Tag: Primary Care

  • Your doctor or your insurer? Little-known rules may ease the choice in Medicare Advantage

    Your doctor or your insurer? Little-known rules may ease the choice in Medicare Advantage

    [ad_1]

    Bart Klion, 95, and his wife, Barbara, faced a tough choice in January: The upstate New York couple learned that this year they could keep either their private, Medicare Advantage insurance plan — or their doctors at Saratoga Hospital.

    The Albany Medical Center system, which includes their hospital, is leaving the Klions’ Humana plan — or, depending on which side is talking, the other way around. The breakup threatened to cut the couple’s lifeline to cope with serious chronic health conditions.

    Klion refused to pick the lesser of two bad options without a fight.

    He contacted Humana, the Saratoga hospital, and the health system. The couple’s doctors “are an exceptional group of caregivers and have made it possible for us to live an active and productive life,” he wrote to the hospital’s CEO. He called his wife’s former employer, which requires its retirees to enroll in a Humana Medicare Advantage plan to receive company health benefits. He also contacted the New York StateWide Senior Action Council, one of the nationwide State Health Insurance Assistance Programs that offer free, unbiased advice on Medicare.

    Klion said they all told him the same thing: Keep your doctors or your insurance.

    With rare exceptions, Advantage members are locked into their plans for the rest of the year — while health providers may leave at any time.

    Disputes between insurers and providers can lead to entire hospital systems suddenly leaving the plans. Insurers must comply with extensive regulations from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, including little-known protections for beneficiaries when doctors or hospitals leave their networks. But the news of a breakup can come as a surprise.

    In the nearly three decades since Congress created a private-sector alternative to original, government-run Medicare, the plans have enrolled a record 52% of Medicare’s 66 million older or disabled adults, according to the CMS. But along with getting extra benefits that original Medicare doesn’t offer, Advantage beneficiaries have discovered downsides. One common complaint is the requirement that they receive care only from networks of designated providers.

    Many hospitals have also become disillusioned by the program.

    “We hear every day, from our hospitals and health systems across the country, about challenges they experience with Medicare Advantage plans,” said Michelle Millerick, senior associate director for health insurance and coverage policy at the American Hospital Association, which represents about 5,000 hospitals. The hurdles include prior authorization restrictions, late or low payments, and “inappropriate denials of medically necessary covered services,” she said.

    “Some of these issues get to a boiling point where decisions are made to not participate in networks anymore,” she said.

    An escape hatch

    CMS gives most Advantage members two chances to change plans: during the annual open enrollment period in the fall and from January until March 31.

    But a few years ago, CMS created an escape hatch by expanding special enrollment periods, or SEPs, which allow for “exceptional circumstances.” Beneficiaries who qualify can request SEPs to change plans or return to original Medicare.

    According to CMS rules, there’s an SEP patients may use if their health is in jeopardy due to problems getting or continuing care. This may include situations in which their health care providers are leaving their plans’ networks, said David Lipschutz, an associate director at the Center for Medicare Advocacy.

    Another SEP is available for beneficiaries who experience “significant” network changes, although CMS officials declined to explain what qualifies as significant. However, in 2014, CMS offered this SEP to UnitedHealthcare Advantage members after the insurer terminated contracts with providers in 10 states.

    When providers leave, CMS ensures that the plans maintain “adequate access to needed services,” Meena Seshamani, CMS deputy administrator and director of the federal Center for Medicare, said in a statement.

    While hospitals say insurers are pushing them out, insurers blame hospitals for the turmoil in Medicare Advantage networks.

    “Hospitals are using their dominant market positions to demand unprecedented double-digit rate increases and threatening to terminate their contracts if insurers don’t agree,” said Ashley Bach, a spokesperson for Regence BlueShield, which offers Advantage plans in Idaho, Oregon, Utah, and Washington state.

    Patients get caught in the middle.

    “It feels like the powers that be are playing chicken,” said Mary Kay Taylor, 69, who lives near Tacoma, Washington. Regence BlueShield was in a weeks-long dispute with MultiCare, one of the largest medical systems in the state, where she gets her care.

    “Those of us that need this care and coverage are really inconsequential to them,” she said. “We’re left in limbo and uncertainty.”

    Other breakups this year include Baton Rouge General hospital in Louisiana leaving Aetna’s Medicare Advantage plans and Baptist Health in Kentucky leaving UnitedHealthcare and Wellcare Advantage plans. In San Diego, Scripps Health has left nearly all the area’s Advantage plans.

    In North Carolina, UNC Health and UnitedHealthcare renewed their contract just three days before it would have expired, and only two days before the deadline for Advantage members to switch plans. And in New York City, Aetna told its Advantage members this year to be prepared to lose access to the 18 hospitals and other care facilities in the NewYork-Presbyterian Weill Cornell Medical Center health system, before reaching an agreement on a contract last week.

    Limited choices

    Taylor didn’t want to lose her doctors or her Regence Advantage plan. She’s recovering from surgery and said waiting to see how the drama would end “was really scary.”

    So, last month, she enrolled in another plan, with help from Tim Smolen, director of Washington’s SHIP, Statewide Health Insurance Benefits Advisors program. Soon afterward, Regence and MultiCare agreed to a new contract. But Taylor is allowed only one change before March 31 and can’t return to Regence this year, Smolen said.

    Finding an alternative plan can be like winning at bingo. Some patients have multiple doctors, who all must be easy to get to and covered by the new plan. To avoid bigger, out-of-network bills, they must find a plan that also covers their prescription drugs and includes their preferred pharmacies.

    “A lot of times, we may get through the provider network and find that that’s good to go but then we get to the drugs,” said Kelli Jo Greiner, state director of Minnesota’s SHIP, Senior LinkAge Line. Since Jan. 1, counselors there have helped more than 900 people switch to new Advantage plans after HealthPartners, a large health system based in Bloomington, left Humana’s Medicare Advantage plans.

    Choices are more limited for low-income beneficiaries who receive subsidies for drugs and monthly premiums, which only a few plans accept, Greiner said.

    For almost 6 million people, a former employer chooses a Medicare Advantage plan and requires them to enroll in it to receive retiree health benefits. If they want to keep a provider who leaves that plan, those beneficiaries must forfeit all their employer-subsidized health benefits, often including coverage for their families.

    The threat of losing coverage for their providers was one reason some New York City retirees sued Mayor Eric Adams to stop efforts to force 250,000 of them into an Aetna Advantage plan, said Marianne Pizzitola, president of the New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees, which filed the lawsuit. The retirees won three times, and city officials are appealing again.

