Differences In Intermediate Outcomes Research Articles

Playing catch up: A term-level investigation of the racial gap in STEM retention

This paper examines differences in STEM retention between minority and non-minority students enrolled at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) from 1980 through 2006. Using detailed administrative records of undergraduate students, we document that minority students and non-minority students take divergent pathways through the STEM major. Specifically, minority students take fewer lower division STEM courses in their early career, which delays their enrollment in upper division STEM courses and leads to lower graduation probability in STEM within four years and higher dropout rates. We investigate the potential reasons (and/or predictors) for this apparent discrepancy. To do so, we first identify a student’s major-specific Individual Performance Potential (IPP) from lower division course regressions. We find that once we control for the heterogeneity in the IPP’s and a rich set of term level controls, the differences in intermediate outcomes (declared major, STEM course load) between minority and non-minority students largely disappear, but that some of the gap in outcomes persist, with the exception being in graduation from STEM within five years, for which minority students are more likely after controlling for these factors. Our findings suggest that minority STEM majors would benefit from additional support such as early career course advising.

Differences in Management of Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Fee-for-Service Medicare Among Cardiology Practices

One-third of Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in Medicare Advantage (MA), Medicare's private plan option. Medicare Advantage incentivizes performance on evidence-based care, but limited information exists using reliable clinical data to determine whether this translates into better quality for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) enrolled in MA compared with those enrolled in traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare. To determine differences in evidence-based secondary prevention treatments and intermediate outcomes among patients with CAD enrolled in MA vs FFS Medicare. In this observational, retrospective, cohort study, deidentified data from patients 18 years or older diagnosed as having CAD between January 1, 2013, and May 1, 2014, at cardiology practices participating in the Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence (PINNACLE) registry were studied, including 35 563 patients enrolled in MA and 172 732 enrolled in FFS Medicare. Data were analyzed from March to July 2018. Medicare Advantage enrollment. Medication prescription patterns among eligible patients and intermediate outcomes, including blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Of the 35 563 patients with CAD enrolled in MA, 20 193 (56.8%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 76.7 (7.6) years; of the 172 732 patients with CAD enrolled in FFS Medicare, 100 025 (57.9%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 77.5 (8.0) years. Patients enrolled in MA were younger, less likely to be white, and more likely to be female and to have heart failure, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease compared with those enrolled in FFS Medicare. Compared with FFS Medicare beneficiaries, MA beneficiaries were more likely to receive secondary prevention treatments, including β-blockers (80.6% vs 78.8%; P < .001), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers (70.7% vs 65.1%; P < .001), and statins (68.4% vs 64.5%; P < .001). Patients enrolled in MA were also more likely to receive all 3 medications when eligible (48.9% vs 40.4%; P < .001). After adjustment, MA beneficiaries had higher odds of receiving guideline-recommended therapy compared with FFS Medicare beneficiaries for β-blockers (odds ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.17; P = .002), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers (odds ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08-1.19; P < .001), and all 3 medications (odds ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.001-1.50; P = .047). There were no significant differences in intermediate outcomes between those enrolled in MA and FFS Medicare, including systolic and diastolic blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. Among patients with CAD in the PINNACLE registry, MA beneficiaries had more comorbidities than FFS Medicare beneficiaries and were more likely to receive secondary prevention treatments. However, this did not translate into differences in intermediate outcomes. These findings suggest that MA plans may drive improvements in process-based quality measures for Medicare beneficiaries, although this may have a limited effect on improving patient outcomes over FFS Medicare.

Total arch replacement versus debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair for aortic arch aneurysm: what indicates a high-risk patient for arch repair in octogenarians?

This study aimed to reveal the differences in intermediate outcomes between TAR and d-TEVAR in octogenarians and to identify risk factors for adverse events after aortic arch repair in octogenarians. We reviewed medical records of 125 patients aged > 80years who underwent surgical intervention for aortic aneurysm between 2008 and 2016. Of these, 60 underwent conventional TAR (43 men; age, 82 ± 2.2years) and 65 underwent d-TEVAR (49 men; age, 84 ± 3.4years). Freedom from all causes of mortality at 2 and 4years was similar (80 and 66% in TAR, 80 and 51% in d-TEVAR, p = 0.17). Freedom from aortic death at 2 and 4years was similar (88 and 88% in TAR, 87 and 76% in d-TEVAR, p = 0.86). Using Cox regression analysis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [hazard ratio (HR), 6.0; p = 0.008], malignancy (HR, 8.8; p = 0.004), previous cardiac and thoracic aortic surgery (required median sternotomy) (HR, 65.9; p = 0.012), perioperative stroke (HR, 12.6; p = 0.012), and postoperative pneumonia (HR, 5.8; p = 0.026) were identified as independent positive predictors of overall postoperative mortality for TAR, whereas neurological dysfunction (HR, 3.0; p = 0.016) and perioperative stroke (HR, 12.1; p = 0.023) were identified for d-TEVAR. TAR in octogenarians with COPD and/or malignancy showed higher mortality rates; d-TEVAR is more appropriate in these situations. The prevention of perioperative stroke, which is related with poor prognosis in both the groups, is critical.

