Kari R Gillmeyer, Seppo T Rinne, Justin M Rucci, Elizabeth S Klings, A Rani Elwy, Renda Soylemez Wiener
{"title":"肺动脉高压患者转诊到专家的相关因素。","authors":"Kari R Gillmeyer, Seppo T Rinne, Justin M Rucci, Elizabeth S Klings, A Rani Elwy, Renda Soylemez Wiener","doi":"10.1513/AnnalsATS.202408-901OC","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Rationale: </strong>Guidelines recommend early referral to pulmonary hypertension (PH) experts for patients with confirmed or suspected pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) or chronic thromboembolic PH (CTEPH), among others. Yet, patients often have advanced disease at the time of referral. The drivers of these referral delays are not well known.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Building upon our prior qualitative findings on barriers to timely PH care along the care continuum, we sought to identify patient-level factors associated with referral to PH experts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We leveraged the Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database to identify all patients with incident PH in 2015-2017 using a validated algorithm (sensitivity 28%; specificity 100%) and further identified subgroups with a risk factor for PAH and CTEPH. Our outcome was presence or absence of referral to a PH expert during the study period. Based on our prior qualitative work, our three primary exposures were 1) Medicaid recipient, 2) mental health diagnoses, and 3) distance to the nearest PH center. We conducted separate multivariable logistic regression models to determine the association between each of our primary exposures and outcome, among our entire cohort and those with a risk factor for PAH and CTEPH.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among our entire cohort (n=12,505), 704 (5.6%) were seen by a PH expert. Among the subset with a risk factor for PAH (n=2,393) and CTEPH (n=3,167), 242 (10.1%) and 185 (5.8%) were seen by a PH expert, respectively. Patients less likely to be referred included Medicaid recipients (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] 0.64, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.53-0.77), those with mental health diagnoses (aOR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.83), and those living further from a PH center (aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.74-0.82 for each 10 miles increase in distance to PH center). Findings were similar among those with a risk factor for PAH and CTEPH.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Few patients with PH are referred to PH experts, including those with a risk factor for PAH and CTEPH. Factors associated with expert referral identified in this study highlight barriers to timely PH care and offer targeted areas of future study to improve the timeliness of PH care.</p>","PeriodicalId":93876,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the American Thoracic Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors Associated with Referral to Expert Providers among Patients with Pulmonary Hypertension.\",\"authors\":\"Kari R Gillmeyer, Seppo T Rinne, Justin M Rucci, Elizabeth S Klings, A Rani Elwy, Renda Soylemez Wiener\",\"doi\":\"10.1513/AnnalsATS.202408-901OC\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Rationale: </strong>Guidelines recommend early referral to pulmonary hypertension (PH) experts for patients with confirmed or suspected pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) or chronic thromboembolic PH (CTEPH), among others. Yet, patients often have advanced disease at the time of referral. The drivers of these referral delays are not well known.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Building upon our prior qualitative findings on barriers to timely PH care along the care continuum, we sought to identify patient-level factors associated with referral to PH experts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We leveraged the Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database to identify all patients with incident PH in 2015-2017 using a validated algorithm (sensitivity 28%; specificity 100%) and further identified subgroups with a risk factor for PAH and CTEPH. Our outcome was presence or absence of referral to a PH expert during the study period. Based on our prior qualitative work, our three primary exposures were 1) Medicaid recipient, 2) mental health diagnoses, and 3) distance to the nearest PH center. We conducted separate multivariable logistic regression models to determine the association between each of our primary exposures and outcome, among our entire cohort and those with a risk factor for PAH and CTEPH.