    CMS requires Advantage plans to notify their members 45 days before a primary care doctor leaves their plan and 30 days before a specialist physician drops out. But counselors who advise Medicare beneficiaries say the notice doesn’t always work.

    “A lot of people are experiencing disruptions to their care,” said Sophie Exdell, a program manager in San Diego for California’s SHIP, the Health Insurance Counseling & Advocacy Program. She said about 32,000 people in San Diego lost access to Scripps Health providers when the system left most of the area’s Advantage plans. Many didn’t get the notice or, if they did, “they couldn’t get through to someone to get help making a change,” she said.

    CMS also requires plans to comply with network adequacy rules, which limit how far and how long members must travel to primary care doctors, specialists, hospitals, and other providers. The agency checks compliance every three years or more often if necessary.

    In the end, Bart Klion said he had no alternative but to stick with Humana because he and his wife couldn’t afford to give up their retiree health benefits. He was able to find doctors willing to take on new patients this year.

    But he wonders: “What happens in 2025?”




    Kaiser Health NewsThis article was reprinted from khn.org, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF – the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Transforming cardiovascular health through diet and education

    Transforming cardiovascular health through diet and education

    [ad_1]

    In a recent study published in BMJ Nutrition, Prevention, and Health, researchers evaluated the effectiveness of the Get Heart Smart (GHS) program in improving cardiovascular health.

    Study: Evaluation of a 4-week interdisciplinary primary care cardiovascular health programme: impact on knowledge, Mediterranean Diet adherence and biomarkers. Image Credit: Sven Hansche/Shutterstock.comStudy: Evaluation of a 4-week interdisciplinary primary care cardiovascular health programme: impact on knowledge, Mediterranean Diet adherence and biomarkers. Image Credit: Sven Hansche/Shutterstock.com

    Background

    Cardiovascular disease is Canada’s second-leading cause of mortality. Lifestyle changes can boost cardiovascular health by improving the lipid profile and blood pressure.

    Limiting alcohol use, lowering stress, increasing physical activity, managing weight, stopping smoking, and eating a well-balanced, nutrient-dense diet, such as the Mediterranean diet, can optimize cardiovascular health.

    The Mediterranean Diet promotes a high diet of unsaturated fats, fruits, leafy greens, wholegrain cereals, seeds, nuts, plant-origin proteins, moderate animal-based protein consumption, and minimal sweet intake.

    A two-point rise in the Mediterranean Diet score is associated with better health, including lower mortality, CVD risk, neoplastic illness, and depression. Health education and motive planning can improve cardiovascular outcomes.

    According to the Planned Behavior Theory, knowledge can robustly estimate involvement, which impacts intentions and subsequent behavior change.

    About the study

    In the present pragmatic, longitudinal cohort study, researchers explored the impact of the GHS program on cardiovascular outcomes.

    The researchers enrolled 31 adults in the four-week GHS program formulated by the East Elgin Family Health Team dieticians based on referrals from healthcare practitioners or by themselves. Due to COVID-19, 16 participants attended the program virtually.

    The program comprised four weekly educational sessions of 75 minutes each to improve participant awareness of BP and cholesterol management.

    In addition, the program educated the participants on grocery store navigation from a cardiovascular perspective and reviewed diets that improve cardiovascular health [like the Mediterranean Diet, Portfolio Diet, and Dietary Approaches to Stopping Hypertension (DASH) diet].

    In one session, a physician answered questions concerning cardiovascular medications. After each session, participants developed their SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and timely) goals.

    The team conducted in-person sessions between May 2019 and March 2020 and provided educational handouts to the participants.

    They obtained blood samples from the participants for metabolic profile analysis and used the GHS knowledge questionnaire to assess participant awareness. The primary outcome was a change in Mediterranean Diet adherence after four weeks and six months of follow-up.

    Secondary study outcomes included changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), blood pressure (BP), lipid profile [total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and triglycerides], and an improved understanding of cardiovascular health after four weeks and six months.

    In addition, the team compared cardiovascular outcomes between those attending in-person and virtually during COVID-19.

    They performed two-way repeated-measures analyses of variance (RM-ANOVAs) to investigate GHS program effectiveness using data obtained between May 2019 and March 2023.

    Results

    The study population was primarily comprised of healthy female Caucasians, with a mean age of 61 years. GHS program participation was strong, with participants attending an average of 3.5 out of 4 sessions, with no significant differences between in-person and virtual attendance.

    Knowledge ratings differed significantly between groups at baseline and after four weeks. Over six months, the team noted significantly higher Mediterranean Diet adherence and knowledge ratings in the in-person, virtual, and pooled samples. None of the biomarker alterations, except triglycerides, were statistically significant.

    Following the four-week GHS course, the virtual group’s Mediterranean Diet adherence improved significantly. After a six-month follow-up, adherence to the Mediterranean Diet was remarkably higher in the virtual and in-person groups.

    The effect on Mediterranean Diet adherence increased considerably with time (partial eta squared for time: 0.4).

    After four-week and six-month follow-ups, the pooled, virtual, and in-person groups showed significantly higher knowledge scores than at study initiation.

    After four weeks, knowledge levels differed considerably between the virtual and in-person groups; however, the team found no statistically significant difference between groups after six months. As time passed, they found a considerable influence on participant knowledge (partial eta squared for time, 0.5).

    The study found that the four-week cardiovascular health program significantly increased Mediterranean diet adherence, as seen by an increase in the mean Mediterranean Diet score from 7.0 to 9.2 after six months.

    Significant gains in knowledge ratings were observed in both the virtual and in-person groups, showing the adoption of virtual programs.

    Future research, however, must assess the program’s effectiveness in larger sample sizes with higher gender and ethnic diversity and poor cardiovascular health to increase the generalizability and validity of the study findings.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How Hologic is Shaping the Future of Women’s Healthcare

    How Hologic is Shaping the Future of Women’s Healthcare

    [ad_1]

    In celebration of International Women’s Day 2024, we’re honored to host Tim Simpson and Sarah Smith from Hologic, a forefront leader in women’s health. As we dive into this year’s theme, “Invest in Women: Accelerate Progress” and “#InspireInclusion,” let’s explore how Hologic’s pioneering work and dedication align with these powerful calls to action.

    Join us as we discuss the crucial role of investment in women’s healthcare and the innovative strides Hologic is making toward inclusive and progressive healthcare solutions.

