Peter J Leary,Rachel J Le,Sumeet Panjabi,John Hartney,Amit Goyal,Charlotte Ward,Dwaipayan Mukherjee,Nathan Hatton,Samuel G Rayner,Hayley D Germack,John J Ryan
{"title":"Location of Care Delivery for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension in the United States.","authors":"Peter J Leary,Rachel J Le,Sumeet Panjabi,John Hartney,Amit Goyal,Charlotte Ward,Dwaipayan Mukherjee,Nathan Hatton,Samuel G Rayner,Hayley D Germack,John J Ryan","doi":"10.1164/rccm.202404-0816oc","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"RATIONALE\r\nGuidelines recommend patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) be referred to pulmonary hypertension (PH) centers, but little is known about where care is actually delivered in the United States (US).\r\n\r\nOBJECTIVES\r\nTo use prescription patterns to estimate the proportion of PAH care delivered at US PH centers and explore factors associated with location of care.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nThis retrospective study analyzed claims from the Komodo database in adults who received ≥1 PAH prescription between March 2021 and February 2022. A PH center was defined as accredited (Pulmonary Hypertension Association accreditation), high-volume (≥10 patients receiving parenteral prostacyclin), or a composite including either definition.\r\n\r\nMEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS\r\nAnalyses included 12,137 patients. Only 37.1% of patients received PAH-specific prescriptions from PH centers. A minority of patients on monotherapy (31.8%) received prescriptions from PH centers. A greater fraction of patients on triple therapy (61.8%) received prescriptions from PH centers. Patients on monotherapy were less likely to receive prescriptions from a PH center if they were older, male, had a higher comorbidity burden, had Medicaid, resided in the South or West, or lived in a 3-digit ZIP code without a PH center. Fewer characteristics were associated with PH center-based care for patients on dual or triple therapy; however, ZIP code and insurance status were associated with center-based care for these patients.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nA minority of US patients received PAH-specific prescription from a PH center. This potential guideline discordance warrants further exploration and may require guidelines to be revisited or the health system to adapt.","PeriodicalId":7664,"journal":{"name":"American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":19.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.202404-0816oc","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
RATIONALE
Guidelines recommend patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) be referred to pulmonary hypertension (PH) centers, but little is known about where care is actually delivered in the United States (US).
OBJECTIVES
To use prescription patterns to estimate the proportion of PAH care delivered at US PH centers and explore factors associated with location of care.
METHODS
This retrospective study analyzed claims from the Komodo database in adults who received ≥1 PAH prescription between March 2021 and February 2022. A PH center was defined as accredited (Pulmonary Hypertension Association accreditation), high-volume (≥10 patients receiving parenteral prostacyclin), or a composite including either definition.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
Analyses included 12,137 patients. Only 37.1% of patients received PAH-specific prescriptions from PH centers. A minority of patients on monotherapy (31.8%) received prescriptions from PH centers. A greater fraction of patients on triple therapy (61.8%) received prescriptions from PH centers. Patients on monotherapy were less likely to receive prescriptions from a PH center if they were older, male, had a higher comorbidity burden, had Medicaid, resided in the South or West, or lived in a 3-digit ZIP code without a PH center. Fewer characteristics were associated with PH center-based care for patients on dual or triple therapy; however, ZIP code and insurance status were associated with center-based care for these patients.
CONCLUSIONS
A minority of US patients received PAH-specific prescription from a PH center. This potential guideline discordance warrants further exploration and may require guidelines to be revisited or the health system to adapt.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine focuses on human biology and disease, as well as animal studies that contribute to the understanding of pathophysiology and treatment of diseases that affect the respiratory system and critically ill patients. Papers that are solely or predominantly based in cell and molecular biology are published in the companion journal, the American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology. The Journal also seeks to publish clinical trials and outstanding review articles on areas of interest in several forms. The State-of-the-Art review is a treatise usually covering a broad field that brings bench research to the bedside. Shorter reviews are published as Critical Care Perspectives or Pulmonary Perspectives. These are generally focused on a more limited area and advance a concerted opinion about care for a specific process. Concise Clinical Reviews provide an evidence-based synthesis of the literature pertaining to topics of fundamental importance to the practice of pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. Images providing advances or unusual contributions to the field are published as Images in Pulmonary, Critical Care, Sleep Medicine and the Sciences.
A recent trend and future direction of the Journal has been to include debates of a topical nature on issues of importance in pulmonary and critical care medicine and to the membership of the American Thoracic Society. Other recent changes have included encompassing works from the field of critical care medicine and the extension of the editorial governing of journal policy to colleagues outside of the United States of America. The focus and direction of the Journal is to establish an international forum for state-of-the-art respiratory and critical care medicine.