Dataset Information

Association between insurance status and in-hospital outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation arrest.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Lack of health insurance is associated with adverse clinical outcomes; however, the association between health insurance status and in-hospital outcomes after out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation (OHVFA) arrest is unclear.

Hypothesis

Lack of health insurance is associated with worse in-hospital outcomes after out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation arrest.

Methods

From January 2003 to December 2014, hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis of OHVFA in patients ≥18 years of age were extracted from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Patients were categorized into insured and uninsured groups based on their documented health insurance status. Study outcome measures were in-hospital mortality, utilization of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), and cost of hospitalization. Inverse probability weighting adjusted binary logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictors of in-hospital mortality and ICD utilization and linear regression was performed to identify independent predictors of cost of hospitalization.

Results

Of 188 946 patients included in the final analyses, 178 005 (94.2%) patients were insured and 10 941 (5.8%) patients were uninsured. Unadjusted in-hospital mortality was higher (61.7% vs. 54.7%, p < .001) and ICD utilization was lower (15.3% vs. 18.3%, p < .001) in the uninsured patients. Lack of health insurance was independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality (O.R = 1.53, 95% C.I. [1.46-1.61]; p < .001) and lower utilization of ICD (O.R = 0.84, 95% C.I [0.79-0.90], p < .001). Cost of hospitalization was significantly higher in uninsured patients (median [interquartile range], p-value) ($) (39 650 [18 034-93 399] vs. 35 965 [14 568.50-96 163], p < .001).

Conclusion

Lack of health insurance is associated with higher in-hospital mortality, lower utilization of ICD and higher cost of hospitalization after OHVFA.

SUBMITTER: Pancholy SB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8027577 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To assess the current evidence on the effect pre-arrest comorbidity has on survival and neurological outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). DESIGN:Systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. DATA SOURCES:MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and MedNar were searched from inception to 31 December 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:Studies included if they examined the association between prearrest comorbidity and OHCA survival and neurological outcomes in adult or paediatric populations. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Data were extracted from individual studies but not pooled due to heterogeneity. Quality of included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. RESULTS:This review included 29 observational studies. There were high levels of clinical heterogeneity between studies with regards to patient recruitment, inclusion criteria, outcome measures and statistical methods used which ultimately resulted in a high risk of bias. Comorbidities reported across the studies were diverse, with some studies reporting individual comorbidities while others reported comorbidity burden using tools like the Charlson Comorbidity Index. Generally, prearrest comorbidity was associated with both reduced survival and poorer neurological outcomes following OHCA with 79% (74/94) of all reported adjusted results across 23 studies showing effect estimates suggesting lower survival with 42% (40/94) of these being statistically significant. OHCA survival was particularly reduced in patients with a prior history of diabetes (four out of six studies). However, a prearrest history of myocardial infarction appeared to be associated with increased survival in one of four studies. CONCLUSIONS:Prearrest comorbidity is generally associated with unfavourable OHCA outcomes, however differences between individual studies makes comparisons difficult. Due to the clinical and statistical heterogeneity across the studies, no meta-analysis was conducted. Future studies should follow a more standardised approach to investigating the impact of comorbidity on OHCA outcomes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42018087578.

Project description:Importance:Studies of public hospitals have reported increasing incidence of emergency department (ED) transfers of uninsured patients for hospitalization, which is perceived to be associated with financial incentives. Objective:To examine the differences in risk-adjusted transfer and discharge rates by patient insurance status among hospitals capable of providing critical care. Design, Setting, and Participants:A cross-sectional analysis of the 2015 National Emergency Department Sample was conducted, including visits between January 2015 and December 2015. Adult ED visits throughout 2015 (n = 215 028) for the 3 common medical conditions of pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and asthma, at hospitals with intensive care capabilities were included. Only hospitals with advanced critical care capabilities for pulmonary care were included. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcomes were patient-level and hospital-level risk-adjusted ED discharges, ED transfers, and hospital admissions. Adjusted odds of discharge or transfer compared with admission among uninsured patients, Medicaid and Medicare beneficiaries, and privately insured patients are reported. Hospital ownership status was used for the secondary analysis. Results:Of the 30 542 691 ED visits to 953 hospitals included in the 2015 National Emergency Department Sample, 215 028 visits (0.7%) were for acute pulmonary diseases to 160 intensive care-capable hospitals. These visits were made by patients with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 55 (40-71) years and who were predominantly female (124 931 [58.1%]). Substantial variation in unadjusted and risk-standardized ED discharge, ED transfer, and hospital admission rates was found across EDs. Compared with privately insured patients, uninsured patients were more likely to be discharged (odds ratio [OR], 1.66; 95% CI, 1.57-1.76) and transferred (adjusted OR [aOR], 2.41; 95% CI, 2.08-2.79). Medicaid beneficiaries had comparable odds of discharge (aOR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.97-1.04) but higher odds of transfer (aOR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.05-1.33). Conclusions and Relevance:After accounting for hospital critical care capability and patient case mix, the study found that uninsured patients and Medicaid beneficiaries with common medical conditions appeared to have higher odds of interhospital transfer.