    Firstly, please introduce yourself and Hologic. More specifically, how does Hologic’s mission align with the 2024 International Women’s Day theme of “Invest in Women: Accelerate Progress” and ”#Inspireinclusion”?

    Tim: I’m Tim Simpson, General Manager UK & Ireland at Hologic. Hologic is a global champion of women’s health, providing innovations designed to detect, diagnose, and treat women’s health conditions. We see it as our mission to advance women’s health, and for this to happen in the UK, targeted investments in research and technology are crucial.

    Sarah: I’m Sarah Smith, Senior Marketing Manager, Surgical Gynaecology, EMEA. Improvement in women’s healthcare only begins when there is investment in empowering women to feel confident to know when to talk to a healthcare professional (HCP) about their health concerns. By the same token, we also need to invest in educating HCPs so that when a woman speaks to their GP, they leave feeling heard and understood.

    Learn more about Hologic

    From your perspective, why is putting women at the heart of decision-making critical in advancing women’s healthcare?

    Sarah: Putting women at the heart of all decisions is the cornerstone of patient-centered care. Shared decision-making is needed to ensure that the patient and clinician work together to make the best healthcare decision for the individual.

    In women’s health, it is particularly important to champion shared decision-making. High rates of misdiagnosis, myths, and misperceptions about conditions1,2, as well as barriers to dialogue due to the sensitive nature of some conditions, can often leave women in the dark when it comes to decisions about their health and treatment.2

    Providing women with better education via initiatives, such as our Wear White Again awareness campaign for women suffering from Heavy Menstrual Bleeding, is vital in empowering them to seek help.

    Improved education and knowledge can make a considerable difference, especially in situations where dialogue barriers may prevent women from clearly communicating their condition’s impact on their lives. Equally, providing clinicians with relevant and up-to-date information is crucial so that when women present symptoms, the conversations between them and their clinicians are productive and satisfactory for both parties.

    In the context of reducing health inequalities, what are some of the barriers to accessing quality healthcare for women, and how is Hologic working to overcome these challenges?

    Tim: We know from our annual Hologic Global Women’s Health Index that cancer testing amongst women has improved. However, our supplementary research found that women from ethnic minorities (non-white women) reported lower attendance for breast cancer screening (11% vs. 25%), compared with white women.”3,4 It is concerning to see these discrepancies, as we know cancer can affect anyone.

    One of the main barriers to attending screenings is being time-poor, with another being not having access to the correct health information. We know it’s vital that health information is accessible for all and translated into multiple languages.

    To tackle these inequalities, we must work in partnership with different organizations, for example, charities that hold vital insights into women’s experiences, to better understand how we make breast cancer screening accessible for all.

    In 2021, we partnered with Manchester-based charity, Prevent Breast Cancer for our global Project Health Equality Campaign, which engaged with hundreds of women to raise awareness of breast cancer and the importance of attending their screening.

    Both breast and cervical cancer remain a significant concern worldwide. Could you discuss the efficiencies Hologic is implementing to help reduce the incidence of these common cancers?

    Tim: We believe diagnostic innovation is key to helping detect cancers early, therefore improving the chances of a better outcome. Both cervical and breast cancer screening are well suited for digital technologies and the application of artificial intelligence (AI), given both require highly trained medical professionals to identify rare, subtle changes visually. This process can be labor-intensive and time-consuming. AI and computer vision are technologies that could help to improve this significantly.

    AI and increased screening units and mammographers can potentially increase breast cancer screening capacity by removing the need for review by two radiologists5.

    When AI-guided imaging is used as part of a screening program, it could effectively and efficiently highlight the areas that are of particular interest to the reader, in the case of breast screening or cytotechnologists, when considering cervical screening.

    Additionally, AI can be used for risk stratification, meaning it could help identify women who are particularly at risk and push them further up the queue for regular screening.

    For example, women with dense breast tissue have a greater risk factor than having two immediate family members who have suffered from breast cancer. What is more, dense breasts make it more difficult to identify cancerous cells in standard mammograms6. This means that in some cases, cancers may be missed, and in others, women will be unnecessarily recalled for further investigation. 

    Could you discuss the advancements in diagnosing and treating heavy menstrual bleeding and how these impact women’s lives?

    Sarah: Our research conducted in 2022 found that only a quarter of those who reported symptoms of heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) (24%) have received a formal diagnosis. Perhaps even more concerning is that nearly half of the women who experience symptoms of the condition (42%) have not spoken to their GP about them, demonstrating a potential belief that it is something to be endured rather than managed7.

    GPs cannot be experts in every area, and as they continue to do more with limited resources, it is vital to ensure that primary care is supported to understand HMB better. This is a point echoed by the Women’s Health Strategy, which has the ambition of healthcare professionals in primary care to be well-informed and trained in menstrual and gynecological health8.

    Alongside this research, Hologic has launched a report entitled, ‘The right patients, the right setting, the right clinicians’ to set out its vision on tackling HMB. The report recommends launching Women’s Health Hubs and the development of a specific Office for Health Improvement and Disparities communication campaign to support clinicians with building a greater knowledge of menstrual conditions, so GPs can effectively recognise and diagnose HMB.

    How does Hologic’s approach to women’s health care exemplify innovation in addressing long-standing health issues like endometriosis and menstrual health?

    Sarah: Part of our approach at Hologic when championing women’s healthcare is to make sure we connect with key stakeholders along the patient pathway, as we know we need to work collaboratively to change the status quo. This attitude is reflected in our everyday lives – I spend much of my time speaking to clinicians and patients to understand better the challenges they face and the solutions we can collectively create.

    This was the approach we took when conducting the heavy menstrual bleeding roundtable. We made sure we had a diverse set of menstrual health experts who could speak to different parts of the patient pathway. We were also honored to be joined by Dame Lesley Regan, the first Women’s Health Ambassador for England.

    As mentioned, we produced the report following the inspiring roundtable discussion. It is available on our Hologic UK website.  

    Image Credit: fizkes/Shutterstock.comImage Credit: fizkes/Shutterstock.com

    How does Hologic UK & Ireland measure the impact of its initiatives on women’s health, and what benchmarks do you use to evaluate success in contributing to the broader goals of healthcare equity and access?

    Tim: At Hologic, we believe you cannot improve what you don’t measure, so we must continue to collect vital data to help us pinpoint how we best support women across the country.

    In 2021, we launched the Hologic Global Women’s Health Index (HGWHI)*, a globally comparative study in partnership with Gallup, to measure and monitor the behaviors and attitudes influencing women’s access to quality healthcare. It provides us with a unique insight into the experiences of women across the globe, including the UK. HGWHI runs annually; we’re launching the UK data in May.

