Faculty Bibliography

Electronic health record (EHR)-embedded tools are known to improve prescribing of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for patients with heart failure. However, physicians may perceive EHR tools to be unhelpful, and may be therefore hesitant to implement these in their practice. We surveyed cardiologists about two effective EHR-tools to improve heart failure care, and they perceived the EHR tools to be easy to use, helpful, and improve the overall management of their patients with heart failure.

OBJECTIVE:To estimate the prevalence of post-acute sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (PASC) after infection with SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy and to characterize associated risk factors. METHODS:In a multicenter cohort study (NIH RECOVER [Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery]-Pregnancy Cohort), individuals who were pregnant during their first SARS-CoV-2 infection were enrolled across the United States from December 2021 to September 2023, either within 30 days of their infection or at differential time points thereafter. The primary outcome was PASC , defined as score of 12 or higher based on symptoms and severity as previously published by the NIH RECOVER-Adult Cohort, at the first study visit at least 6 months after the participant's first SARS-CoV-2 infection. Risk factors for PASC were evaluated, including sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics before SARS-CoV-2 infection (baseline comorbidities, trimester of infection, vaccination status), and acute infection severity (classified by need for oxygen therapy). Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to estimate associations between these characteristics and presence of PASC. RESULTS:Of the 1,502 participants, 61.1% had their first SARS-CoV-2 infection on or after December 1, 2021 (ie, during Omicron variant dominance); 51.4% were fully vaccinated before infection; and 182 (12.1%) were enrolled within 30 days of their acute infection. The prevalence of PASC was 9.3% (95% CI, 7.9-10.9%) measured at a median of 10.3 months (interquartile range 6.1-21.5) after first infection. The most common symptoms among individuals with PASC were postexertional malaise (77.7%), fatigue (76.3%), and gastrointestinal symptoms (61.2%). In a multivariable model, the proportion PASC positive with vs without history of obesity (14.9% vs 7.5%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.65, 95% CI, 1.12-2.43), depression or anxiety disorder (14.4% vs 6.1%, aOR 2.64, 95% CI, 1.79-3.88) before first infection, economic hardship (self-reported difficulty covering expenses) (12.5% vs 6.9%, aOR 1.57, 95% CI, 1.05-2.34), and treatment with oxygen during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection (18.1% vs 8.7%, aOR 1.86, 95% CI, 1.00-3.44) were associated with increased prevalence of PASC. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The prevalence of PASC at a median time of 10.3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy was 9.3% in the NIH RECOVER-Pregnancy Cohort. The predominant symptoms were postexertional malaise, fatigue, and gastrointestinal symptoms. Several socioeconomic and clinical characteristics were associated with PASC after infection during pregnancy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT05172024.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:There are currently no validated clinical biomarkers of postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To investigate clinical laboratory markers of SARS-CoV-2 and PASC. DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Propensity score-weighted linear regression models were fitted to evaluate differences in mean laboratory measures by prior infection and PASC index (≥12 vs. 0). (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05172024). SETTING/UNASSIGNED:83 enrolling sites. PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:RECOVER-Adult cohort participants with or without SARS-CoV-2 infection with a study visit and laboratory measures 6 months after the index date (or at enrollment if >6 months after the index date). Participants were excluded if the 6-month visit occurred within 30 days of reinfection. MEASUREMENTS/UNASSIGNED:Participants completed questionnaires and standard clinical laboratory tests. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:levels was attenuated after participants with preexisting diabetes were excluded. Among participants with prior infection, no meaningful differences in mean laboratory values were found between those with a PASC index of 12 or higher and those with a PASC index of zero. LIMITATION/UNASSIGNED:Whether differences in laboratory markers represent consequences of or risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection could not be determined. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Overall, no evidence was found that any of the 25 routine clinical laboratory values assessed in this study could serve as a clinically useful biomarker of PASC. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE/UNASSIGNED:National Institutes of Health.