Dual-System Use and Intermediate Health Outcomes among Veterans Enrolled in Medicare Advantage Plans.

The concurrent use of multiple health care systems may duplicate or fragment care. We assessed the characteristics of veterans who were dually enrolled in both the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system and a Medicare Advantage (MA) plan, and compared intermediate quality outcomes among those exclusively receiving care in the VA with those receiving care in both systems. VA and MA quality and administrative data from 2008 to 2009. We used propensity score methods to test the association between dual use and five intermediate outcome quality measures. Outcomes included control of cholesterol, blood pressure, and glycosylated hemoglobin among persons with coronary heart disease (CHD), hypertension, and diabetes. VA and MA data were merged to identify VA-only users (n = 1,637) and dual-system users (n = 5,006). We found no significant differences in intermediate outcomes between VA-only and dual-user populations. Differences ranged from a 3.2 percentage point (95 percent CI: -1.8 to 8.2) greater rate of controlled cholesterol among VA-only users with CHD to a 2.2 percentage point (95 percent CI: -2.4 to 6.6) greater rate of controlled blood pressure among dual users with diabetes. For the five measures studied, we did not find evidence that veterans with dual use of VA and MA care experienced improved or worsened outcomes as compared with veterans who exclusively used VA care.

Is delayed radical prostatectomy in men with low‐risk screen‐detected prostate cancer associated with a higher risk of unfavorable outcomes?

Strategies of active surveillance (AS) of low-risk screen-detected prostate cancer have emerged, because the balance between survival outcomes and quality of life issues when radically treating these malignancies is disputable. Delay before radical treatment caused by active surveillance may be associated with an impaired chance of curability. Men diagnosed with low-risk (T1c/T2; prostate-specific antigen [PSA] = <10.0; PSA density, <0.2 ng/mL; Gleason score, 3 + 3=6; 1-2 positive biopsies) prostate cancer in the Swedish section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer who received radical prostatectomy (RP) were studied. One group received immediate RP, whereas another group received delayed RP after an initial period of expectant management. These groups were compared regarding histopathological and biochemical outcomes, correcting for baseline differences. Mean follow-up after diagnosis was 5.7 years (standard deviation [SD], 3.2). The immediate RP group (n = 158) received RP a mean of 0.5 (SD, 0.2) years after diagnosis; the delayed RP group (n = 69) received RP after 2.6 (SD, 2.0) years (P < .001). After adjustment for small baseline dissimilarities, no differences in RP frequencies of Gleason score >6 (odds ratio [OR], 1.54; P = .221), capsular penetration (OR, 2.45; P = .091), positive margins (OR, 1.34; P = .445), RP tumor volume (difference, 0.099; P = .155), or biochemical progression rates (P = .185, P = .689) were found between groups, although all data were in favor of immediate RP. With limited patient numbers available for analysis, differences in intermediate outcomes between immediate RP and delayed RP were nonsignificant. The delayed RP group may be subject to a selection bias. Prospective evaluation of active surveillance protocols is essential.

Quality of Colon Cancer Outcomes in Hospitals with a High Percentage of Medicaid Patients

There is evidence that patients with Medicaid insurance suffer worse outcomes from surgical conditions; but there is little research about whether this reflects clustering of such patients at hospitals with worse outcomes. We assess the outcomes of patients with colon and rectal cancers at hospitals with a high proportion of Medicaid patients. California Cancer Registry patient-level records were linked to discharge abstracts from California's Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. All operative California Cancer Registry patients from 1998 and 1999 were included. Hospitals with > 40% Medicaid patients were labeled high Medicaid hospitals (HMH). We analyzed the odds of mortality at 30 days, 1, and 5 years for colon cancer and rectal cancer separately. Multilevel logistic regression models were constructed, using MLwiN 2.0, to include patient and hospital-level characteristics. Thirty-day mortality after colon operation was worse in HMH (1% versus 0.6%; p = 0.04); as was 1-year mortality (3.4% versus 2.4%; p = 0.001). There was no substantial difference in rates of 5-year mortality. Individuals who were insured by Medicaid had worse outcomes at 5 years. Adjustment for surgical volume eliminated the effect of HMH at 30 days (1% versus 0.7%; p = 0.45) but not at 1 year (3.4% versus 2.5%; p = 0.01). Adjustment for academic affiliation did not alter these results. There were an insufficient number of rectal cancer patients to detect any differences by hospital type. HMH have higher postoperative colon cancer mortality rates at 30 days and 1 year but not at 5 years. The early effect can be explained by surgical volume, but additional research is needed to determine which factors contribute to differences in intermediate outcomes after operations in HMH settings.

