Trends and Disparities in Ambulatory Follow-Up After Cardiovascular Hospitalizations : A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Anderson TS, Yeh RW, Herzig SJ, Marcantonio ER, Hatfield LA, Souza J, Landon BE. Trends and Disparities in Ambulatory Follow-Up After Cardiovascular Hospitalizations : A Retrospective Cohort Study. Annals of internal medicine. 2024 Sep 1; 177(9):1190-1198.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Timely follow-up after cardiovascular hospitalization is recommended to monitor recovery, titrate medications, and coordinate care. OBJECTIVE: To describe trends and disparities in follow-up after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and heart failure (HF) hospitalizations. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Medicare. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized between 2010 and 2019. MEASUREMENTS: Receipt of a cardiology visit within 30 days of discharge. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate changes over time overall and across 5 sociodemographic characteristics on the basis of known disparities in cardiovascular outcomes. RESULTS: The cohort included 1 678 088 AMI and 4 245 665 HF hospitalizations. Between 2010 and 2019, the rate of cardiology follow-up increased from 48.3% to 61.4% for AMI hospitalizations and from 35.2% to 48.3% for HF hospitalizations. For both conditions, follow-up rates increased for all subgroups, yet disparities worsened for Hispanic patients with AMI and patients with HF who were Asian, Black, Hispanic, Medicaid dual eligible, and residents of counties with higher levels of social deprivation. By 2019, the largest disparities were between Black and White patients (AMI, 51.9% vs. 59.8%, difference, 7.9 percentage points [pp] [95% CI, 6.8 to 9.0 pp]; HF, 39.8% vs. 48.7%, difference, 8.9 pp [CI, 8.2 to 9.7 pp]) and Medicaid dual-eligible and non-dual-eligible patients (AMI, 52.8% vs. 60.4%, difference, 7.6 pp [CI, 6.9 to 8.4 pp]; HF, 39.7% vs. 49.4%, difference, 9.6 pp [CI, 9.2 to 10.1 pp]). Differences between hospitals explained 7.3 pp [CI, 6.7 to 7.9 pp] of the variation in follow-up for AMI and 7.7 pp [CI, 7.2 to 8.1 pp]) for HF. LIMITATION: Generalizability to other payers. CONCLUSION: Equity-informed policy and health system strategies are needed to further reduce gaps in follow-up care for patients with AMI and patients with HF. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Aging.