BACKGROUND:Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce heart failure (HF) hospitalizations, recurrent cardiovascular events, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression, and thus constitute a Class 1a recommendation in people with diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, HF, or CKD and in people with severe albuminuria or HF, regardless of diabetes status. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to comprehensibly characterize the rate of SGLT2 inhibitor prescriptions among people with a Class 1a recommendation for SGLT2 inhibitor use. METHODS:Among 3,189,827 adults from 28 U.S. health systems within Optum Labs Data Warehouse between April 1, 2022, and March 31, 2023, we assessed SGLT2 inhibitor prescription rates, stratified by presence of diabetes and Class 1a recommendation. RESULTS:Among 716,387 adults with diabetes, 63.4% had a Class 1a recommendation for SGLT2 inhibitor therapy. There was little difference by Class 1a recommendation status (present: 11.9%; 95% CI: 11.9%-12.0% vs absent: 11.4%; 95% CI: 11.3%-11.6%; standardized mean difference: 1.3%). Among 2,473,440 adults without diabetes, 6.2% had a Class 1a recommendation for SGLT2 inhibitor therapy, and 3.1% (3.0%-3.2%) of those received a prescription. Internists/family practitioners initiated SGLT2 inhibitor prescriptions most commonly among people with diabetes, whereas specialists initiated SGLT2 inhibitor prescriptions most commonly among people without diabetes. No health system had >25% SGLT2 inhibitor prescription rate among people with a Class 1a recommendation. Health systems with higher proportions of patients with commercial insurance and lower proportions with Medicare had higher SGLT2 inhibitor prescription rates. CONCLUSIONS:In this analysis of U.S. data from 2022 to 2023, SGLT2 inhibitor prescription among people with a Class 1a recommendation is low. Interventions are needed to increase uptake of guideline-recommended SGLT2 inhibitor use.

BACKGROUND:Electronic health record (EHR) tools can improve prescribing of guideline-recommended therapies for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but their effectiveness may vary by physician workload. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This paper aims to assess whether physician workload modifies the effectiveness of EHR tools for HFrEF. METHODS:This was a prespecified subgroup analysis of the BETTER CARE-HF (Building Electronic Tools to Enhance and Reinforce Cardiovascular Recommendations for Heart Failure) cluster-randomized trial, which compared effectiveness of an alert vs message vs usual care on prescribing of mineralocorticoid antagonists (MRAs). The trial included adults with HFrEF seen in cardiology offices who were eligible for and not prescribed MRAs. Visit volume was defined at the cardiologist-level as number of visits per 6-month study period (high = upper tertile vs non-high = remaining). Analysis at the patient-level used likelihood ratio test for interaction with log-binomial models. RESULTS:Among 2,211 patients seen by 174 cardiologists, 932 (42.2%) were seen by high-volume cardiologists (median: 1,853; Q1-Q3: 1,637-2,225 visits/6 mo; and median: 10; Q1-Q3: 9-12 visits/half-day). MRA was prescribed to 5.5% in the high-volume vs 14.8% in the non-high-volume groups in the usual care arm, 10.3% vs 19.6% in the message arm, and 31.2% vs 28.2% in the alert arm, respectively. Visit volume modified treatment effect (P for interaction = 0.02) such that the alert was more effective in the high-volume group (relative risk: 5.16; 95% CI: 2.57-10.4) than the non-high-volume group (relative risk: 1.93; 95% CI: 1.29-2.90). CONCLUSIONS:An EHR-embedded alert increased prescribing by >5-fold among patients seen by high-volume cardiologists. Our findings support use of EHR alerts, especially in busy practice settings. (Building Electronic Tools to Enhance and Reinforce Cardiovascular Recommendations for Heart Failure [BETTER CARE-HF]; NCT05275920).

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the efficacy of a multimodal intervention in reducing CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) overutilization in the evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism in the emergency department (ED). METHODS:Previous mixed-methods analysis of barriers to guideline-concordant CTPA ordering results was used to develop a provider-focused behavioral intervention consisting of a clinical decision support tool and an audit and feedback system at a multisite, tertiary academic network. The primary outcome (guideline concordance) and secondary outcomes (yield and CTPA and D-dimer order rates) were compared using a pre- and postintervention design. ED encounters for adult patients from July 5, 2017, to January 3, 2019, were included. Fisher's exact tests and statistical process control charts were used to compare the pre- and postintervention groups for each outcome. RESULTS:Of the 201,912 ED patient visits evaluated, 3,587 included CTPA. Guideline concordance increased significantly after the intervention, from 66.9% to 77.5% (P < .001). CTPA order rate and D-dimer order rate also increased significantly, from 17.1 to 18.4 per 1,000 patients (P = .035) and 30.6 to 37.3 per 1,000 patients (P < .001), respectively. Percent yield showed no significant change (12.3% pre- versus 10.8% postintervention; P = .173). Statistical process control analysis showed sustained special-cause variation in the postintervention period for guideline concordance and D-dimer order rates, temporary special-cause variation for CTPA order rates, and no special-cause variation for percent yield. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Our success in increasing guideline concordance demonstrates the efficacy of a mixed-methods, human-centered approach to behavior change. Given that neither of the secondary outcomes improved, our results may demonstrate potential limitations to the guidelines directing the ordering of CTPA studies and D-dimer ordering.

