Stephen W Waldo, Thomas J Glorioso, Neel Butala, Paul Varosy, Claire S Duvernoy, Mary E Plomondon, Joseph Francis
{"title":"在医疗保健系统中进行心血管评估的患者的管理和结果:社区护理和综合退伍军人事务卫生保健的比较。","authors":"Stephen W Waldo, Thomas J Glorioso, Neel Butala, Paul Varosy, Claire S Duvernoy, Mary E Plomondon, Joseph Francis","doi":"10.1161/JAHA.125.041930","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System maintains the largest integrated health system in the United States but also supports fee-for-service insurance for veterans receiving care in community facilities outside the VA. We sought to evaluate the management and outcomes of patients referred for consultation in either venue, using cardiovascular evaluation as a model.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort study identifying patients enrolled in the VA Healthcare System referred for cardiovascular evaluation from October 2020 through September 2024 and stratified the population based on the venue in which evaluation was completed. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (acute coronary syndromes/stroke/mortality) in a matched population.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 235 197 consultations for cardiovascular evaluation, 201 453 were completed in the chosen venue within 6 months. The time between consultation and evaluation was similar across venues (community, 35 days [95% CI, 17-65] versus VA, 33 days [95% CI, 19-53]), with comparable delays to diagnostic testing or therapeutic interventions. Patients receiving care in the community were more likely to undergo stress testing (43.2% versus 36.4%, <i>P</i>=1.5×10<sup>-46</sup>) and coronary angiography (23.1% versus 17.4%, <i>P</i>=2.1×10<sup>-51</sup>) within 2 years compared with those treated in the VA Healthcare System. Despite this, patients treated in the community had a significantly higher rate of major adverse events at 2 years (17.6% versus 15.3%, <i>P</i>=5.9×10<sup>-10</sup>) compared with those treated in the VA Healthcare System.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients undergoing cardiovascular evaluation in community practices were not evaluated more rapidly than those seen in the VA, though they were more likely to receive initial and repeat diagnostic testing. Adverse events were more common among community-treated patients than those in the VA, suggesting an opportunity to optimize access to care while improving clinical outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":54370,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Heart Association","volume":" ","pages":"e041930"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Management and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Cardiovascular Evaluation Across Health Care Systems: Comparison of Community Care and Integrated Veterans Affairs Health Care.\",\"authors\":\"Stephen W Waldo, Thomas J Glorioso, Neel Butala, Paul Varosy, Claire S Duvernoy, Mary E Plomondon, Joseph Francis\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/JAHA.125.041930\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System maintains the largest integrated health system in the United States but also supports fee-for-service insurance for veterans receiving care in community facilities outside the VA. We sought to evaluate the management and outcomes of patients referred for consultation in either venue, using cardiovascular evaluation as a model.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort study identifying patients enrolled in the VA Healthcare System referred for cardiovascular evaluation from October 2020 through September 2024 and stratified the population based on the venue in which evaluation was completed. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (acute coronary syndromes/stroke/mortality) in a matched population.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 235 197 consultations for cardiovascular evaluation, 201 453 were completed in the chosen venue within 6 months. The time between consultation and evaluation was similar across venues (community, 35 days [95% CI, 17-65] versus VA, 33 days [95% CI, 19-53]), with comparable delays to diagnostic testing or therapeutic interventions. Patients receiving care in the community were more likely to undergo stress testing (43.2% versus 36.4%, <i>P</i>=1.5×10<sup>-46</sup>) and coronary angiography (23.1% versus 17.4%, <i>P</i>=2.1×10<sup>-51</sup>) within 2 years compared with those treated in the VA Healthcare System. Despite this, patients treated in the community had a significantly higher rate of major adverse events at 2 years (17.6% versus 15.3%, <i>P</i>=5.9×10<sup>-10</sup>) compared with those treated in the VA Healthcare System.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients undergoing cardiovascular evaluation in community practices were not evaluated more rapidly than those seen in the VA, though they were more likely to receive initial and repeat diagnostic testing. Adverse events were more common among community-treated patients than those in the VA, suggesting an opportunity to optimize access to care while improving clinical outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54370,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Heart Association\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e041930\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Heart Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.125.041930\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Heart Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.125.041930","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Management and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Cardiovascular Evaluation Across Health Care Systems: Comparison of Community Care and Integrated Veterans Affairs Health Care.
Background: The Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System maintains the largest integrated health system in the United States but also supports fee-for-service insurance for veterans receiving care in community facilities outside the VA. We sought to evaluate the management and outcomes of patients referred for consultation in either venue, using cardiovascular evaluation as a model.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study identifying patients enrolled in the VA Healthcare System referred for cardiovascular evaluation from October 2020 through September 2024 and stratified the population based on the venue in which evaluation was completed. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (acute coronary syndromes/stroke/mortality) in a matched population.
Results: Among 235 197 consultations for cardiovascular evaluation, 201 453 were completed in the chosen venue within 6 months. The time between consultation and evaluation was similar across venues (community, 35 days [95% CI, 17-65] versus VA, 33 days [95% CI, 19-53]), with comparable delays to diagnostic testing or therapeutic interventions. Patients receiving care in the community were more likely to undergo stress testing (43.2% versus 36.4%, P=1.5×10-46) and coronary angiography (23.1% versus 17.4%, P=2.1×10-51) within 2 years compared with those treated in the VA Healthcare System. Despite this, patients treated in the community had a significantly higher rate of major adverse events at 2 years (17.6% versus 15.3%, P=5.9×10-10) compared with those treated in the VA Healthcare System.
Conclusions: Patients undergoing cardiovascular evaluation in community practices were not evaluated more rapidly than those seen in the VA, though they were more likely to receive initial and repeat diagnostic testing. Adverse events were more common among community-treated patients than those in the VA, suggesting an opportunity to optimize access to care while improving clinical outcomes.
期刊介绍:
As an Open Access journal, JAHA - Journal of the American Heart Association is rapidly and freely available, accelerating the translation of strong science into effective practice.
JAHA is an authoritative, peer-reviewed Open Access journal focusing on cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease. JAHA provides a global forum for basic and clinical research and timely reviews on cardiovascular disease and stroke. As an Open Access journal, its content is free on publication to read, download, and share, accelerating the translation of strong science into effective practice.