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among our entire cohort (n=12,505), 704 (5.6%) were seen by a PH expert. Among the subset with a risk factor for PAH (n=2,393) and CTEPH (n=3,167), 242 (10.1%) and 185 (5.8%) were seen by a PH expert, respectively. Patients less likely to be referred included Medicaid recipients (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] 0.64, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.53-0.77), those with mental health diagnoses (aOR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.83), and those living further from a PH center (aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.74-0.82 for each 10 miles increase in distance to PH center). Findings were similar among those with a risk factor for PAH and CTEPH.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Few patients with PH are referred to PH experts, including those with a risk factor for PAH and CTEPH. Factors associated with expert referral identified in this study highlight barriers to timely PH care and offer targeted areas of future study to improve the timeliness of PH care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93876,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of the American Thoracic Society\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of the American Thoracic Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1513/AnnalsATS.202408-901OC\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the American Thoracic Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1513/AnnalsATS.202408-901OC","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
理由:指南建议确诊或疑似肺动脉高压(PAH)或慢性血栓栓塞性PH (CTEPH)等患者早期转诊肺动脉高压(PH)专家。然而,患者通常在转诊时病情已经发展到晚期。造成这些转诊延误的原因并不为人所知。目的:建立在我们之前的定性发现的障碍,及时PH护理沿护理连续体,我们试图确定患者层面的因素与转介PH专家。方法:我们利用马萨诸塞州所有付款人索赔数据库,使用经过验证的算法(灵敏度28%;特异性100%),并进一步确定具有PAH和CTEPH危险因素的亚组。我们的结果是在研究期间是否有转介给PH专家。基于我们之前的定性工作,我们的三个主要暴露是:1)医疗补助接受者,2)精神健康诊断,3)离最近的PH中心的距离。我们进行了单独的多变量logistic回归模型,以确定我们的每个主要暴露与结果之间的关系,在我们的整个队列中以及那些具有PAH和CTEPH危险因素的人群中。结果:在我们的整个队列(n=12,505)中,704例(5.6%)就诊于PH专家。在具有PAH (n= 2393)和CTEPH (n= 3167)危险因素的亚组中,分别有242例(10.1%)和185例(5.8%)接受了PH专家的检查。不太可能转诊的患者包括医疗补助接受者(调整优势比[aOR] 0.64, 95%可信区间[CI] 0.53-0.77),有精神健康诊断的患者(aOR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.83),以及离PH中心较远的患者(距离PH中心每增加10英里,aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.74-0.82)。在有PAH和CTEPH危险因素的人群中,研究结果相似。结论:很少有PH患者被推荐给PH专家,包括那些有PAH和CTEPH危险因素的患者。本研究中确定的与专家转诊相关的因素突出了及时PH护理的障碍,并提供了未来研究的目标领域,以提高PH护理的及时性。
Factors Associated with Referral to Expert Providers among Patients with Pulmonary Hypertension.
Rationale: Guidelines recommend early referral to pulmonary hypertension (PH) experts for patients with confirmed or suspected pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) or chronic thromboembolic PH (CTEPH), among others. Yet, patients often have advanced disease at the time of referral. The drivers of these referral delays are not well known.
Objectives: Building upon our prior qualitative findings on barriers to timely PH care along the care continuum, we sought to identify patient-level factors associated with referral to PH experts.
Methods: We leveraged the Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database to identify all patients with incident PH in 2015-2017 using a validated algorithm (sensitivity 28%; specificity 100%) and further identified subgroups with a risk factor for PAH and CTEPH. Our outcome was presence or absence of referral to a PH expert during the study period. Based on our prior qualitative work, our three primary exposures were 1) Medicaid recipient, 2) mental health diagnoses, and 3) distance to the nearest PH center. We conducted separate multivariable logistic regression models to determine the association between each of our primary exposures and outcome, among our entire cohort and those with a risk factor for PAH and CTEPH.
Results: Among our entire cohort (n=12,505), 704 (5.6%) were seen by a PH expert. Among the subset with a risk factor for PAH (n=2,393) and CTEPH (n=3,167), 242 (10.1%) and 185 (5.8%) were seen by a PH expert, respectively. Patients less likely to be referred included Medicaid recipients (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] 0.64, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.53-0.77), those with mental health diagnoses (aOR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.83), and those living further from a PH center (aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.74-0.82 for each 10 miles increase in distance to PH center). Findings were similar among those with a risk factor for PAH and CTEPH.
Conclusions: Few patients with PH are referred to PH experts, including those with a risk factor for PAH and CTEPH. Factors associated with expert referral identified in this study highlight barriers to timely PH care and offer targeted areas of future study to improve the timeliness of PH care.