Project description:Effectiveness of a resuscitation strategy may vary across communities. We hypothesize that a strategy that prioritizes initial emergency medical services (EMS) rhythm analysis (analyze early) will be associated with survival advantage among EMS systems with lower baseline (pretrial) ventricular fibrillation survival, whereas a strategy that prioritizes initial EMS cardiopulmonary resuscitation (analyze late) will be associated with survival advantage among systems with higher ventricular fibrillation baseline survival.We conducted a secondary, post hoc study of a randomized trial of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Subjects were stratified according to randomization status (analyze early versus analyze late) and EMS agency baseline ventricular fibrillation survival. We used a mixed-effects model to determine whether the association between favorable functional survival to hospital discharge and trial intervention (analyze late versus analyze early) differed according to EMS agency baseline ventricular fibrillation survival (<20% or >20%).Characteristics were similar among patients randomized to analyze early (n=4,964) versus analyze late (n=4,426). For EMS agencies with baseline ventricular fibrillation survival less than 20%, analyze late compared with analyze early was associated with a lower likelihood of favorable functional survival (3.8% versus 5.5%; odds ratio [OR]=0.67 [95% CI 0.50, 0.90]). Conversely, among agencies with a ventricular fibrillation survival greater than 20%, analyze late compared with analyze early was associated with higher likelihood of favorable functional survival (7.5% versus 6.1%; OR=1.22 [95% CI 0.98, 1.52]). In the multivariable-adjusted model, for every 10% increase in baseline ventricular fibrillation survival, analyze late versus analyze early was associated with a 34% increase in odds of favorable functional survival (OR=1.34 [95% CI 1.07 to 1.66]).The findings suggest that system-level characteristics may influence resuscitation outcomes.

Project description:ImportanceAdministration of epinephrine has been found to be associated with an increased chance of survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), but the optimal timing of administration has not been fully investigated.ObjectiveTo ascertain whether there is an association between timing of epinephrine administration and patient outcomes after OHCA.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study included adults 18 years or older with OHCA treated by emergency medical services (EMS) personnel from April 1, 2011, to June 30, 2015. Initial cardiac rhythm was stratified as either initially shockable (ventricular defibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia) or nonshockable (pulseless electrical activity or asystole). Eligible individuals were identified from among publicly available, deidentified patient-level data from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Cardiac Epidemiologic Registry, a prospective registry of adults with EMS-treated, nontraumatic OHCA with 10 sites in North America. Data analysis was conducted from May 2019 to April 2021.ExposuresInterval between advanced life support (ALS)-trained EMS personnel arrival at the scene and the first prehospital intravenous or intraosseous administration of epinephrine.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. In each cohort of initial cardiac rhythms, patients who received epinephrine at any period (minutes) after EMS arrival at the scene were matched with patients who were at risk of receiving epinephrine within the same period using time-dependent propensity scores calculated from patient demographic characteristics, arrest characteristics, and EMS interventions.ResultsOf 41 079 eligible individuals (median [interquartile range] age, 67 [55-79] years), 26 579 (64.7%) were men. A total of 10 088 individuals (24.6%) initially had shockable cardiac rhythms, and 30 991 (75.4%) had nonshockable rhythms. Those who received epinephrine included 8223 patients (81.5%) with shockable cardiac rhythms and 27 901 (90.0%) with nonshockable rhythms. In the shockable cardiac rhythm cohort, the risk ratio (RR) for receipt of epinephrine with survival to hospital discharge was highest between 0 and 5 minutes after EMS arrival (1.12; 95% CI, 0.99-1.26) across the categorized timing of the administration of epinephrine by 5-minute intervals after EMS arrival; however, that finding was not statistically significant. Treating the timing of epinephrine administration as a continuous variable, the RR for survival to hospital discharge decreased 5.5% (95% CI, 3.4%-7.5%; P < .001 for the interaction between epinephrine administration and time to matching) per minute after EMS arrival. In the nonshockable cardiac rhythm cohort, the RR for the association of receipt of epinephrine with survival to hospital discharge was the highest between 0 and 5 minutes (1.28; 95% CI, 0.95-1.72), although not statistically significant, and decreased 4.4% (95% CI, 0.8%-7.9%; P for interaction = .02) per minute after EMS arrival.Conclusions and relevanceAmong adults with OHCA, survival to hospital discharge differed across the timing of epinephrine administration and decreased with delayed administration for both shockable and nonshockable rhythms.

