Association Between use of an Adaptive Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Algorithm and Healthcare Utilization and Cost.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the association between use of adaptive pacing on clinical and economic outcomes of CRT recipients in a real-world analysis. BACKGROUND: The AdaptivCRTTM algorithm was shown in prior subgroup analyses of prospective trials to achieve clinical benefits, but a large prospective trial showed nonsignificant changes in the endpoint of mortality or heart failure hospitalizations. METHODS: CRT-implanted patients from the Optum Clinformatics® database with ≥90 days of follow-up were included. Remote monitoring data was used to classify patients based on CRT setting - adaptive biventricular and left ventricular pacing (aCRT) vs. standard biventricular pacing (Standard CRT). Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for baseline differences between groups. Mortality, 30-day readmissions, healthcare utilization, and payer and patient costs were evaluated post-implantation. RESULTS: This study included 2,412 aCRT and 1,638 Standard CRT patients (mean follow-up: 2.4 ± 1.4 years), with balanced baseline characteristics after adjustment. The aCRT group was associated with lower all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.88 [95% confidence interval (CI):0.80, 0.96]), fewer all-cause 30-day readmissions (adjusted incidence rate ratio = 0.87 [CI:0.81, 0.94]), and fewer all-cause and HF-related inpatient, outpatient, and emergency department (ED) visits. The aCRT cohort was also associated with lower all-cause outpatient payer-paid amounts and lower all-cause and HF-related inpatient and ED patient-paid amounts. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective analysis of a large real-world cohort, use of an adaptive CRT algorithm was associated with lower mortality, reduced healthcare resource utilization, and lower payer and patient costs. LAY SUMMARY: While cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves quality of life and clinical outcomes for certain heart failure patients, some patients do not respond to this therapy. Adaptive CRT algorithms (aCRT), such as AdaptivCRTTM, have been developed with the goal of improving effectiveness of CRT, and consequently, clinical and economic outcomes. This research study used a large database of administrative claims data - which contains information on patient demographics, diagnoses, healthcare services received, mortality, and cost data - to compare clinical and economic outcomes between CRT patients with the aCRT algorithm turned on (aCRT group) and CRT patients with the aCRT algorithm turned off (standard CRT group). Statistical methods were used to adjust for baseline differences between the aCRT group and standard CRT groups. Ultimately, the aCRT group was found to have a lower risk of all-cause mortality, fewer all-cause 30-day readmissions, fewer hospital visits (including inpatient, outpatient, and emergency department visits), and lower costs to payers and patients for specific types of costs.

Prevalence and Economic Burden of Malnutrition Diagnosis Among Patients Presenting to United States Emergency Departments.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is a potentially remediable condition that when untreated contributes to poor health and economic outcomes. While assessment of malnutrition risk is improving, its identification rate and economic burden in emergency departments (EDs) is largely unknown. We sought to determine prevalence and economic burden of diagnosed malnutrition among patients presenting to U.S. EDs. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Emergency Department Sample data. Malnutrition prevalence was confirmed via International Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition, diagnosis codes. The economic burden was assessed by comparing probability of hospitalization and the average total charges between propensity-score matched visits with and without a malnutrition diagnosis. RESULTS: Data from 238 million ED visits between 2006 and 2014 were analyzed. Over this period, the prevalence of diagnosed malnutrition increased for all demographic categories assessed. For older adults (≥65 years), the prevalence increased from 2.5% (2006) to 3.6% (2014). Older age, high-income community residence, Western region, urban areas, and Medicare coverage were associated with higher diagnosis prevalence. Malnutrition diagnosis was associated with a 4.23 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.93 to 4.55) times higher odds of hospitalization and $21,892 higher mean total charges (95% CI = $19,593 to $24,192). CONCLUSIONS: While malnutrition is currently diagnosed at a low rate in U.S. EDs, the economic burden of malnutrition is substantial in this care setting. Given the potential for systematic malnutrition screening and treatment protocols to alleviate this burden, future research is warranted.