IMPORTANCE:Equity is an essential domain of health care quality. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) developed 2 Disparity Methods that together assess equity in clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVES:To define a measure of equitable readmissions; identify hospitals with equitable readmissions by insurance (dual eligible vs non-dual eligible) or patient race (Black vs White); and compare hospitals with and without equitable readmissions by hospital characteristics and performance on accountability measures (quality, cost, and value). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:Cross-sectional study of US hospitals eligible for the CMS Hospital-Wide Readmission measure using Medicare data from July 2018 through June 2019. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:We created a definition of equitable readmissions using CMS Disparity Methods, which evaluate hospitals on 2 methods: outcomes for populations at risk for disparities (across-hospital method); and disparities in care within hospitals' patient populations (within-a-single-hospital method). EXPOSURES:Hospital patient demographics; hospital characteristics; and 3 measures of hospital performance-quality, cost, and value (quality relative to cost). RESULTS:Of 4638 hospitals, 74% served a sufficient number of dual-eligible patients, and 42% served a sufficient number of Black patients to apply CMS Disparity Methods by insurance and race. Of eligible hospitals, 17% had equitable readmission rates by insurance and 30% by race. Hospitals with equitable readmissions by insurance or race cared for a lower percentage of Black patients (insurance, 1.9% [IQR, 0.2%-8.8%] vs 3.3% [IQR, 0.7%-10.8%], P < .01; race, 7.6% [IQR, 3.2%-16.6%] vs 9.3% [IQR, 4.0%-19.0%], P = .01), and differed from nonequitable hospitals in multiple domains (teaching status, geography, size; P < .01). In examining equity by insurance, hospitals with low costs were more likely to have equitable readmissions (odds ratio, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.38-1.77), and there was no relationship between quality and value, and equity. In examining equity by race, hospitals with high overall quality were more likely to have equitable readmissions (odds ratio, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.03-1.26]), and there was no relationship between cost and value, and equity. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE:A minority of hospitals achieved equitable readmissions. Notably, hospitals with equitable readmissions were characteristically different from those without. For example, hospitals with equitable readmissions served fewer Black patients, reinforcing the role of structural racism in hospital-level inequities. Implementation of an equitable readmission measure must consider unequal distribution of at-risk patients among hospitals.

IMPORTANCE:Innovation centers in US health care systems are increasingly common but variably successful and sustainable. Few studies have examined how and why some centers achieve sustainable success but others do not. OBJECTIVE:To explore whether and how innovation centers in US health care systems are able to successfully sustain themselves over multiple years. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:In this qualitative study, semistructured, qualitative interviews of leaders at 9 innovation centers across the US were conducted from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2020. Data analysis was conducted from December 2020 to April 2021 using qualitative methods and a deductive framework based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Centers were identified through purposeful sampling. The 9 study centers had a mean age of 6 years (range, 2-15 years); most were affiliated with an academic teaching hospital and half with a medical school. Two were wholly separate from the health care system. Two-thirds had fewer than 10 full-time staff members. EXPOSURES:All interviewees were staff of a US-based innovation center. This study did not evaluate particular interventions or innovations. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Perceptions of and views on factors associated with the success and sustainability of innovation centers. RESULTS:Staff interviewed at 9 innovation centers across the US described 3 key activities that appeared to be associated with long-term sustainability: facilitating innovation projects that were valued for quality improvement and cost avoidance, not just return on investment; acting as networking nodes for their institutions; and upskilling staff. These activities were associated with improved institutional culture. Two structural characteristics underpinned successful centers: finding an effective balance between being "internal" and being "external" to the organization and providing practical support and skills otherwise lacking within the wider institution. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:This qualitative study of 9 innovation centers explored how centers sustained themselves within US health care institutions and showed that success was often associated with interpersonal relationships and cultural benefits. Independent financial sustainability was not always essential to longevity; systems also valued how centers could create cultures of innovation and upskill staff.