals (HBHs) treating large numbers of uninsured or Medicaid-insured patients have generally been linked to worse clinical outcomes. However, limited data exist on the impact of the hospitals’ safety-net burden on in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) outcomes in the United States. OBJECTIVES: To compare the differences in survival to discharge, routine discharge home, and healthcare resource utilization between patients at HBH with those treated at low safety-net burden hospital (LBH). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study across hospitals in the United States: Hospitalized patients greater than or equal to 18 years that underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) between 2008 and 2018 identified from the Nationwide Inpatient Database. Data analysis was conducted in January 2022. EXPOSURE: IHCA. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome is survival to hospital discharge. Other outcomes are routine discharge home among survivors, length of hospital stay, and total hospitalization cost RESULTS: From 2008 to 2018, an estimated 555,016 patients were hospitalized with IHCA, of which 19.2% occurred at LBH and 55.2% at HBH. Compared with LBH, patients at HBH were younger (62 ± 20 yr vs 67 ± 17 yr) and predominantly in the lowest median household income (< 25th percentile). In multivariate analysis, HBH was associated with lower chances of survival to hospital discharge (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.85–0.96) and lower odds of routine discharge (aOR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.47–0.75), compared with LBH. In addition, IHCA patients at publicly owned hospitals and those with medium and large hospital bed size were less likely to survive to hospital discharge, while patients with median household income greater than 25th percentile had better odds of hospital survival. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our study suggests that patients who experience IHCA at HBH may have lower rates and odds of in-hospital survival and are less likely to be routinely discharged home after CPR. Median household income and hospital-level characteristics appear to contribute to survival.