    Our ambition is that the HGWHI results, in partnership with research from key organizations, will help to form a quality data set that can be used as a benchmark for how UK women perceive their health in the years to come.

    ​As leaders in the healthcare industry, how do you foresee the role of technology evolving to further support women’s health initiatives in the next decade?

    Tim: We know that preventing disease saves lives9. Therefore, as a business leader, I believe technology should lie at the heart of prevention, detection, and diagnosis. Technology for breast cancer screening is an area where investment is crucial to meet women’s health needs in preventative health.

    Currently, many screening programs use traditional 2D mammography technology, which makes identifying cancer lesions more difficult in dense breasts. Therefore, investing in technology such as tomosynthesis (3D Mammography) for breast cancer screening would help provide the reassurance that women deserve. Tomosynthesis detects up to 65% more invasive breast cancers when compared to traditional 2D Mammography alone10.**

    The second method of improving breast and cervical cancer screening programs is using artificial intelligence (AI) to support reading images. Therefore, investing in digital infrastructure is crucial to improving the accuracy and efficiency of diagnosis, as it will ultimately lead to earlier treatment and, thus, better patient outcomes.

    Endometriosis Month coincides with International Women’s Day. How is Hologic raising awareness and advancing treatment options for this often-overlooked condition?

    Sarah: This year’s Endometriosis Month theme is, ‘Could it be endometriosis?’ which makes me think about all the undiagnosed women and girls living in pain. At Hologic, we prioritize fostering relationships with stakeholders and policymakers to raise awareness of what is needed to improve women’s health and the importance of treating gynecological health.  

    As previously mentioned, the HMB roundtable with Dame Lesley Regan, the first Women’s Health Ambassador for England, and other influential leaders from across the continuum of menstrual health care to discuss how we can improve patient pathways for heavy menstrual bleeding was a recent example.

    Additionally, we recognize the importance of data to understand women’s conditions and care and, therefore, conducted research in 2022. This data collected provided the below insights on pain 4:

    • Nearly a quarter of women in the UK experience pain daily, and a fifth of those have had to stop working because of their pain.
    • Among these respondents, the top causes were joint pain, backache, and headache. Women also reported pain due to periods, menopause, heavy menstrual bleeding, and endometriosis.
    • It takes women, on average, 4.29 visits with a healthcare professional before being diagnosed with the cause of their pain, with just more than a quarter of women still not having a diagnosis.

    At Hologic, we believe that to achieve improvement in the treatment of women’s pain is two-fold. We need to continue to educate healthcare professionals (HCPs), so they are provided with the most up-to-date information to diagnose menstrual conditions effectively.

    We also need to ensure that HCPs know that diagnosis and treatment can be overwhelming for the patient and allow time to support patients through the process, setting clear expectations to avoid disappointment post-treatment.

    Can you share a success story or case study where Hologic’s initiatives directly impact women’s healthcare outcomes?

    Tim: We’ve seen first-hand the positive impact AI-guided imaging can directly have on women’s healthcare outcomes. An example of this would be the UK’s first pilot of digital cytology in cervical cancer screening at University Hospital Monklands.

    The technology rapidly reviews test slides, providing the screener with the most diagnostically relevant cells. The initial results are promising, with the hospital reporting increased capacity in slide assessment and improved analysis turnaround times.

    Allan Wilson, Consultant Biomedical Scientist at NHS Lanarkshire, who led the pilot project, commented on the possibilities of the technology in allowing screeners to dedicate more time to training on the latest technologies and dealing with difficult-to-diagnose cases.

    He also noted that with advanced technology, giving women their results quicker increases their confidence in cervical cancer screening while reducing the likelihood of a false negative so any pre-cancerous changes can be picked up and treated earlier before they become cancerous.​​​​​​

    How does Hologic ensure that women’s voices and experiences are incorporated into the development and improvement of gynaecological surgical solutions?

    Sarah: At Hologic, we work extremely closely with patient groups and women’s charities to better understand the patient’s voice. They hold key knowledge and insights about the patient’s experience.

    At the Heavy Menstrual Bleeding Roundtable that I referenced earlier, we brought together experts from different parts of the patient pathway to ensure that women’s experiences were an integral part of the discussion. This meant that their views shaped the resulting report. helped ensure that we were able to understand a woman’s experience. This, in turn, helps us to improve our services and solutions.

    Looking towards the future, what are the main areas of women’s health that Hologic is focusing on for research and development?

    Tim: Hologic is passionate about delivering solutions that are based on data-driven insights that improve women’s well-being. As we look ahead to the future, we will continue to invest in developing our solutions and services that enable healthcare professionals to provide better healthcare to women.

    We also remain committed to raising awareness of the need to address the inequities in women’s health and educating women so they can better advocate for themselves.

    Where can readers find more information?

    About Tim Simpson

    Tim Simpson General Manager at Hologic, UK and Ireland. Tim joined Hologic in 2019 as UK Country Business Manager, before becoming Hologic UK and Ireland’s General Manager in February 2022.

    About Sarah Smith

    Sarah Smith, Senior Marketing Manager, Gynaecology Surgical EMEA. Sarah has worked at Hologic for over twenty years, beginning her role as Senior Marketing Manager EMEA in 2023.​

     

    Sources:

    1. Better for Women. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. 2019. Available from: https://www.rcog.org.uk/about-us/campaigning-and-opinions/better-for-women/ [Accessed 15 February 2024]
    2. Thompson J and Blake D. Women’s Experiences of Medical Miss-Diagnosis: How Does Gender Matter in Healthcare Settings?”. Women’s Studies Journal 2020; 34:28.
    3. Hologic. Hologic Global Women’s Health Index. 2021
    4. OnePoll. Women’s Health Index. 2022
    5. American Cancer Society [Internet]. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2019-2020 Available from: https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/breast-cancer-facts-and-figures/breast-cancer-facts-and-figures-2019-2020.pdf [Accessed 15 February 2024]
    6. National Cancer Institute. Dense Breast: Answers to Commonly Asked Questions. Available from: https://www.cancer.gov/types/breast/breast-changes/dense breasts#:~:text=Dense%20breasts%20can%20make%20a,tissue%20appears%20as%20dark%20areas [Accessed 15 February 2024]
    7. Hologic data on file MISC-08708-GBR-EN . Survey of 2,000 Women aged 18-55 plus top up 1,000 UK women who have heavy menstrual bleeding during October 20th – 27th 2022.
    8. Department of Health and Social Care. Women’s Health Strategy for England. Available from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/womens-health-strategy-for-england/womens-health-strategy-for-england [Accessed 15 February 2024]​​​​​​
    9. Department of Health & Social Care. [Internet] Prevention is better than cure. 2018. [Accessed 14 February 2024] Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/753688/Prevention_is_better_than_cure_5-11.pdf
    10. Friedewald SM, Rafferty EA, Rose SL, Durand MA, Plecha DM, Greenberg JS, et al. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. JAMA, 2014 Jun 25;311(24):2499-507.

