ABSTRACT
Objective: To compare the 1-year health care utilization and mortality in persons living with heart failure (HF) before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Patients and Methods: Residents of a 9-county area in southeastern Minnesota aged 18 years or older with a HF diagnosis on January 1, 2019; January 1, 2020; and January 1, 2021, were identified and followed up for 1-year for vital status, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalizations. Results: We identified 5631 patients with HF (mean age, 76 years; 53% men) on January 1, 2019, 5996 patients (mean age, 76 years; 52% men) on January 1, 2020, and 6162 patients (mean age, 75 years; 54% men) on January 1, 2021. After adjustment for comorbidities and risk factors, patients with HF in 2020 and patients with HF in 2021 experienced similar risks of mortality compared with those in 2019. After adjustment, patients with HF in 2020 and 2021 were less likely to experience all-cause hospitalizations (2020: rate ratio [RR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.81-0.95; 2021: RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83-0.97) compared with patients in 2019. Patients with HF in 2020 were also less likely to experience ED visits (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.80-0.92). Conclusion: In this large population-based study in southeastern Minnesota, we observed an approximately 10% decrease in hospitalizations among patients with HF in 2020 and 2021 and a 15% decrease in ED visits in 2020 compared with those in 2019. Despite the change in health care utilization, we found no difference in the 1-year mortality between patients with HF in 2020 and those in 2021 compared with those in 2019. It is unknown whether any longer-term consequences will be observed.
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare 1-year health care utilization and mortality between persons living with heart failure (HF) prior to vs. during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Patients and Methods Residents of a 9-county area in southeastern Minnesota ≥18 years with a HF diagnosis on January 1, 2019, January 1, 2020, and January 1, 2021, were identified and followed 1-year for vital status, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalizations. Results We identified 5631 patients with HF (mean age 76, 53% male) on January 1, 2019, 5996 (mean age 76, 52% male) on January 1, 2020, and 6162 (mean age 75, 54% male) on January 1, 2021. After adjustment for comorbidities and risk factors, HF patients in 2020 had a similar risk of mortality compared to patients in 2019, as did patients in 2021. After adjustment, HF patients in 2020 and 2021 were less likely to have all-cause hospitalizations (2020 HR, 0.88;95% CI, 0.81-0.95;2021 HR, 0.90;95% CI, 0.83-0.97) compared to patients in 2019. HF patients in 2020 were also less likely to have ED visits (HR, 0.85;95% CI, 0.80-0.92). Conclusion In a large population-based study in southeastern MN, we observed an approximately 10% decrease in hospitalizations among patients with HF in 2020 and 2021, and a 15% decrease in ED visits in 2020 compared to 2019. Despite the change in health care utilization, we found no difference in 1-year mortality between patients with HF in 2020 or 2021. It is unknown if any longer-term consequences will be observed.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To study associations between the Minnesota coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mitigation strategies on incidence rates of acute myocardial infarction (MI) or revascularization among residents of Southeast Minnesota. METHODS: Using the Rochester Epidemiology Project, all adult residents of a nine-county region of Southeast Minnesota who had an incident MI or revascularization between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, were identified. Events were defined as primary in-patient diagnosis of MI or undergoing revascularization. We estimated age- and sex-standardized incidence rates and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) stratified by key factors, comparing 2020 to 2015-2019. We also calculated IRRs by periods corresponding to Minnesota's COVID-19 mitigation timeline: "Pre-lockdown" (January 1-March 11, 2020), "First lockdown" (March 12-May 31, 2020), "Between lockdowns" (June 1-November 20, 2020), and "Second lockdown" (November 21-December 31, 2020). RESULTS: The incidence rate in 2020 was 32% lower than in 2015-2019 (24 vs 36 events/100,000 person-months; IRR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.62-0.74). Incidence rates were lower in 2020 versus 2015-2019 during the first lockdown (IRR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.44-0.66), in between lockdowns (IRR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.79), and during the second lockdown (IRR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41-0.72). April had the lowest IRR (IRR 0.48; 95% CI, 0.34-0.68), followed by August (IRR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.40-0.76) and December (IRR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.41-0.77). Similar declines were observed across sex and all age groups, and in both urban and rural residents. CONCLUSION: Mitigation measures for COVID-19 were associated with a reduction in hospitalizations for acute MI and revascularization in Southeast Minnesota. The reduction was most pronounced during the lockdown periods but persisted between lockdowns.