Differences in intermediate outcomes for Asian and non-Asian adult hemodialysis patients in the United States

There is a paucity of information regarding the clinical experience of Asian hemodialysis patients. This paper describes intermediate outcomes for adult Asian hemodialysis patients compared to Caucasians and African Americans. Dialysis facility staff abstracted clinical information on a national random sample of adult hemodialysis patients from October through December 2000. Associations of race with intermediate outcomes were tested by bivariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression modeling. A total of 429 patients were identified as Asian, 4403 as Caucasians, and 3103 as African Americans. Asian and Caucasian patients were older than African Americans [mean 63.2 (+/-15.6), 63.9 (+/-15.2), and 57.7 (+/-14.7) years, P < 0.001], and had fewer years on dialysis [mean 3.5 (+/-3.8), 3.1 (+/-3.8), and 4.1 (+/-4.1) years, P < 0.001]. Ninety three percent of Asians, 87% of Caucasians, and 84% of African Americans had a mean Kt/V > or =1.2 (P < 0.001). In addition, 36% of Asians, 32% of Caucasians, and 26% of African Americans had an arteriovenous (AV) fistula as their vascular access (P < 0.001). Hemoglobin profiles were only slightly different among the three racial groups. More Asians and African Americans had a mean serum albumin > or =4.0/3.7 g/dL compared to Caucasians (33% and 31% compared to 27%, respectively, P < 0.001). In the final multivariable logistic regression model, Asians were twice as likely to have a mean Kt/V > or =1.2 compared to Caucasians (the referent group) [odds ratio (OR) (95% CI) 2.10 (1.33, 3.32), P < 0.01]. They experienced similar intermediate outcomes for vascular access, anemia management, and serum albumin compared to the majority racial group. These findings indicate that adult hemodialysis Asian patients experience similar or better intermediate outcomes compared to the majority racial group. Further study is needed to determine if these results are associated with improved survival and less morbidity in this minority group.

Impact of facility size and profit status on intermediate outcomes in chronic dialysis patients

Little information is available regarding the influence of dialysis facility size or profit status on intermediate outcomes in chronic dialysis patients. We have combined data from the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) Core Indicators Project; the end-stage renal disease (ESRD) facility survey; and the HCFA On-Line Survey, Certification, and Reporting System to analyze trends in this area. For hemodialysis patients, larger facilities were more likely than smaller facilities to perform dialysis on patients who were younger than 65 years of age, black, or undergoing dialysis 2 years or more (P < 0.001). Nonprofit facilities were more likely to perform dialysis on patients with diabetes mellitus as a cause of ESRD and less likely to perform dialysis on patients with hypertension as a cause of ESRD compared with for-profit units (P < 0.05). By multivariate analysis, larger facility size was modestly associated with a greater Kt/V value and urea reduction ratio, but not with hematocrit or serum albumin values. Facility profit status was not associated with these intermediate outcomes. For peritoneal dialysis patients, there were no significant differences in patient demographics based on facility size. More patients in nonprofit units had been undergoing dialysis 2 or more years than patients in for-profit units (P < 0.05). By univariate analysis, patients in larger facilities were more likely to have an adequacy measure performed than patients from smaller facilities (P < 0.05). There were few substantial differences in intermediate outcomes in chronic dialysis patients based on facility size or profit status.

Intermediate Outcomes by Race and Ethnicity in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: Results from the 1997 ESRD Core Indicators Project

Hispanics are the fastest growing minority group in the United States, and approximately 10% of all end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are Hispanic. Few data are available, however, regarding dialysis adequacy and anemia management in Hispanic patients receiving peritoneal dialysis in the U.S. Data from the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) ESRD Core Indicators Project were used to assess racial and ethnic differences in selected intermediate outcomes for peritoneal dialysis patients. Of the 1219 patients for whom data were available from the 1997 sample, 9% were Hispanic, 24% were non-Hispanic blacks, and 59% were non-Hispanic whites. Hispanics were more likely to have diabetes mellitus as a cause of ESRD compared to blacks or whites, and both Hispanics and blacks were younger than white patients (both p < 0.001). Although whites had higher weekly Kt/V and creatinine clearance values compared to blacks or Hispanics (p < 0.05), blacks had been dialyzing longer (p < 0.01) and were more likely to be anuric compared to the other two groups (p < 0.001). Blacks had significantly lower mean hematocrit values (p < 0.001) and a greater proportion of patients who had a hematocrit level less than 28% (p < 0.05) compared to Hispanics or whites, despite receiving significantly larger weekly mean epoetin alfa doses (p < 0.05) and having significantly higher mean serum ferritin concentrations (p < 0.01). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed significant differences by race/ethnicity for experiencing a weekly Kt/V urea < 2.0 and hypertension, but not for other intermediate outcomes examined (weekly creatinine clearance < 60 L/week/1.73 m2, Hct < 30%, and serum albumin < 3.5/3.2 g/dL). Hispanics had adequacy values similar to blacks and anemia parameters similar to whites. Additional studies are needed to determine the etiologies of the differences in intermediate outcomes by racial and ethnic groupings in peritoneal dialysis patients.