    *The Hologic Global Women’s Health Index is one of the most comprehensive initiatives measuring the state of health for 97% of the world’s women and girls aged 15 and older.

    **Results from Friedewald, SM, et al. “Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography.” JAMA 311.24 (2014): 2499-2507; a multi-site (13), non-randomized, historical control study of 454,000 screening mammograms investigating the initial impact the introduction of the Hologic Selenia® Dimensions ® on screening outcomes. Individual results may vary. The study found an average 41% (95% CI: 20-65%) increase and that 1.2 (95% CI: 0.8-1.6) additional invasive breast cancers per 1000 screening exams were found in women receiving combined 2D FFDM and 3D™ mammograms acquired with the Hologic 3D Mammography™ System versus women receiving 2D FFDM mammograms only.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • In California, faceoff between major insurer and health system shows hazards of consolidation

    In California, faceoff between major insurer and health system shows hazards of consolidation

    [ad_1]

    For weeks, more than half a million Anthem Blue Cross enrollees who receive health care from the University of California were held in suspense. It wasn’t clear whether they would have to find new doctors or switch plans as the health system and one of its largest insurance partners struggled to reach agreement on a new contract.

    UC Health accused Anthem of not negotiating in good faith, while Anthem leaders retorted that UC Health had demanded too much and rebuffed the insurer’s request for administrative efficiencies. In fact, roughly 8 million Anthem members in California were at risk of losing in-network access to UC Health’s vast network of prestigious hospitals and medical facilities, which could have left them with much higher out-of-pocket expenses. While not all patients were made aware of the situation, Anthem notified some enrollees they would be reassigned to new primary care doctors if no deal were reached.

    But even as the parties announced an eleventh-hour agreement on Feb. 5, industry analysts say the conflict has become part of a trend in which patients are increasingly caught in the crossfire of contract disputes. Amid negotiations over rising labor and equipment costs, it’s often patients who are ultimately saddled with higher bills as the health industry continues to consolidate.

    “This type of contract dispute is a routine feature of the health care system,” said Kristof Stremikis, director of market analysis and insight at the California Health Care Foundation. “At the same time, from a patient’s perspective, it’s an unfortunate feature of our health care system because it creates uncertainty and anxiety.” (California Healthline is an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation.)

    Stremikis noted that as mergers occur in the health industry, patients are left with fewer choices. Any time there are disputes, disruptions are felt more widely. And such fights rarely result in lower costs for consumers long-term across California.

    A KFF analysis found widespread evidence that consolidation of health providers leads to higher health care prices for private insurance. The same brief from 2020 found some evidence suggesting that large, consolidated insurance companies are able to obtain lower prices from providers, but that has not necessarily led to lower premiums for patients. And a 2022 report from the California Department of Health Care Access and Information found that health care costs have grown “at an unsustainable rate,” and noted that between 2010 and 2018 “health insurance premiums for job-based coverage increased more than twice the rate of growth for wages.” State regulators also found that health plans spent nearly $1.3 billion more on prescription drugs in 2022 than in 2021.

    In trying to slow growth, California in 2022 set up an Office of Health Care Affordability, which has proposed a 3% spending growth target for the industry for 2025-2029. But enforcement will start in 2028 at the earliest, using spending data from 2026.

    Cathy Jordan, 60, a social worker in Yuba City, California, has been a patient at UC Davis Health for two decades. Jordan was diagnosed at the end of 2021 with aggressive small cell carcinoma, a rare form of cancer. She has undergone surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, and other treatments since then, yet her cancer has returned twice.

    “I don’t have the luxury of time — my cancer comes back fast,” Jordan said.

    She is among the group of Anthem-insured patients at UC Health who were at risk of losing access to in-network care there, and when she got a notice from Anthem, she grew alarmed, she said.

    Jordan’s oncologist, Rebecca Brooks, said in an interview prior to the agreement being reached that it would be “incredibly disruptive” for cancer patients to have to switch providers in the middle of their treatments.

    “It’s a detriment to their care,” said Brooks, director of the gynecologic oncology division at UC Davis Health. “It’s going to disrupt treatment and cause worse outcomes.”

    Jordan said she appreciates that UC Davis Health has a National Cancer Institute comprehensive cancer center designation; the only other cancer center of that caliber in Northern California not part of UC Health is at Stanford University, several hours away in Santa Clara County.

    Jordan was worried that she and other UC Health patients would have to compete for treatment elsewhere. She was also uncomfortable with the idea of adjusting to a new setting and routine while undergoing intensive medical treatment.

    “Someone needs to say, ‘We need to think about these patients.’ Someone needs to step up and say, ‘What’s going to be best for our patients?’” Jordan said. “This is my life.”

    Stremikis said such concerns are ever more urgent as the health care industry consolidates. UC San Francisco recently announced it would acquire two struggling hospitals in San Francisco, and it is joining Adventist Health in making a new effort to purchase a bankrupt community hospital in Madera. And UC Irvine recently agreed to buy four hospitals in Southern California.

    “There is consolidation vertically up and down the supply chain and horizontally,” he explained. “So when there are disputes between these large entities, it has a larger and larger impact because there are fewer choices for patients.”

    While contract disputes between health care providers and insurers are nothing new, there is some evidence that they are increasing, at least in public view. FTI Consulting published data last year that found a steady increase in media coverage of rate negotiations between providers and insurers from 2022 to 2023. In addition to the fight with Anthem, UC Health narrowly avoided a break with Aetna last year by reaching an agreement in April. And regional hospital systems, including Sonoma Valley Hospital and Salinas Valley Health, have been at odds with Anthem within the last few months.

    UC and Anthem have now agreed to extend the current contract to April 1 while terms of the new agreement are being finalized. UC Health spokesperson Heather Harper said the rate increases were below the inflation rate.

    Anthem spokesperson Michael Bowman said the new contract would allow Anthem members to access care at UC Health for years to come.

    “This underscores our mutual commitment to providing Anthem’s consumers and employers with access to high quality, affordable care at UC Health,” Bowman said in an email.

    This article was produced by KFF Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation. 




    Kaiser Health NewsThis article was reprinted from khn.org, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF – the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Reducing unnecessary testing or treatments in older patients

    Reducing unnecessary testing or treatments in older patients

    [ad_1]

    When a doctor ordered a routine prostate screening for an 80-year-old man -; as doctors often do -; a dramatic yellow alert popped up on the electronic health record with dire warnings. 

    It flashed: “You are ordering a test that no guideline recommends. Screening with PSA can lead to harms from diagnostic and treatment procedures. If you proceed without a justification, the unnecessary test will be noted on the health record.” 

    This was the strategy Northwestern Medicine investigators tested to see if they could move the needle on the stubbornly persistent practice of ordering unnecessary screenings for older adults. Doctors got the message.

    The results, published Feb. 6 in Annals of Internal Medicine, found a significant decrease in screenings for prostate cancer and urinary tract infections. 

    After 18 months of delivering the alerts to 370 clinicians in 60 Northwestern Medicine clinics, unnecessary testing was reduced 9% in the PSA intervention group and 5.5% in the urine testing intervention group. There was, however, only a small change, in the overtreatment of blood sugar, which also can result in potential harm. Half of the physicians received the alerts, the other half did not. 

    To our knowledge, this is the first study to significantly reduce all of the unnecessary testing or treatments studied using point-of-care alerts. We believe that incorporating elements like a focus on potential harms, sharing social norms and promoting a sense of social accountability and reputational concerns led to the effectiveness of these messages.”


    Dr. Stephen Persell, lead investigator, professor of medicine at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and a Northwestern Medicine physician

    Several recent trials that attempted to reduce overuse of testing, using interventions delivered to clinicians through the electronic health record, have not been particularly successful at changing clinicians’ behavior, Persell noted. 

    “But if messages clinicians find compelling can be delivered by electronic health records at the time clinicians place their orders, this could be a straightforward way to improve care and could be applied across large health systems easily,” Persell said. 

    Harm from unnecessary screening and overtreatment

    Screening a man 76 years or older for prostate cancer may result in overtreatment that could cause him serious health problems than simply living with an indolent cancer.

    Even so, a man’s primary care physician will often obtain a PSA test to screen for prostate cancer. Ditto for women 65 and older being tested for urinary tract infections without any symptoms. Doctors also overtreat diabetes with hypoglycemic agents in patients aged 75 years and older.

    The overuse of low-value screenings and unnecessary care remains a problem in American health care, particularly for older adults. 

    “These are screening practices people have adopted without good evidence,” Persell said. 

    “If a man is not going to live another 10 or 15 years due to his age, you won’t save his life from prostate cancer by screening him, but you will subject him to the potential harms of treatment,” said Persell, also director of the Center for Primary Care Innovation at Feinberg. The treatment may lead to surgery or radiation treatment that can cause urinary incontinence or urinary symptoms, impair sexual function or cause rectal bleeding. 

    “What’s right for a 68-year-old man might not be right for one who is 75 or 85 years old,” Persell said. 

    Harm can also result from testing women 65 and older for urinary tract infections, if they are not experiencing any symptoms.

    “These asymptomatic urinary tract infections are common in older women, but there is no evidence that you can improve a woman’s health with antibiotics,” Persell said. Antibiotics, however, can cause allergic reactions, diarrhea and antibiotic resistance, which could make bacterial infections harder to treat in the future.

    In addition, treating blood sugar to very low levels in older adults with drugs like insulin or sulfonylureas puts older patients at risk for dangerous low blood sugar events. 

    But doctors and patients resist change in blood sugar interventions. “We have taught patients to strive to control their blood sugar, even when it gets to a point when it’s safer to have slightly less controlled blood sugar,” Persell said. “It’s hard to convince patients and doctors to change their goals.”

    The next step in the research and other ongoing studies are testing whether similar approaches can be used to improve the quality of care in other areas where treatments may be overused such as opioids, sleeping pills and drug combinations that may cause harm. 

    Other authors include Lucia C. Petito, Ji Young Lee, Daniella Meeker, Jason N. Doctor, Noah J. Goldstein, Craig R. Fox, Theresa A. Rowe, Dr. Jeffrey A. Linder, Ryan Chmiel, Yaw Amofa Peprah and Tiffany Brown.

    The title of the article is “Reducing Care Overuse in Older Patients Using Professional Norms and Accountability.”

    The research was supported by National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health award R33AG057383.

    Source:

    Journal reference:

    Persell, S. D., et al. (2024). Reducing Care Overuse in Older Patients Using Professional Norms and Accountability. Annals of Internal Medicine. doi.org/10.7326/m23-2183.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Retrospective study shows decrease in kindergarten readiness

    Retrospective study shows decrease in kindergarten readiness

    [ad_1]

    Primary care screening visits for young children serve as useful sources of data for assessing social and developmental markers. It is not clear how these screening data can be used to predict whether children are school ready.

    Study: arly Correlates of School Readiness Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic Linking Health and School Data. Image Credit: FamVeld/Shutterstock.com
    Study: Early Correlates of School Readiness Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic Linking Health and School Data. Image Credit: FamVeld/Shutterstock.com

    A new study appeared in JAMA Pediatrics that explored associations between school district early Kindergarten Readiness Assessment (KRA) and electronic health records (EHR) data and linked KRA scores with the changes occurring during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

    Background

    Childhood is a watershed period for developing social skills, healthy physical and brain development, and becoming ready for school. Multiple factors may interfere with the acquisition of these skills which are essential in school life, such as social training, emotional regulation, as well as math and literacy skills. These may include socioeconomic and racial characteristics.

    In some regions, up to 4 out of 10 new kindergartners are not ready to enter school. Since there has been no systematic attempt to identify which children are at risk of entering kindergarten without readiness, it is not clear how and which risk factors can be modified to change this situation.

    The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted learning in school-age children, but its effect on development in children under five years remains to be described. This motivated the current study that uses KRA scores before and during the pandemic with the EHR data from a cohort of students in a large school district with about 36,000 students.

    The KRA scores are linked to reading proficiency in the third grade and include four skill categories: preliteracy, premath, motor skills, and social-emotional skills.

    What did the study show?

    The study included over 3,000 patients who were screened at primary care level. The mean age was 67 months, with the majority being Black (80%) vs 8% Whites. The passing KRA score was set at 270.

    When correlated with the pandemic dates, the mean KRA scores were significantly lower in 2021, at 260, vs ~263 in 2019 and 2018. About a fifth of students scored above passing levels in 2021, demonstrating school readiness, vs ~30% in 2019 and 32% in 2018.

    About one in four parents said they rarely read to their child, that is, one or less days a week, at least once during the period of the study. About 27% of children were unable to meet ASQ scores at least once, while 12% of the children sometimes experienced food insecurity.

    The risk factors for a low KRA score were one or more failures in the ASQ between 18 and 54 months, being Hispanic, not speaking the language of the healthcare professional during screening visits, being male and being seldom read to, as well as having food insecurity. Only 23% of boys were school-ready vs 32% of girls.

    Having Medicaid insurance, indicative of low socioeconomic status, was associated with school readiness in ~27% of children, vs ~51% if Medicaid was never used.

    Other socioeconomic factors, like housing insecurity, race, depression among the caregivers, and difficulty of any sort in obtaining benefits, did not show an association with the KRA scores. 

    To interpret our findings using a hypothetical clinical example, starting with the expected score of 270.8 in the adjusted model (equivalent to demonstrating readiness): a boy who is Medicaid insured, who once failed an ASQ, who infrequently reported food insecurity, and was not read to as an infant lost an average of 15 points on the KRA, placing him in bottom category of emerging readiness (score below 257).”

    What are the implications?

    This is among the earliest studies to report that there might have been “a deleterious association of the COVID-19 pandemic with early learning and development.” It is also one of the largest studies to correlate primary care data to outcomes in public schools.

    While other researchers have found conflicting evidence regarding childhood development during the pandemic, multiple factors have been at work, impacting the validity of observed associations. For example, school enrolment was lower during the period. However, the association of lower school readiness with not being read to as an infant has been well documented, as well as with low developmental scores and food insecurity.

    Danger signals picked up in this way could help provide appropriate interventions in early life, whether by speech and language therapy, promoting learning by enrolment in good early childhood education programs, or facilitating library access.

    These findings suggest substantial untapped potential for primary care pediatrics and school districts to work more closely together given that risks for kindergarten readiness are evident much earlier in primary care.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Primary-care-based housing program shows promise in addressing social determinants of health

    Primary-care-based housing program shows promise in addressing social determinants of health

    [ad_1]

    Brigham researchers found that participation in a housing program was associated with fewer outpatient visits, improved physical and mental health, and stronger connections to their primary care clinics and care team. 

    Lack of safe and affordable housing is a critical issue in the United States and creates immense challenges for patients’ health, well-being, and ability to access care. Investigators from Brigham and Women’s Hospital, a founding member of the Mass General Brigham healthcare system, evaluated data from a social determinants of health screening and housing intervention program initiated in 2018 to help prevent homelessness and improve health care utilization and outcomes. 

    They found that in this primary-care-based program for patients who were unhoused, facing eviction, or living in unsafe housing conditions, those who received integrated support from the program’s care team had fewer outpatient visits, reported better physical and mental health, and felt more connected to their health care clinic and clinical team. The results are published in Health Affairs

    It is very hard to get a patient’s blood pressure under control if they are worried about where they are going to sleep. A person’s health is extremely at risk if their housing is unstable. And since the pandemic, there has been an enormous increase in housing needs.” 


    MaryCatherine Arbour, MD, MPH, study’s lead author, medical director of the social care team at Brigham and Women’s Hospital’s Primary Care Center

    In 2018, Brigham and Women’s Hospital began screening every MassHealth patient to address social determinants of health (SDoH), a term for nonmedical conditions that influence a person’s health, such as housing, education, employment and transportation access. ,The Brigham’s 14 primary care sites all conduct SDoH screening annually for every MassHealth patient. Four of those practices have expanded the screening to all primary care patients. The housing crisis is acutely evident in these screenings. Housing referrals fielded in this screening jumped from 20 per month in 2020 to 350 per month in 2023. 

    As part of this program, a Social Care Team, including housing advocates, address patients’ social needs in partnership with clinicians. Patients with a need for housing who are referred by staff or their doctor receive housing information from a Community Resource Specialist, and a subset of patients with imminent eviction risk or unhealthy conditions receive more specialized and intensive support from a housing advocacy team. Housing Advocates support patients for six months by addressing their housing needs and helping them with clinical care navigation and management. The care team works with a variety of community partners, including legal representation, to help find housing solutions. 

    “What makes this program special is that it is embedded in primary care and uses a triaged approach to identify housing types that are more likely to be affecting someone’s health,” said Arbour. “It is a unique, integrated approach that partners community resource specialists and community health workers with the primary care team and partners the primary care team with community-based partners, including legal partners.” 

    To evaluate the program’s impact, Arbour and co-authors conducted a mixed-method, retrospective cohort evaluation study and looked at a sample of 1,139 patients over age 18 with housing-related needs who enrolled in the program between October 2018 and March 2021. The cohort was mainly comprised of female, non-white, and non-English-speaking MassHealth patients with more chronic conditions and higher emergency room use than the general population. The evaluation looked at associations between patients’ participation in the program and their utilization of health care services and chronic disease management. It also reviewed patient charts for data on housing issues, services, and outcomes, and conducted interviews that included questions about their living situations, health status, and social supports. 

    Participation in the program was linked to 2.5 fewer primary care visits and 3.6 fewer outpatient visits per year, including fewer social work, behavioral health, psychiatry, and urgent care visits. Patients also expressed mental and physical health benefits as a result of being placed in new housing, and many felt a closer connection to their primary care clinics and teams, partially due to the compassionate guidance received from the housing advocates. Another outcome was that often the first housing solution for the patient was not stable or healthy, which speaks to the complex magnitude of the unaffordable housing situation. 

    “The reduction in outpatient care was driven mostly by less urgent care, behavioral health, and social work utilization which suggests that the program is having important effects on mental health and behavioral health,” said Arbour. “Our housing advocates are amazing. Their ability to connect with patients in very stressful situations and provide them with empathy, respect, and compassion makes a big difference.” 

    The study’s limitations included a small sample size, short-term follow up, restricted data set, and self-reported data. The investigators also recognize that the program’s interventions do not address the root causes of housing insecurity and health disparities. 

    With primary care burnout on the rise, the research team plans to next explore the effects of a housing program on clinical staff and providers to see if it might also be associated with feeling more supported in confronting distressing situations with patients. 

    “Being unhoused or at risk of homelessness is incredibly stressful and detrimental for mental health,” said Arbour. “The most compelling aspect of the study to me was hearing the patients’ stories and reflections. They not only felt their physical and mental health improved as a result of the program, but they felt a sense of belonging and truly cared for by their primary care clinic.” 

    Source:

    Journal reference:

    Arbour, M. C., et al. (2024) Primary Care–Based Housing Program Reduced Outpatient Visits; Patients Reported Mental And Physical Health Benefits. Health Affairs. doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2023.01046.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Doctors fear workload, lawsuits with online medical records access: UK study

    Doctors fear workload, lawsuits with online medical records access: UK study

    [ad_1]

    Most family doctors surveyed fear that giving patients online access to their medical records will increase their workload and the risks of litigation, suggest the results of the largest study of its kind, published in the open access journal BMJ Open.

    A significant proportion did agree that there would be benefits for patients. Among the 400 GPs who responded to the survey, 7 out of 10 (70%; 280) agreed that patients would better remember their care plan, while 6 out of 10 respondents believed that access would help patients feel more in control of their care ( 60%; 243).

    But most (91%; 364) felt that patients would worry more as a result, or find their GP records more confusing than helpful (85%; 338). And 6 in 10 (60%; 240) believed that most patients would find significant errors in their records.

    An increase in workload and potential litigation were also major concerns for respondents. An overwhelming majority (89%; 357) believed they will, or already, spend more time addressing patients’ questions outside of consultations as a result, and that consultations will/already take significantly longer (81%; 322). 

    Of further concern is that nearly 3 out of 4 (72%; 289) said they will be/already are less candid in their documentation as a consequence of the move. And nearly two-thirds (62%; 246) felt the risks of litigation would increase.

    “We emphasize that studies of patients’ experiences in diverse countries question the robustness of this perspective,” write the study authors. “However, it will be important for ongoing studies in the UK to evaluate and continue to assess both GPs’ and patients’ experiences with access.” 

    But like it or not, “in England, patients’ online access to their GPs’ records is here to stay,” they add. “In the coming months, it will be crucial for GPs, primary care staff, and patients to adapt to this radical change in practice.”

    Source:

    Journal reference:

    Blease, C. R., et al. (2024). Experiences and opinions of general practitioners with patient online record access: an online survey in England. BMJ Open. doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-078158.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • CT scans may be better first step for evaluating chest pain

    CT scans may be better first step for evaluating chest pain

    [ad_1]

    Previous studies have found less than 40% of patients with stable chest pain undergoing invasive coronary angiography are found to have obstructive coronary artery disease. Recent randomized clinical trials have demonstrated a benefit to using computed tomography angiography (CTA) first in evaluation of these patients, and a new study being presented at the American College of Cardiology Cardiovascular Summit lends credence to this strategy, finding that CT was associated with a higher likelihood of revascularization compared to other imaging modalities or no testing.

    Stable angina is a type of chest discomfort that occurs when the heart muscle needs more oxygen than usual-;such as during stress, exercise or cold weather-;but it’s not getting it, often due to blocked coronary arteries. Patients with stable angina are often treated with guideline-directed medical therapy and lifestyle changes but may also need a coronary revascularization procedure to restore adequate blood flow to resolve their symptoms.

    Right now, when a patient presents to their primary care physician or cardiologist with symptoms suspicious for angina, they are commonly referred for additional testing.”


    Markus Scherer, MD, Director of Cardiac CT and Structural Heart Imaging at Atrium Health-Sanger Heart & Vascular Institute and study’s senior author

    Between October 2022 and June 2023, researchers at Atrium Health-Sanger Heart & Vascular Institute in Charlotte, North Carolina, assessed 786 patients who had no prior diagnosis of coronary artery disease and underwent elective invasive coronary angiography (ICA) for the evaluation of suspected angina. The pre-ICA testing strategies were: no noninvasive testing with direct referral to ICA (44%), stress echocardiogram (3%), stress myocardial perfusion imaging (15%), stress MRI (2%) and coronary CTA (36%). The study cohort had a mean age of 66 years, was 63% male, 37% female, 81% White, 13% Black, 1% Asian, 1% Hispanic and 1% other.

    The researchers compared rates of subsequent revascularization between patients whose initial evaluation was coronary CTA versus stress testing or clinical judgement (no testing). The “CT first” strategy was associated with subsequent revascularization in 62% of patients compared to 34% for the combination of other modalities or direct ICA referral.

    The 2021 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain suggests either non-invasive functional imaging or coronary CTA as the initial test without specifying a preference for one or the other.

    According to the researchers, there are a multitude of reasons health systems don’t currently use a CT first approach, including the availability of high-quality CT scanners; availability of qualified cardiac CT interpreting physicians; and challenges in transitioning to a newer approach after decades of pre-established patterns (i.e. stress testing). Furthermore, a CT first approach is predominately advocated for patients with unestablished coronary artery disease and does not apply to all, as some patient factors may reduce the accuracy and utility of coronary CTA. 

    “While care must be individualized, for patients with unknown or unestablished coronary artery disease, the transition to a ‘CT first’ strategy should be a high priority for cardiovascular care providers,” Scherer said. “The non-invasive approach has a lower risk and cost than a diagnostic heart catheterization and, for the CT approach-;but not stress testing-;provides information on the absence, presence and extent of coronary atherosclerosis and whether or not there are high risk plaques as well as vessel blockages, which helps streamline patient management and risk reduction.”

    Since coronary CTA is less expensive than both nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging and ICA, there is a direct cost saving to patients and third-party payers with the CT first approach, according to Scherer. From the perspective of a health system, the most financially efficient evaluation approach becomes more important during the transition to a value-oriented health care system.

    According to the authors, the study demonstrates “real world” credence to the randomized trials showing similar benefits to a “CT first” strategy and should promote increased adoption of this strategy for the evaluation of patients with chest pain and an unestablished history of coronary artery disease.

    “Cardiac catheterization labs are a capital and human resource intensive care environment. Using them for their maximum potential of treating disease, rather than diagnosing it, bring the highest yield for these resources to the health care system,” Scherer said.

    The full results of the study and other studies will be presented at the ACC Cardiovascular Summit 2024 in Washington, on February 1-3, 2024. The ACC Cardiovascular Summit 2024 will examine innovative strategies and emerging trends in CV care, assess operational efficiencies to enhance the effectiveness of the CV service line, and adopt customizable approaches that support economic sustainability.

    [ad_2]

    Source link