Dataset Information

Assessing Variation in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy Guideline Adherence With Physician and Hospital Patient-sharing Networks.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy is used for primary prevention of death among people with heart failure, and new evidence in 2005 on its effectiveness changed practice guidelines in the United States. OBJECTIVES:The objective of this study is to examine how the connectedness of physicians and hospitals, measured using network analysis, relates to guideline-consistent ICD implantation. RESEARCH DESIGN:We constructed physician and hospital networks for cardiovascular disease. Physicians were linked if they shared cardiovascular disease patients; these links were aggregated by hospital affiliation to construct a hospital network. SUBJECTS:Medicare beneficiaries who underwent ICD therapy for primary prevention from 2007 to 2011. MEASURES:The clinical outcome of interest was guideline-consistent ICD implantation, calculated using the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. The exposure variables of interest were the network measures of the ICD surgeon, the referring hospital, and the hospital where the ICD surgery occurred. RESULTS:We focused on patients who were referred between hospitals for ICD implantation because they were more likely influenced by the hospital network (n=28,179). Patients were less likely to meet guidelines if their referring hospital had more connections to other hospitals (OR, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.96) and more likely to meet guidelines if their ICD surgery hospital had more connections (OR, 1.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-2.64). The ICD surgeon's network measures were not associated with guideline-consistent implantation. CONCLUSIONS:Associations between the hospital network measures and guideline adherence suggests new approaches to better disseminate clinical guidelines across health systems.

SUBMITTER: Moen EL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5851832 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Patients undergoing implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantations have high rates of long-term device-related complications and reoperations. Whether physician specialty training is associated with differences in long-term outcomes following ICD implantation is unclear. Methods and Results We linked data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry with Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify physicians who performed ≥10 index ICDs from 2006 to 2009. We used data from the American Board of Medical Specialties to group the specialty of the implanting physician into mutually exclusive categories: electrophysiologists, interventional cardiologists, general cardiologists, thoracic surgeons, and other specialties. Primary outcomes were long-term device-related complications requiring reoperations or hospitalizations and reoperations for reasons other than complications. We compared the cumulative incidence rates and case-mix adjusted rates of long-term outcomes of index ICD implantations across physician specialties. Our analysis had a median follow-up of 47 months and included 107 966 index ICD implantations. Electrophysiologists had the lowest rates of incident long-term device-related complications (14.1%; interventional cardiologists, 15.3%; general cardiologists, 15.4%; thoracic surgeons, 16.4%; other specialists, 15.2%; P<0.001) and reoperations for reasons other than complications (electrophysiologists, 16.7%; interventional cardiologists, 17.0%; general cardiologists, 18.0%; thoracic surgeons, 18.4%; other specialists, 18.0%; P<0.001). Compared with patients whose ICDs were implanted by electrophysiologists, patients with implantations performed by nonelectrophysiologists were at higher risk of having long-term device-related complications (relative risk for interventional cardiologists: 1.16 [95% CI, 1.08-1.25]; general cardiologists: 1.13 [1.08-1.18]; thoracic surgeons: 1.20 [1.06-1.37]; all P<0.001, but not other specialists: 1.08 [0.99-1.17]; P=0.07). Compared to patients with implantations performed by electrophysiologists, patients with implantations performed by general cardiologists and thoracic surgeons were at higher risk of reoperation for noncomplication causes (relative risk for general cardiologists: 1.10 [1.05-1.15]; thoracic surgeons: 1.16 [1.00-1.33]; both P<0.05). Conclusions Patients with ICD implantations performed by electrophysiologists had the lowest risks of having long-term device-related complications and reoperations for noncomplication causes. Consideration of physician specialty before ICD implantation may represent an opportunity to minimize long-term adverse outcomes.

