Smolderen Kim G, Ameli Omid, Chaisson Christine E, Heath Kevin, Mena-Hurtado Carlos
Vascular Medicine Outcomes (VAMOS) Program, Cardiovascular Medicine Section, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
OptumLabs, Eden Prairie, Minnesota.
AJPM Focus. 2022 Jul 26;1(1):100016. doi: 10.1016/j.focus.2022.100016. eCollection 2022 Sep.
This study aimed to examine all-cause mortality, 1- and 2-year major cardiovascular events, and major adverse limb events in individuals aged ≥65 years who received an in-home health visit with peripheral artery disease screening. In addition, we compared 1-year healthcare utilization before and after peripheral artery disease screening for those who screened positive.
SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Medicare Advantage beneficiaries aged ≥65 years participating in the Optum HouseCalls program in the U.S. between April 1, 2017 and February 1, 2019 were included.
The intervention consisted of a peripheral artery disease screening program using a plethysmography system.
One-year all-cause mortality as a landmark analysis, 1- and 2-year major cardiovascular events, and major adverse limb events after screening were compared by peripheral artery disease screen status using claims data. We compared cardiovascular medications and revascularization procedures between the year before and after the peripheral artery disease screening event for those with peripheral artery disease.
Of 192,500 beneficiaries, 27.7% screened positive. One-year all-cause mortality rates for those who screened positive for peripheral artery disease versus those who screened negative were higher (1.51% vs 0.89%; <0.001; adjusted hazard ratio=1.21; 95% CI=1.08, 1.36) as well as 1-year major cardiovascular events (5.54% vs 3.60%; adjusted hazard ratio= 1.22; 95% CI=1.15, 1.30) and major adverse limb events (0.23% vs 0.04%; adjusted hazard ratio=3.15; 95% CI=2.10, 4.73). Similar risks were observed for 2-year results. Before and after peripheral artery disease screening, medications remained stable for those who screened positive (e.g., statin therapy=54.2% vs 56.6%); rates of peripheral vascular interventions remained stable (0.0% vs 0.1%).
A national peripheral artery disease screening effort is feasible. Detecting previously undiagnosed peripheral artery disease is a way to risk stratify a population that would benefit from further cardiovascular risk management.
本研究旨在调查年龄≥65岁且接受过包含外周动脉疾病筛查的家庭健康访视的个体的全因死亡率、1年和2年主要心血管事件以及主要肢体不良事件。此外,我们比较了外周动脉疾病筛查呈阳性者筛查前后1年的医疗资源利用情况。
研究背景/参与者:纳入2017年4月1日至2019年2月1日期间参加美国Optum上门医疗服务项目的年龄≥65岁的医疗保险优势计划受益人群。
干预措施包括使用体积描记系统的外周动脉疾病筛查项目。
使用理赔数据,按外周动脉疾病筛查状态比较作为里程碑分析的1年全因死亡率、筛查后1年和2年主要心血管事件以及主要肢体不良事件。我们比较了外周动脉疾病筛查前后外周动脉疾病患者的心血管药物使用情况和血运重建手术情况。
在192,500名受益人群中,27.7%筛查呈阳性。外周动脉疾病筛查呈阳性者与筛查呈阴性者的1年全因死亡率更高(1.51%对0.89%;<0.001;调整后风险比=1.21;95%置信区间=1.08, 1.36),1年主要心血管事件发生率也更高(5.54%对3.60%;调整后风险比=1.22;95%置信区间=1.15, 1.30),主要肢体不良事件发生率同样更高(0.23%对0.04%;调整后风险比=3.15;95%置信区间=2.10, 4.73)。2年结果观察到类似风险。外周动脉疾病筛查前后,筛查呈阳性者的药物使用情况保持稳定(例如,他汀类药物治疗=54.2%对56.6%);外周血管介入治疗率保持稳定(0.0%对0.1%)。
全国性外周动脉疾病筛查工作是可行的。检测先前未诊断出的外周动脉疾病是一种对可能从进一步心血管风险管理中受益的人群进行风险分层的方法。