Project description:BackgroundAmong patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and ventricular fibrillation, more than half present with refractory ventricular fibrillation unresponsive to initial standard advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) treatment. We did the first randomised clinical trial in the USA of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)-facilitated resuscitation versus standard ACLS treatment in patients with OHCA and refractory ventricular fibrillation.MethodsFor this phase 2, single centre, open-label, adaptive, safety and efficacy randomised clinical trial, we included adults aged 18-75 years presenting to the University of Minnesota Medical Center (MN, USA) with OHCA and refractory ventricular fibrillation, no return of spontaneous circulation after three shocks, automated cardiopulmonary resuscitation with a Lund University Cardiac Arrest System, and estimated transfer time shorter than 30 min. Patients were randomly assigned to early ECMO-facilitated resuscitation or standard ACLS treatment on hospital arrival by use of a secure schedule generated with permuted blocks of randomly varying block sizes. Allocation concealment was achieved by use of a randomisation schedule that required scratching off an opaque layer to reveal assignment. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes were safety, survival, and functional assessment at hospital discharge and at 3 months and 6 months after discharge. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The study qualified for exception from informed consent (21 Code of Federal Regulations 50.24). The ARREST trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03880565.FindingsBetween Aug 8, 2019, and June 14, 2020, 36 patients were assessed for inclusion. After exclusion of six patients, 30 were randomly assigned to standard ACLS treatment (n=15) or to early ECMO-facilitated resuscitation (n=15). One patient in the ECMO-facilitated resuscitation group withdrew from the study before discharge. The mean age was 59 years (range 36-73), and 25 (83%) of 30 patients were men. Survival to hospital discharge was observed in one (7%) of 15 patients (95% credible interval 1·6-30·2) in the standard ACLS treatment group versus six (43%) of 14 patients (21·3-67·7) in the early ECMO-facilitated resuscitation group (risk difference 36·2%, 3·7-59·2; posterior probability of ECMO superiority 0·9861). The study was terminated at the first preplanned interim analysis by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute after unanimous recommendation from the Data Safety Monitoring Board after enrolling 30 patients because the posterior probability of ECMO superiority exceeded the prespecified monitoring boundary. Cumulative 6-month survival was significantly better in the early ECMO group than in the standard ACLS group. No unanticipated serious adverse events were observed.InterpretationEarly ECMO-facilitated resuscitation for patients with OHCA and refractory ventricular fibrillation significantly improved survival to hospital discharge compared with standard ACLS treatment.FundingNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Project description:Post-resuscitation hemodynamic instability following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) may occur from myocardial dysfunction underlying cardiogenic shock and/or inflammation-mediated distributive shock. Distinguishing the predominant shock subtype with widely available clinical metrics may have prognostic and therapeutic value.A two-hospital cohort was assembled of patients in shock following OHCA. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was assessed via echocardiography or cardiac ventriculography within 1 day post arrest and used to delineate shock physiology. The study evaluated whether higher LVEF, indicating distributive-predominant shock physiology, was associated with neurocognitive outcome (primary endpoint), survival, and duration of multiple organ failures. The study also investigated whether volume resuscitation exhibited a subtype-specific association with outcome.Of 162 patients with post-resuscitation shock, 48% had normal LVEF (>?40%), consistent with distributive shock physiology. Higher LVEF was associated with less favorable neurocognitive outcome (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.94 per 10% increase in LVEF; p?=?0.01). Higher LVEF also was associated with worse survival (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.97; p?=?0.02) and fewer organ failure-free days (? = - 0.67, 95% CI - 1.28 to -?0.06; p?=?0.03). Only 51% of patients received a volume challenge of at least 30 ml/kg body weight in the first 6 h post arrest, and the volume received did not differ by LVEF. Greater volume resuscitation in the first 6 h post arrest was associated with favorable neurocognitive outcome (OR 1.59, 95% CI 0.99-2.55 per liter; p?=?0.03) and survival (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.02-2.04; p?=?0.02) among patients with normal LVEF but not low LVEF.In post-resuscitation shock, higher LVEF-indicating distributive shock physiology-was associated with less favorable neurocognitive outcome, fewer days without organ failure, and higher mortality. Greater early volume resuscitation was associated with more favorable neurocognitive outcome and survival in patients with this shock subtype. Additional studies with repeated measures of complementary hemodynamic parameters are warranted to validate the clinical utility for subtyping post-resuscitation shock.