Rehan Waheed, MD

Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, and vascular death in patients who have symptomatic peripheral artery disease. However, a subset of patients who take aspirin continues to have recurrent cardiovascular events. There are few data on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with peripheral artery disease who manifest aspirin resistance.

Patients with peripheral artery disease on long-term aspirin therapy (≥4 wk) were tested for aspirin responsiveness by… Show more

Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, and vascular death in patients who have symptomatic peripheral artery disease. However, a subset of patients who take aspirin continues to have recurrent cardiovascular events. There are few data on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with peripheral artery disease who manifest aspirin resistance.

Patients with peripheral artery disease on long-term aspirin therapy (≥4 wk) were tested for aspirin responsiveness by means of the VerifyNow Aspirin Assay. The mean follow-up duration was 22.6 ± 8.3 months. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke. Secondary endpoints were the incidence of vascular interventions (surgical or percutaneous), or of amputation or gangrene caused by vascular disease.

Of the 120 patients enrolled in the study, 31 (25.8%) were aspirin-resistant and 89 (74.2%) were aspirin-responsive. The primary endpoint occurred in 10 (32.3%) patients in the aspirin-resistant group and in 13 (14.6%) patients in the aspirin-responsive group (hazard ratio=2.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.08–5.66; P=0.03). There was no significant difference in the secondary outcome of revascularization or tissue loss. By multivariate analysis, aspirin resistance and history of chronic kidney disease were the only independent predictors of long-term adverse cardiovascular events.

Aspirin resistance is highly prevalent in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease and is an independent predictor of adverse cardiovascular risk. Whether intervening in these patients with additional antiplatelet therapies would improve outcomes needs to be explored. Show less

Objectives: To describe health information exchange (HIE) use and providers’ perceptions of value in a public healthcare system using a commercial electronic health record (EHR).

Study Design: Observational study of HIE implementation and cross-sectional provider survey.

Methods: We identified characteristics (age, gender, race/ethnicity, insurance type, comorbid conditions) and the care setting (primary care; emergency department [ED] or inpatient care; or specialty care) for… Show more

Objectives: To describe health information exchange (HIE) use and providers’ perceptions of value in a public healthcare system using a commercial electronic health record (EHR).

Study Design: Observational study of HIE implementation and cross-sectional provider survey.

Methods: We identified characteristics (age, gender, race/ethnicity, insurance type, comorbid conditions) and the care setting (primary care; emergency department [ED] or inpatient care; or specialty care) for patients with and without HIE. Associations between patient characteristics and HIE were examined using a multivariate logistic regression. Provider perceptions were assessed via confidential survey.

Results: During its first 14 months, 11,960 HIEs occurred among 9399 patients. Rates of HIE use were 13/1000 visits overall (20/1000 in primary care, 36/1000 in the ED/inpatient setting, and 5/1000 in specialty settings [P <.001]). Patients with HIE were older, more often female, African American, had more chronic conditions, and more often had Medicaid or Medicare insurance (P <.001). HIE was used least among commercially insured (odds ratio, 0.78, 95% confidence interval,0.73-0.83, compared with uninsured). Among the 18% (74/412) of survey respondents, 93% “disagreed/strongly disagreed” that obtaining consent was difficult and 97% reported no patient refusals. Respondents “agreed/strongly agreed” that HIE fostered more efficient care (93%), saved time (85%), decreased laboratory (84%) and imaging (74%) use, and 15% stated that HIE prevented an unnecessary admission.

Conclusion: Early HIE use varied by care setting, patient characteristics, and insurance. Providers perceived HIE acceptable to patients, and helpful in avoiding redundant testing and unnecessary hospitalizations. Lower HIE use among commercially insured patients reinforces concerns that financial incentives may inhibit adoption. Show less