Project description:Background One third of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients receive appropriate therapy, but all remain at risk of defibrillator complications. Information on these complications in contemporary cohorts is limited. This study assessed complications and their risk factors after defibrillator implantation in a Dutch nationwide prospective registry cohort and forecasts the potential reduction in complications under distinct scenarios of updated indication criteria. Methods and Results Complications in a prospective multicenter registry cohort of 1442 primary implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implant patients were classified as major or minor. The potential for reducing complications was derived from a newly developed prediction model of appropriate therapy to identify patients with a low probability of benefitting from the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. During a follow-up of 2.2 years (interquartile range, 2.0-2.6 years), 228 complications occurred in 195 patients (13.6%), with 113 patients (7.8%) experiencing at least one major complication. Most common ones were lead related (n=93) and infection (n=18). Minor complications occurred in 6.8% of patients, with lead-related (n=47) and pocket-related (n=40) complications as the most prevailing ones. A surgical reintervention or additional hospitalization was required in 53% or 61% of complications, respectively. Complications were strongly associated with device type. Application of stricter implant indication results in a comparable proportional reduction of (major) complications. Conclusions One in 13 patients experiences at least one major implantable cardioverter-defibrillator-related complication, and many patients undergo a surgical reintervention. Complications are related to defibrillator implantations, and these should be discussed with the patient. Stricter implant indication criteria and careful selection of device type implanted may have significant clinical and financial benefits.

Project description:BackgroundImplantable cardioverter-defibrillators are used to prevent sudden cardiac death in patients with cardiac sarcoidosis. The most recent recommendations for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in these patients are in the 2017 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/Heart Rhythm Society Guideline for Management of Patients With Ventricular Arrhythmias and the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death. These recommendations, based on observational studies or expert opinion, have not been assessed. We aimed to assess them.MethodsWe performed a large retrospective cohort study of patients with biopsy-proven sarcoidosis and known or suspected cardiac sarcoidosis that underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. Patients were followed for a composite end point of significant ventricular arrhythmia or sudden cardiac death. The discriminatory performance of the Guideline recommendations was tested using time-dependent receiver operating characteristic analyses. The optimal cutoff for the extent of late gadolinium enhancement predictive of the composite end point was determined using the Youden index.ResultsIn 290 patients, the class I and IIa recommendations identified all patients who experienced the composite end point during a median follow-up of 3.0 years. Patients meeting class I recommendations had a significantly higher incidence of the composite end point than those meeting class IIa recommendations. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >35% with >5.7% late gadolinium enhancement on cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging was as sensitive as and significantly more specific than LVEF >35% with any late gadolinium enhancement. Patients meeting 2 class IIa recommendations, LVEF >35% with the need for a permanent pacemaker and LVEF >35% with late gadolinium enhancement >5.7%, had high annualized event rates. Excluding 2 class IIa recommendations, LVEF >35% with syncope and LVEF >35% with inducible ventricular arrhythmia, resulted in improved discrimination for the composite end point.ConclusionsWe assessed the Guideline recommendations for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in patients with known or suspected cardiac sarcoidosis and identified topics for future research.

Project description:ImportanceCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces the risk for mortality and heart failure-related events in select patients. Little is known about the use of CRT in combination with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in patients who are eligible for this therapy in clinical practice.ObjectiveTo (1) identify patient, clinician, and hospital characteristics associated with CRT defibrillator (CRT-D) use and (2) determine the extent of hospital-level variation in the use of CRT-D among guideline-eligible patients undergoing ICD placement.Design, setting, and participantsMulticenter retrospective cohort from 1428 hospitals participating in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry between April 1, 2010, and June 30, 2014. Adult patients meeting class I or IIa guideline recommendations for CRT at the time of device implantation were included in this study.Main outcomes and measuresImplantation of an ICD with or without CRT.ResultsA total of 63 506 eligible patients (88.6%) received CRT-D at the time of device implantation. The mean (SD) ages of those in the ICD and CRT-D groups were 67.9 (12.2) years and 68.4 (11.5) years, respectively. In hierarchical multivariable models, black race was independently associated with lower use of CRT-D (odds ratio [OR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71-0.83) as was nonprivate insurance (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95 for Medicare and OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.65-0.82 for Medicaid). Clinician factors associated with greater CRT-D use included clinician implantation volume (OR, 1.01 per 10 additional devices implanted; 95% CI, 1.01-1.01) and electrophysiology training (OR, 3.13 as compared with surgery-boarded clinicians; 95% CI, 2.50-3.85). At the hospital level, the overall median risk-standardized rate of CRT-D use was 79.9% (range, 26.7%-100%; median OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.99-2.18).Conclusions and relevanceIn a national cohort of patients eligible for CRT-D at the time of device implantation, nearly 90% received a CRT-D device. However, use of CRT-D differed by race and implanting operator characteristics. After accounting for these factors, the use of CRT-D continued to vary widely by hospital. Addressing disparities and variation in CRT-D use among guideline-eligible patients may improve patient outcomes.

Dataset Information

Assessing Variation in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy Guideline Adherence With Physician and Hospital Patient-sharing Networks.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets