Impact of insurance type on eligibility for advanced heart failure therapies and survival

Insurance-Based Differences in Treatment Patterns for Uterine Fibroids

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to examine whether Medicaid versus commercial insurance and reimbursement are associated with uterine artery embolization (UAE) utilization rates for uterine fibroid treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective (October 2015 to September 2023) study of women aged 30 to 59 years who underwent procedures for the treatment of uterine fibroids (hysterectomy, myomectomy, or UAE) was based on the Inovalon Insights dataset for those with Medicaid or commercial insurance. Differences in the receipt of UAE versus hysterectomy or myomectomy by insurance type and relative reimbursement were assessed using logistic regression controlling for patient characteristics and geographic differences in treatment patterns. For women with either hysterectomy or myomectomy, differences in the receipt of these procedures laparoscopically or not were assessed by insurance type and relative reimbursement controlling for patient characteristics and geographic differences in treatment patterns.

RESULTS

Medicaid compared with commercial insurance was associated with 38% higher odds of UAE (odds ratio [OR], 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-1.42). States with higher Medicaid reimbursement for hysterectomy were associated with lower odds for UAE (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92-0.98). For women with hysterectomy or myomectomy, those with Medicaid versus commercial insurance had 20% lower odds (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.79-0.82) of undergoing the procedure laparoscopically.

CONCLUSIONS

Women insured by Medicaid versus commercial insurance were more likely to undergo the less invasive UAE procedure. Conversely, Medicaid patients who underwent hysterectomy or myomectomy were less likely to undergo the procedure laparoscopically. Both results are consistent with the notion that insurance status may influence both physician referral patterns and treatment options available to patients.

Non-Medical Characteristics Affect Referral for Advanced Heart Failure Services: a Retrospective Review

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced heart failure (AHF) are extensively evaluated before heart transplantation or left ventricular assist device (LVAD) eligibility. Patients are assessed for medical need and psychosocial or economic factors that may affect success post-treatment. For patients to be evaluated, however, they first must be referred. This study investigated social and economic factors affecting AHF referral, specialist visits, or treatment.

METHODS

Patients with heart failure (n = 24,258) were reviewed at one large hospital system over 4 years. Independent variables age, sex, marital status, race/ethnicity, preferred language, smoking, and insurance status were assessed for the outcomes of referral, clinic visit, and treatment by Chi-square and ANOVA. In-house and 1-year mortality were evaluated by logistic regression, and time-to-event was assessed by the Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Younger (HR 0.934, 95% CI 0.925-0.943), male (HR 2.216, 95% CI 1.544-3.181), and publicly insured (HR 1.298 [95% CI 1.038, 1.623]) patients were more likely to be referred, while unmarried (HR 0.665, 95% CI 0.488-0.905) and smoking (HR 0.549, 95% CI 0.389-0.776) patients had fewer referrals. Younger, married, and nonsmoking patients were more likely to have a clinic visit. Younger age, White race, and Hispanic/Latino ethnicity were associated with receiving a heart transplant, and LVAD recipients were more likely Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. Advanced age, Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, and smoking were associated with 1-year mortality after heart failure diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Disparities in access exist before evaluation for AHF therapies. Improving access at the levels of referral and evaluation is a necessary step toward achieving equity in organ allocation.

Mediators of Black-White inequities in cardiovascular mortality among survivors of 18 cancers in the USA

BACKGROUND

This study aims to quantify Black-White inequities in cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality among US survivors of 18 adult-onset cancers and the extent to which these inequities are explained by differences in socio-economic and clinical factors.

METHODS

Survivors of cancers diagnosed at ages 20-64 years during 2007-16 were identified from 17 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registries. Associations between race and CVD mortality were examined using proportional hazards models. Mediation analyses were performed to quantify the contributions of potential mediators, including socio-economic [health insurance, neighbourhood socio-economic status (nSES), rurality] and clinical (stage, surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy) factors.

RESULTS

Among 904 995 survivors, 10 701 CVD deaths occurred (median follow-up, 43 months). Black survivors were more likely than White survivors to die from CVD for all 18 cancers with hazard ratios ranging from 1.30 (95% CI = 1.15-1.47) for lung cancer to 4.04 for brain cancer (95% CI = 2.79-5.83). The total percentage mediations (indirect effects) ranged from 24.8% for brain (95% CI=-5.2-59.6%) to 99.8% for lung (95% CI = 61.0-167%) cancers. Neighbourhood SES was identified as the strongest mediator for 14 cancers with percentage mediations varying from 25.0% for kidney cancer (95% CI = 14.1-36.3%) to 63.5% for lung cancer (95% CI = 36.5-108.7%). Insurance ranked second for 12 cancers with percentage mediations ranging from 12.3% for leukaemia (95% CI = 0.7-46.7%) to 31.3% for thyroid cancer (95% CI = 10.4-82.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Insurance and nSES explained substantial proportions of the excess CVD mortality among Black survivors. Mitigating the effects of unequal access to care and differing opportunities for healthy living among neighbourhoods could substantially reduce racial inequities in CVD mortality among cancer survivors.

The impact of race on utilization of durable left ventricular assist device therapy in patients with advanced heart failure

BACKGROUND

Heart failure affects >6 million people in the United States alone and is most prevalent in Black patients who suffer the highest mortality risk. Yet prior studies have suggested that Black patients are less likely to receive advanced heart failure therapy. We hypothesized that Black patients would have decreased rates of durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation within our expansive heart failure program.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center cohort study was conducted at a single high-volume academic medical center. Patients between 18 and 85 years admitted with a diagnosis of cardiogenic shock or congestive heart failure between 1, 2013 and 12, 2017 with a left ventricular ejection fraction < 30% and inotropic dependence or need for mechanical circulatory support were included. Patients with contraindications to durable LVAD were excluded. An adjusted logistic regression model for durable LVAD implantation within 90 days of the index admission was used to determine the effect of race on durable LVAD implantation.

RESULTS

Among the 702 study patients (60.9% White, 34.1% Black), durable LVAD implantation was performed within 90 days of the index admission in 183 (26%) of the cohort. After multivariate analysis, Black patients were not found to have a statistically significant difference in durable LVAD implantation rates compared to White patients in our study (OR: 0.68 [95% confidence interval: 0.45-1.04; p: .074]).

CONCLUSIONS

Black patients in our study did not have a statistically significant difference in the rate of durable LVAD implantation compared with White patients after adjustments were made for age, sex, socioeconomic, and clinical covariates. Larger prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.

The effects of demographic, psychosocial, and socioeconomic characteristics on access to heart transplantation and left ventricular assist device

Background

This study aims to better understand how demographic, psychosocial, and socioeconomic factors influence the selection of patients for advanced therapies for heart failure (heart transplant and left ventricular assist device (LVAD)).

Methods

Patients evaluated for heart transplant or LVAD at a large, Midwestern hospital system were assessed retrospectively. Three outcomes were analyzed: 1) Patients who were evaluated and approved to receive a transplant or LVAD were compared to patients who were not approved for transplant or LVAD; 2) Patients who were listed for transplant were compared to patients not listed; and 3) Patients who received a transplant or LVAD were compared to patients who did not receive a transplant or LVAD. ANOVA was used for continuous variables and Chi-squared test for categorical variables. Significant variables were further analyzed by logistic regression.

Results

Four hundred fifty-nine patients were included. Marital status (p = 0.004), race (p = 0.008), social support (p < 0.001), mental health (p = 0.006), and substance use (p < 0.001) were associated with whether patients were approved for transplant or LVAD. Patients with public insurance were half as likely (OR 0.495) to be listed for transplant once approved.

Conclusions

Financial, psychosocial, and demographic characteristics all play a role in selection for advanced therapies for heart failure. These insights can help guide future work on interventions to address the social disparities in access to heart transplant and LVAD.

A scoping review of inequities in access to organ transplant in the United States

BACKGROUND

Organ transplant is the preferred treatment for end-stage organ disease, yet the majority of patients with end-stage organ disease are never placed on the transplant waiting list. Limited access to the transplant waiting list combined with the scarcity of the organ pool result in over 100,000 deaths annually in the United States. Patients face unique barriers to referral and acceptance for organ transplant based on social determinants of health, and patients from disenfranchised groups suffer from disproportionately lower rates of transplantation. Our objective was to review the literature describing disparities in access to organ transplantation based on social determinants of health to integrate the existing knowledge and guide future research.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of the literature reporting disparities in access to heart, lung, liver, pancreas and kidney transplantation based on social determinants of health (race, income, education, geography, insurance status, health literacy and engagement). Included studies were categorized based on steps along the transplant care continuum: referral for transplant, transplant evaluation and selection, living donor identification/evaluation, and waitlist outcomes.

RESULTS

Our search generated 16,643 studies, of which 227 were included in our final review. Of these, 34 focused on disparities in referral for transplantation among patients with chronic organ disease, 82 on transplant selection processes, 50 on living donors, and 61 on waitlist management. In total, 15 studies involved the thoracic organs (heart, lung), 209 involved the abdominal organs (kidney, liver, pancreas), and three involved multiple organs. Racial and ethnic minorities, women, and patients in lower socioeconomic status groups were less likely to be referred, evaluated, and added to the waiting list for organ transplant. The quality of the data describing these disparities across the transplant literature was variable and overwhelmingly focused on kidney transplant.

CONCLUSIONS

This review contextualizes the quality of the data, identifies seminal work by organ, and reports gaps in the literature where future research on disparities in organ transplantation should focus. Future work should investigate the association of social determinants of health with access to the organ transplant waiting list, with a focus on prospective analyses that assess interventions to improve health equity.

Utilization of Left Ventricular Assist Device for Congestive Heart Failure: Inputs on Demographic and Hospital Characterization From Nationwide Inpatient Sample

Objectives The first goal of the study is to provide a descriptive overview of the utilization of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) for the treatment of congestive heart failure (CHF) and determine the rates of LVAD use stratified by patients' demographic and hospitals' characteristics in the United States. Next, is to measure the hospitalization outcomes of length of stay (LOS) and cost in inpatients managed with LVAD. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study using the nationwide inpatient sample and included 184,115 patients (age ≥65 years) with a primary discharge diagnosis of hypertensive and non-hypertensive CHF and was further classified by inpatients who were managed with LVAD. We compared the distributions of demographic and hospital characteristics in CHF inpatients with versus without LVAD by performing Pearson's chi-square test for categorical variables, and independent sample t-test for continuous variables. Results The inpatient utilization of LVAD was 0.93% (1690 out of 184,115) in CHF patients. The LVAD cohort were younger compared to non-LVAD group (mean age, 69.9 years vs. 79.4 years). The utilization rate of LVAD was also almost four times higher in males (1.50%) compared to females (0.36%). Although whites (78.5%) accounted for majority of LVAD recipients, the rate of LVAD utilization was highest in blacks (1.04%) and lowest in Hispanics (0.58%) with whites having utilization rate of 0.89%. Medicare was the dominant primary payer to cover the LVAD inpatients (91.1%), though the rate of LVAD utilization is highest in private (2.22%) and lowest in those covered by public insurance (medicaid/medicare). CHF patients in public hospitals (1.79%) were more than twice more likely to receive LVAD than in private hospitals (0.83%) due to higher utilization rate. LVAD utilization rate was approximately 55 times higher in teaching hospitals (1.67%) compared to non-teaching hospitals (0.03%), and 20 times higher in large bed hospitals (1.41%) compared to small bed-size hospitals (0.07%). CHF patients that received LVAD had a significantly longer LOS (34.6 days vs 9.8 days) and higher inpatient treatment costs ($802,118 vs. $86,302) compared to non-LVAD group. Conclusion The inpatient utilization of LVAD was in CHF patients is higher in males, blacks and private health insurance beneficiaries. In terms of hospital characteristics, the utilization of LVAD for CHF management was higher in large bed sized, and public type and teaching hospitals compared to their counterparts. This data will allow us to devise strategies to improve LVAD utilization and increase its outreach for heart failure patients, especially those on the transplant waiting list. Despite its effectiveness, aggressive usage of LVAD is restricted due to cost-effectiveness and lack of technical confidence among medical professional due to complications.

Exception Status Listing in the New Adult Heart Allocation System: A New Solution to an Old Problem?

BACKGROUND

One of the goals of the revised 6-tiered US adult heart allocation policy was to improve risk stratification of patients to lower exception status utilization for transplant listing. We sought to define the characteristics and outcomes of waitlisted patients using exception status and to examine region- and center-level differences in utilization of exception status in the new heart allocation system.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database included adult waitlisted patients for heart transplant between October 18, 2018, and June 30, 2020, in the United States, stratified by use of exception status versus standard criteria.

RESULTS

Out of 6351 patients, 1907 (30.0%) were waitlisted under exception status. Patients using exception status were more likely to have a nonischemic cause of heart failure, blood type O, United Network for Organ Sharing status 2 at listing and were less likely to have a durable left ventricular assist device at listing. Exception status utilization varied significantly between and within United Network for Organ Sharing regions. Listing by exception criteria was associated with a significantly higher incidence of heart transplantation compared with listing by standard criteria (hazard ratio, 1.25 [1.15-1.38], P<0.001), without increased risk of death or delisting for worsening clinical status (hazard ratio, 0.83 [0.65-1.05], P=0.12) after multivariable adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

The status tiers of the new heart allocation system may not fully capture medical urgency and complexity of waitlisted patients as assessed by transplant physicians and review committees and may limit the ability to develop a heart allocation score.

Racial differences in outcomes after receiving advanced heart failure therapies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite advances in medical and device-based therapies for advanced heart failure as well as public policy, disparities by race/ethnicity persist in heart failure clinical outcomes. The purpose of this review is to describe disparities in outcomes by race--ethnicity in patients after receipt of heart transplantation and left ventricular assist device (LVAD), and the current understanding of factors contributing to these disparities.

RECENT FINDINGS

The proportion of black and Latinx patients receiving advanced heart failure therapies continues to rise, and they have worse hemodynamic profiles at the time of referral for heart transplantation and LVAD. Black patients have lower rates of survival after heart transplantation, in part because of higher rates of cellular and humoral rejection that may be mediated through unique gene pathways, and increased risk for allosensitization and de-novo donor-specific antibodies. Factors that have previously been cited as reasons for worse outcomes in race--ethnic minorities, including psychosocial risk and lower SES, may not be as strongly correlated with outcomes after LVAD.

SUMMARY

Black and Latinx patients are sicker at the time of referral for advanced heart failure therapies. Despite higher psychosocial risk factors among race--ethnic minorities, outcomes after LVAD appear to be similar to white patients. Black patients continue to have lower posttransplant survival, because of a complex interplay of immunologic susceptibility, clinical and socioeconomic factors. No single factor accounts for the disparities in clinical outcomes for race--ethnic minorities, and thus consideration of these components together is critical in management of these patients.

Insurance disparity in cardiovascular mortality among non-elderly cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Insurance status plays a vital role in cancer diagnosis, treatments and survival. Cancer patients have higher cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality than the general population.

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program 2007-2016 was used to estimate the CVD mortality among cancer patients aged 18 to 64 years at the time of diagnosis of an initial malignancy with the eight most prevalent cancers. Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated for each insurance (Non-Medicaid vs Medicaid vs Uninsured) using coded cause of death from CVD with adjustment of age, race, and gender. The Fine-Grey Model was used to estimate adjusted Hazard Ratios (HR) of each insurance in CVD mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 768,055 patients were included in the final analysis. CVD death in patients with Medicaid insurance remained higher than in those with Non-Medicaid insurance (HR = 1.71; 95%CI, 1.61-1.81; p < 0.001). Older age, male gender, and black race were all associated with increased CVD mortality in the multivariable model. Compared to the general population, patients with Medicaid had the highest SMRs of CVD mortality, regardless of year of cancer diagnosis, follow-up time, cancer site, and race. Non-Medicaid insured patients had similar CVD mortality to the general population after 2 years out from their cancer diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Cancer patients with Non-Medicaid insurance have significantly lower CVD mortality than those with no insurance or Medicaid. The insurance disparity remained significant regardless of type of CVD, cancer site, year of diagnosis and follow-up time.

Comparison of Management and Outcomes of Acute Heart Failure Hospitalization in Medicaid Beneficiaries Versus Privately Insured Individuals

Medicaid expansion in terms of its eligibility and federal funding has led to improved healthcare access in previously uninsured individuals. However, proposed lower Medicaid rates have unintentionally led to lower utilization of substantial life-saving therapies and poor outcomes compared with private insurance. We examined heart failure (HF) management, in-hospital mortality, and resource utilization in Medicaid and privately insured individuals hospitalized with HF. The authors screened the National Inpatient Sample from January 2012 to September 2015 for HF hospitalizations with Medicaid or private insurance as the primary payer. The authors identified a total of 226,265 and 292,070 patients with HF hospitalizations with Medicaid and private insurance, respectively. In propensity-matched cohort of 155,790 hospitalizations in each group, Medicaid beneficiaries with HF hospitalization had lower rates of intra-aortic balloon pump/left ventricular assist device/extracorporeal membrane oxygenation utilization (0.6 vs 0.9%; odds ratio [OR] 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59 to 0.69), heart transplantation (0.15 vs 0.44%; OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.40), implantable cardioverter-defibrillator/cardiac resynchronization therapy/permanent pacemaker (3.3 vs 3.9%; OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.81 to 0.87), and had higher rates of in-hospital mortality (1.9 vs 1.7%; OR 1.12; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.19) compared with privately insured individuals (p <0.001 for both). In conclusion, Medicaid recipients with HF hospitalizations had a lower rate of device utilization, heart transplantation, and a higher rate of in-hospital mortality compared with the privately insured sector. Further studies are needed to explore and understand the variation in the outcomes of HF hospitalizations stratified by insurance status.

Is the Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion Linked to Change in Rate of Ventricular Assist Device Implantation for Blacks and Whites?

BACKGROUND

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been associated with increased heart transplant listings among blacks, who are disproportionately uninsured. It is unclear whether the ACA is also associated with increased ventricular assist device implantation in blacks.

METHODS

Using Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Data State Inpatient Databases from 19 states and Washington DC, we analyzed 1157 patients from early-adopter states (ACA Medicaid expansion by January 2014) and 785 patients from nonadopter states (no implementation from 2013 to 2014). Piecewise Poisson regression with a discontinuity was used to estimate change in census-adjusted rates of ventricular assist device implants by race and ACA adopter status 1 year before and after January 2014.

RESULTS

Following the ACA Medicaid expansion, the proportional change in rate increased significantly among blacks from early adopter (1.40 [95% CI, 1.12-1.75], pre 0.57/100 000 to post-ACA 0.80/100 000) but not nonadopter states (1.25 [95% CI, 0.98-1.58], pre 0.40/100 000 to post-ACA 0.50/100 000). However, the early and nonadopter changes in implantation rates were not statistically different from each other (P=0.50). There were no immediate changes in whites in either state group following the ACA Medicaid expansion (early adopter, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.98-1.29], pre 0.27/100 000 to post-ACA 0.30/100 000; nonadopter, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.82-1.16], pre 0.27/100 000 to post-ACA 0.26/100 000).

CONCLUSIONS

Among eligible states participating in Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Data State Inpatient Databases, the ACA was not associated with immediate changes in ventricular assist device implantation rates by race. Although a significant increase in implantation rate was observed among blacks from early-adopter states, the change was not statistically different from the change seen in nonadopter states.